Billions in Misspent EU Agricultural Subsidies Could Support the Sustainable Development Goals

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is the guiding policy for agriculture and the largest single budget item in the European Union (EU). Agriculture is essential to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), but the CAP's contribution to do so is uncertain. We analyzed the distribution of (sic)59.4 billion of 2015 CAP payments and show that current CAP spending exacerbates income inequality within agriculture, while little funding supports climate-friendly and biodiverse farming regions. More than (sic)24 billion of 2015 CAP direct payments went to regions where average farm incomes are already above the EU median income. A further (sic)2.5 billion in rural development payments went to primarily urban areas. Effective monitoring indicators are also missing. We recommend redirecting and better monitoring CAP payments toward achieving the environmental, sustainability, and rural development goals stated in the CAP's new objectives, which would support the SDGs, the European Green Deal, and green COVID-19 recovery

Towards a global sustainable development agenda built on social–ecological resilience

Non-technical summary. The United Nations’ sustainable development goals (SDGs) articulate societal aspirations for people and our planet. Many scientists have criticised the SDGs and some have suggested that a better understanding of the complex interactions between society and the environment should underpin the next global development agenda. We further this discussion through the theory of social–ecological resilience, which emphasises the ability of systems to absorb, adapt, and transform in the face of change. We determine the strengths of the current SDGs, which should form a basis for the next agenda, and identify key gaps that should be filled. Technical summary. The United Nations’ sustainable development goals (SDGs) are past their halfway point and the next global development agenda will soon need to be developed. While laudable, the SDGs have received strong criticism from many, and scholars have proposed that adopting complex adaptive or social–ecological system approaches would increase the effectiveness of the agenda. Here we dive deeper into these discussions to explore how the theory of social–ecological resilience could serve as a strong foundation for the next global sustainable development agenda. We identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current SDGs by determining which of the 169 targets address each of 43 factors affecting social–ecological resilience that we have compiled from the literature. The SDGs with the strongest connections to social–ecological resilience are the environment-focus goals (SDGs 2, 6, 13, 14, 15), which are also the goals consistently under-prioritised in the implementation of the current agenda. In terms of the 43 factors affecting social–ecological resilience, the SDG strengths lie in their communication, inclusive decision making, financial support, regulatory incentives, economic diversity, and transparency in governance and law. On the contrary, ecological factors of resilience are seriously lacking in the SDGs, particularly with regards to scale, crossscale interactions, and non-stationarity. Social media summary. The post-2030 agenda should build on strengths of SDGs 2, 6, 13, 14, 15, and fill gaps in scale, variability, and feedbacks

Towards a global sustainable development agenda built on social–ecological resilience

Non-technical summary The United Nations' sustainable development goals (SDGs) articulate societal aspirations for people and our planet. Many scientists have criticised the SDGs and some have suggested that a better understanding of the complex interactions between society and the environment should underpin the next global development agenda. We further this discussion through the theory of social-ecological resilience, which emphasises the ability of systems to absorb, adapt, and transform in the face of change. We determine the strengths of the current SDGs, which should form a basis for the next agenda, and identify key gaps that should be filled. Technical summary The United Nations' sustainable development goals (SDGs) are past their halfway point and the next global development agenda will soon need to be developed. While laudable, the SDGs have received strong criticism from many, and scholars have proposed that adopting complex adaptive or social-ecological system approaches would increase the effectiveness of the agenda. Here we dive deeper into these discussions to explore how the theory of social-ecological resilience could serve as a strong foundation for the next global sustainable development agenda. We identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current SDGs by determining which of the 169 targets address each of 43 factors affecting social-ecological resilience that we have compiled from the literature. The SDGs with the strongest connections to social-ecological resilience are the environment-focus goals (SDGs 2, 6, 13, 14, 15), which are also the goals consistently under-prioritised in the implementation of the current agenda. In terms of the 43 factors affecting social-ecological resilience, the SDG strengths lie in their communication, inclusive decision making, financial support, regulatory incentives, economic diversity, and transparency in governance and law. On the contrary, ecological factors of resilience are seriously lacking in the SDGs, particularly with regards to scale, cross-scale interactions, and non-stationarity. Social media summary The post-2030 agenda should build on strengths of SDGs 2, 6, 13, 14, 15, and fill gaps in scale, variability, and feedbacks

Towards a global sustainable development agenda built on social-ecological resilience

Non-technical summary The United Nations' sustainable development goals (SDGs) articulate societal aspirations for people and our planet. Many scientists have criticised the SDGs and some have suggested that a better understanding of the complex interactions between society and the environment should underpin the next global development agenda. We further this discussion through the theory of social-ecological resilience, which emphasises the ability of systems to absorb, adapt, and transform in the face of change. We determine the strengths of the current SDGs, which should form a basis for the next agenda, and identify key gaps that should be filled. Technical summary The United Nations' sustainable development goals (SDGs) are past their halfway point and the next global development agenda will soon need to be developed. While laudable, the SDGs have received strong criticism from many, and scholars have proposed that adopting complex adaptive or social-ecological system approaches would increase the effectiveness of the agenda. Here we dive deeper into these discussions to explore how the theory of social-ecological resilience could serve as a strong foundation for the next global sustainable development agenda. We identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current SDGs by determining which of the 169 targets address each of 43 factors affecting social-ecological resilience that we have compiled from the literature. The SDGs with the strongest connections to social-ecological resilience are the environment-focus goals (SDGs 2, 6, 13, 14, 15), which are also the goals consistently under-prioritised in the implementation of the current agenda. In terms of the 43 factors affecting social-ecological resilience, the SDG strengths lie in their communication, inclusive decision making, financial support, regulatory incentives, economic diversity, and transparency in governance and law. On the contrary, ecological factors of resilience are seriously lacking in the SDGs, particularly with regards to scale, cross-scale interactions, and non-stationarity. Social media summary The post-2030 agenda should build on strengths of SDGs 2, 6, 13, 14, 15, and fill gaps in scale, variability, and feedbacks

European agricultural policy requires a stronger performance framework to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals

Agriculture provides many benefits to people, such as producing food and creating jobs in rural areas, but it can also have negative impacts on the environment. We analysed existing monitoring indicators for the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to evaluate whether the CAP is effectively achieving multiple social and environmental goals. We found that the current CAP monitoring system is unable to balance many potentially competing goals because its indicators are biased towards a few objectives. We suggest the European Union and its Member States adopt a broader set of indicators covering clear targets when the policy is reformed after 2020

The discontinuum of river networks : the importance of geomorphic boundaries

Context: Rivers are heterogeneous landscapes characterised by distinct patches separated by boundaries. The significance of tributaries as dominant geomorphic boundaries in determining the character of the river discontinuum is a prevailing, yet largely unscrutinised, paradigm of river science. Objectives: This study examines the spatial organisation and strength of geomorphic boundaries within the river network of 10 drainage basins in the Kimberley region of NW Australia. The possible drivers of the spatial organisation of boundaries throughout the river networks are also identified. Methods: Using a suite of GIS tools and statistical analyses, distinct rivers zones or functional process zones (FPZs) and the strength of geomorphic boundaries between these FPZs were empirically determined for > 35,700 km of river network. The spatial distribution of boundary strengths throughout the river network was analysed against a set of environmental variables hypothesised to influence the location of boundaries, specifically: lithology, slope, elevation, and tributary confluences. Results: 1410 boundaries were identified in the river network of the Kimberley region, an average of one boundary every 25 km of river. Only 32% of these occurred at river confluences. Transitions between different FPZs – large scale river patches, present in the river network were the dominant geomorphic boundary. Although a range of boundary strengths occurred, some river confluences represented the strongest geomorphic boundaries. The location of geomorphic boundaries was significantly associated with the boundary between different types of lithologies. Conclusion: Our analysis shows that the river network of the Kimberley region is naturally highly fragmented, and that tributary confluences are not the dominant control on discontinuities in the river network. We suggest that the character of river network fragmentation depends not only on dams, waterfalls, and confluences, but also on the strength and spatial organisation of geomorphic boundaries between FPZs