Making real progress toward more sustainable societies using decision support models and tools: Introduction to the special volume

Academics, politicians, professionals and the general public are aware that without stewarding our planet’s natural resources, man is on the pathway towards a global collapse. Over the next three decades mankind is expected to consume an estimated 140 billion tons of minerals, ores, fossil fuels and biomass per year – three times current consumption. Social welfare and human wellbeing are threatened with the scarcity of natural resources; consequently, nations and their societies are also at risk of collapse. The readers of this special volume will find a compilation of scholarly research papers with real-life applications that take the challenge of proposing decision-making models and tools to address sustainability challenges in integrative ways. The main focus of this special volume is integration of sustainability dimensions (economic, social, environmental, ethical and time) into decision-support models and to identify pathways to achieve more sustainable societies. The majority of the research in this special volume, 74 percent, focuses on environmental and economic dimensions. Only 26 percent integrated social dimensions with them. Methodologically, a range of mathematical models and tools are presented to support prescriptive decision-making, with some descriptive models integrated, to support decision-makers in solving practical problems across a variety of industries and scenarios. The breadth and complexity of issues facing organizations and society requires innovative applications of these methodologies. The concerns cover a spectrum ranging from energy to solid waste management. A multitude of levels from broad-based policy concerns to strategic inter-organizational sustainable supply chain management and significantly, shop floor operational issues are also covered. The variety of problems and solutions exemplifies the potential for modelling and operations research for addressing some of our world’s most pressing concerns

Levers and leverage points for pathways to sustainability

Humanity is on a deeply unsustainable trajectory. We are exceeding planetary boundaries and unlikely to meet many international sustainable development goals and global environmental targets. Until recently, there was no broadly accepted framework of interventions that could ignite the transformations needed to achieve these desired targets and goals. As a component of the IPBES Global Assessment, we conducted an iterative expert deliberation process with an extensive review of scenarios and pathways to sustainability, including the broader literature on indirect drivers, social change and sustainability transformation. We asked, what are the most important elements of pathways to sustainability? Applying a social–ecological systems lens, we identified eight priority points for intervention (leverage points) and five overarching strategic actions and priority interventions (levers), which appear to be key to societal transformation. The eight leverage points are: (1) Visions of a good life, (2) Total consumption and waste, (3) Latent values of responsibility, (4) Inequalities, (5) Justice and inclusion in conservation, (6) Externalities from trade and other telecouplings, (7) Responsible technology, innovation and investment, and (8) Education and knowledge generation and sharing. The five intertwined levers can be applied across the eight leverage points and more broadly. These include: (A) Incentives and capacity building, (B) Coordination across sectors and jurisdictions, (C) Pre-emptive action, (D) Adaptive decision-making and (E) Environmental law and implementation. The levers and leverage points are all non-substitutable, and each enables others, likely leading to synergistic benefits. Transformative change towards sustainable pathways requires more than a simple scaling-up of sustainability initiatives—it entails addressing these levers and leverage points to change the fabric of legal, political, economic and other social systems. These levers and leverage points build upon those approved within the Global Assessment's Summary for Policymakers, with the aim of enabling leaders in government, business, civil society and academia to spark transformative changes towards a more just and sustainable world. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.Fil: Chan, Kai M. A.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Boyd, David R.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Gould, Rachelle. University of Vermont; Estados UnidosFil: Jetzkowitz, Jens. Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde Stuttgart; AlemaniaFil: Liu, Jianguo. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Muraca, Bárbara. University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Naidoo, Robin. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Beck, Paige. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Satterfield, Terre. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Selomane, Odirilwe. Stellenbosch University; SudáfricaFil: Singh, Gerald G.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Sumaila, Rashid. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Ngo, Hien T.. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; AlemaniaFil: Boedhihartono, Agni Klintuni. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Agard, John. The University Of The West Indies; Trinidad y TobagoFil: de Aguiar, Ana Paula D.. Stockholms Universitet; SueciaFil: Armenteras, Dolors. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; ColombiaFil: Balint, Lenke. BirdLife International; Reino UnidoFil: Barrington-Leigh, Christopher. Mcgill University; CanadáFil: Cheung, William W. L.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Díaz, Sandra Myrna. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Driscoll, John. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Esler, Karen. Stellenbosch University; SudáfricaFil: Eyster, Harold. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Gregr, Edward J.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Hashimoto, Shizuka. The University Of Tokyo; JapónFil: Hernández Pedraza, Gladys Cecilia. The World Economy Research Center; CubaFil: Hickler, Thomas. Goethe Universitat Frankfurt; AlemaniaFil: Kok, Marcel. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países BajosFil: Lazarova, Tanya. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency; Países BajosFil: Mohamed, Assem A. A.. Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate; EgiptoFil: Murray-Hudson, Mike. University Of Botswana; BotsuanaFil: O'Farrell, Patrick. University of Cape Town; SudáfricaFil: Palomo, Ignacio. Basque Centre for Climate Change; EspañaFil: Saysel, Ali Kerem. Boğaziçi University; TurquíaFil: Seppelt, Ralf. Martin-universität Halle-wittenberg; AlemaniaFil: Settele, Josef. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research-iDiv; AlemaniaFil: Strassburg, Bernardo. International Institute for Sustainability, Estrada Dona Castorina; BrasilFil: Xue, Dayuan. Minzu University Of China; ChinaFil: Brondízio, Eduardo S.. Indiana University; Estados Unido

Assessing resource consumption at the subnational level: A novel accounting method based on provincial selected material consumption

With considerable progress in material flow analysis (MFA), conducting MFA at the subnational level has become increasingly necessary but is restricted by problems such as domestic trade data deficiency. In this study, a novel material flow indicator—provincial selected material consumption (PSMC)—and its calculation method were proposed to estimate resource consumption mainly by the manufacturing and construction sectors at the subnational level. In order to overcome the restrictions mentioned above, PSMC accounting simplifies the value chain by selecting certain resources (i.e., considering raw materials and intermediate materials while omitting products), placing emphasis on downstream industries that drive material use from a bottom-up perspective instead of transboundary flows. The reliability and feasibility of PSMC and the corresponding method were verified by using China as a case study and calculating PSMC of 31 provinces across the country. Furthermore, the sum of these values was compared with the result obtained on the national scale by using an economy-wide MFA database. PSMC could depict the characteristics of subnational level material use. Moreover, the methodology appropriately balanced reliability against feasibility, which is a concerning issue when analyzing material flows at the subnational level. Overall, PSMC can function as a useful tool for sustainable resource management tailored to subnational areas as well as an important reference for policy making