The years 2023 and 2024 were characterized by unprecedented warming across the globe, underscoring the urgency of climate action. Robust science advice for decision makers on subjects as complex as climate change requires deep cross- and interdisciplinary understanding. However, navigating the ever-expanding and diverse peer-reviewed literature on climate change is enormously challenging for individual researchers. We elicited expert input through an online questionnaire (188 respondents from 45 countries) and prioritized 10 key advances in climate-change research with high policy relevance. The insights span a wide range of areas, from changes in methane and aerosol emissions to the factors shaping citizens' acceptance of climate policies. This synthesis and communications effort forms the basis for a science-policy report distributed to party delegations ahead of the 29th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP29) to inform their positions and arguments on critical issues, including heat-adaptation planning, comprehensive mitigation strategies, and strengthened governance in energy-transition minerals value chains.

There is an urgent need to accelerate progress if the world is to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. Global research has identified six transformation entry points as imperative for SDG achievement: well-being, the economy, and food, energy, urban, and environmental systems. Policymakers require evidence on transformative policies to accelerate progress across these entry points. Here, we present evidence on SDG policies from a scoping review of the global modeling literature. We find that policies have been modeled for all six entry points. Most studies model single entry points and have less coverage of urban systems and five of the SDGs. Initial quantitative estimates of policy ambition and costs and policy interactions are available but remain limited and challenging to compare. Future SDG modeling research to inform policy could emphasize modeling multiple entry points and policy interactions as well as policy standardization.

The world should redouble its efforts on the SDGs, not abandon them. Here’s how to progress the United Nations’ agenda towards 2050. The world should redouble its efforts on the SDGs, not abandon them. Here’s how to progress the United Nations’ agenda towards 2050.

A recent article in this journal (Jackson 2021) validly emphasized that debates about the Anthropocene need to recognize a diverse range of perspectives, worldviews, and forms of knowledge. In doing so, however, the author mischaracterized scholarship on earth system governance as being antithetical to a critical and pluralistic stance on the Anthropocene. In this commentary we address key concerns about the article: selective and misleading quotations regarding the earth system governance literature's diversity; unwarranted insinuations that juxtapose the implications of this literature with those of slavery and holocausts; and neglect of the breadth and diversity of scholarship on earth system governance. We underscore the need for scholarly debates on the Anthropocene to be informed by a balanced and rigorous assessment of existing scholarship, and for a constructive dialogue between global and locally situated ways of understanding the earth.

During the formulation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, many promoted policy coherence as a key tool to ensure achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a way that "leaves no one behind." Their argument assumed that coherent policymaking contributes to more effective policies and supports over-arching efforts to reduce inequality. As the 2030 Agenda reaches the halfway point, however, countries are falling short on many SDGs, particularly SDG 10 (reduce inequality). This study revisits the basic assumptions about policy coherence underpinning the SDGs. We systematically screened the peer-reviewed literature to identify 40 studies that provide evidence about whether coherent policymaking contributes to more effective outcomes and helps to reduce inequality. We find that coherent policymaking did not help reduce inequality in a majority of cases and made it worse in several. Our findings challenge the narrative that coherence is a necessary pre-condition for progress on the SDGs for all people.

Drilling down into why the UN Sustainable Development Goals are so hard to achieve, and showing policymakers pathways to follow, will help the planet and save lives. Drilling down into why the UN Sustainable Development Goals are so hard to achieve, and showing policymakers pathways to follow, will help the planet and save lives.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set a vision for a more sustainable world, to be realized by 2030. Progress to date is insufficient and implementation challenges are many, including the need for strategies that maximize synergies and mitigate trade-offs and conflicts among the goals. This scoping review synthesizes 51 recent scientific articles on interlinkages, with findings that can help decision-makers address this challenge. We identify recurring patterns of SDG interlinkages, including SDGs that promote other SDGs (e.g., SDGs 4, 6, and 17) and those at risk due to negative impacts from progress in other areas (e.g., SDGs 14 and 15). Such patterns can inform national and local implementation. Further research is needed to clarify the systemic roles of some SDGs (e.g., SDGs 10-12), understand causal relationships, and assess policy options. We make six recommendations for science to make interlinkages knowledge more accessible and for decision-makers to systematically use this knowledge.

Principles underpinning the 2030 Agenda — indivisibility, integration and universality — can safeguard against inaction or unsustainable practices but have not yet come into effect. We propose measures to strengthen alignment with them as the world gears up to accelerate implementation at the 2023 SDG Summit.

Policy coherence is crucial in the 2030 Agenda's transformative ambitions and heralded as of paramount importance to ensure the successful implementation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and climate policy targets. Despite political efforts to achieve policy coherence, apparent trade-offs and goal conflicts have emerged - even in a proclaimed 'front-runner' country like Sweden. This paper examines the role of ideas in proposing and legitimising policy options and achieving policy coherence in the light of the Swedish recovery debate in 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideas of a green economic recovery put forward in the public debate are examined through thematic text and frame analysis. We show that ideas of a green transition, boosted by economic recovery spending, draw on a synergistic frame in combining social, environmental, and economic policy options, carrying a potential for coherency. However, the absence of a discussion on power, as in who stands to gain what under which circumstances, coupled with an inherent understanding of a temporal hierarchy of policy priorities does not only impact the ability to design coherent policies but may have considerable impacts on the prospects of achieving sustainability transformations.

Abstract Non-technical summary We identify a set of essential recent advances in climate change research with high policy relevance, across natural and social sciences: (1) looming inevitability and implications of overshooting the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) urgent need for a rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges for scaling carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding the future contribution of natural carbon sinks, (5) intertwinedness of the crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) compound events, (7) mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility in the face of climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. Technical summary The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Reports provides the scientific foundation for international climate negotiations and constitutes an unmatched resource for researchers. However, the assessment cycles take multiple years. As a contribution to cross- and interdisciplinary understanding of climate change across diverse research communities, we have streamlined an annual process to identify and synthesize significant research advances. We collected input from experts on various fields using an online questionnaire and prioritized a set of 10 key research insights with high policy relevance. This year, we focus on: (1) the looming overshoot of the 1.5°C warming limit, (2) the urgency of fossil fuel phase-out, (3) challenges to scale-up carbon dioxide removal, (4) uncertainties regarding future natural carbon sinks, (5) the need for joint governance of biodiversity loss and climate change, (6) advances in understanding compound events, (7) accelerated mountain glacier loss, (8) human immobility amidst climate risks, (9) adaptation justice, and (10) just transitions in food systems. We present a succinct account of these insights, reflect on their policy implications, and offer an integrated set of policy-relevant messages. This science synthesis and science communication effort is also the basis for a policy report contributing to elevate climate science every year in time for the United Nations Climate Change Conference. Social media summary We highlight recent and policy-relevant advances in climate change research – with input from more than 200 experts.

Park, Leahey and Funk – PLF – present a thought-provoking contribution to tracking scientific progress by studying the ‘disruptiveness’ of academic publications and patents in a large-N analysis. Their effort – published in Nature 613 (2023) – is timely because the best possible knowledge is needed to effectively address the grand challenges that societies are facing today, including Earth system changes, human well-being, and justice. Even though the authors' findings show consistency across various scientific disciplines, we argue that (1) their measure of disruptiveness lacks plausibility for the social sciences, and (2) the focus on disruptiveness largely neglects the essence of progress, which is knowledge cumulation. While PLF view knowledge cumulation as a precondition to disruption, we argue that it is knowledge cumulation, rather than disruptiveness, that should be the principal criterion for evaluating scientific progress.

Solar geoengineering is gaining prominence in climate change debates as an issue worth studying; for some it is even a potential future policy option. We argue here against this increasing normalization of solar geoengineering as a speculative part of the climate policy portfolio. We contend, in particular, that solar geoengineering at planetary scale is not governable in a globally inclusive and just manner within the current international political system. We therefore call upon governments and the United Nations to take immediate and effective political control over the development of solar geoengineering technologies. Specifically, we advocate for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering and outline the core elements of this proposal. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > International Policy Framework

Environmental policy integration (EPI) is the incorporation of environmental concerns and objectives into non-environmental policy areas, such as energy, transport and agriculture, as opposed to pursuing such objectives through purely environmental policy practices. EPI is promoted to overcome policy incoherence and institutional fragmentation, to address the driving forces of environmental degradation and to promote innovation and synergy. But how effective are EPI strategies employed in practice? In this chapter we provide a meta-analysis of scientific, empirical research on EPI to address this question. An important finding is the discrepancy between the adoption of EPI in terms of objectives and commitments and its actual implementation, that is, translation into concrete measures. Overall, we found relatively few cases where environmental objectives were given a substantial status in non-environmental policies. The barriers we identified suggest that the actual detailed design or architecture of the strategies that are employed to promote EPI really matters.

Recent debates about the concept of planetary boundaries recall longstanding concerns about whether ecological limits are compatible with ecological democracy. The planetary boundaries framework (originally set out in Rockstrom et al., 2009a, 2009b) defines values for key Earth-system processes such as climate change and biodiversity that aim to maintain a 'safe' distance from thresholds or levels that could endanger human wellbeing. Despite having a significant impact in policy debates, the framework has been criticised as implying an expert-driven approach to governing global environmental risks that lacks democratic legitimacy. Drawing on research on deliberative democracy and the role of science in democratic societies, we argue that planetary boundaries can be interpreted in ways that remain consistent with democratic decision-making. We show how an iterative, dialogical process to formulate planetary boundaries and negotiate 'planetary targets' could form the basis for a democratically legitimate division of labour among experts, citizens and policy-makers in evaluating and responding to Earth-system risks. Crucial to this division of evaluative labour is opening up space for deliberative contestation about the value judgments inherent in collective responses to Earth-system risks, while also safeguarding the ability of experts to issue warnings about what they consider to be unacceptable risks.

Adaptation to climate change has steadily risen on global policy agendas and entered a new era with the 2015 Paris Agreement, which established a global goal on adaptation. While this goal responds to calls to strengthen global governance of adaptation, it has not yet been operationalized. Further, few studies take stock of current global adaptation governance to inform the implementation of the goal. Against this background this review asks: To what extent is there global governance of climate change adaptation? Can it be characterized as a strong domain of global governance? In what ways is it contested? Global adaptation governance is defined here as occurring when state and non-state actors in the global (including transnational) sphere authoritatively and intentionally shape the actions of constituents towards climate change adaptation as a public goal. Although empirical evidence is scant, it is proposed here that global adaptation governance is indeed emerging. Yet, its further strengthening appears contested. First, measurement of progress towards adaptation as a public goal at the global level is severely challenged by the ambiguity of adaptation and the lack of distinct metrics. Second, the lack of a clear global-level problem-framing, or recognition of adaptation as a global public good, has meant limited legitimacy of global governance initiatives. A consequence of contestation is that governance forms and functions used so far have not been authoritative in how they seek to shape actions. The review concludes by identifying research needs for advancing science and policy on adaptation. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

The consumption of goods and services can be a driver of environmental and social impacts around the world. Understanding the role that the different levels of government can play in incentivising sustainable consumption is therefore critical. Using systematic review techniques, this paper reviews the latest evidence on the importance, effectiveness, successes and failures of local government in advancing sustainable consumption. We find that there is little focus on sustainable consumption in its entirety or whether it is being achieved at the local government level. Important consumption categories like food, procurement, water, waste prevention, clothing, other consumables or services are understudied. Evaluation of the outcome of sustainable consumption interventions was limited, and the assessment that was completed gave mixed results. The most popular policy instruments were of the less coercive administrative and informative type. Multiple barriers to the success of an intervention were identified, the top ones being funding; staff capacity, knowledge or data; lack of flexibility and lock-in to the status quo; lack of guidance or political will; administrative burdens; and lack of regulatory powers or tools. Sustainable consumption interventions by local government were most effective when they had strong leadership, good stakeholder engagement, participatory approaches and extensive consultations.

Despite the increasing relevance of cross-border flows of goods, capital and people in shaping risks and opportunities today, we still live in a “bordered” world, where the nation state plays a key role in planning and governance. Yet, climate change impacts will not be contained within country borders, meaning that climate change adaptation governance should also consider “borderless climate risks” that cascade through the international system, in relatively simple or highly complex ways. In this paper, we demonstrate how the notion of borderless climate risks challenges the dominant territorial framing of adaptation and its problem structure. To advance knowledge, we ask: why has a territorial framing and the national and sub-national scales dominated adaptation governance? How do borderless climate risks challenge this framing and what are possible governance responses? We draw on constructivist international relations theory and propose that the epistemic community that developed to interpret climate change adaptation for decision-makers had certain features (e.g. strong environmental sciences foundation, reliance on place-based case study research) that established and subsequently reinforced the territorial framing. This framing was then reinforced by an international norm that adaptation was primarily a national or local responsibility, which has paradoxically also informed calls for international responsibility for funding adaptation. We conclude by identifying types of governance responses at three different scales—national and bilateral; transnational; international and regional—and invite more systematic evaluation by the IR community.

The Earth System Governance project is a global research alliance that explores novel, effective governance mechanisms to cope with the current transitions in the biogeochemical systems of the planet. A decade after its inception, this article offers an overview of the project's new research framework (which is built upon a review of existing earth system governance research), the goal of which is to continue to stimulate a pluralistic, vibrant and relevant research community. This framework is composed of contextual conditions (transformations, inequality, Anthropocene and diversity), which capture what is being observed empirically, and five sets of research lenses (architecture and agency, democracy and power, justice and allocation, anticipation and imagination, and adaptiveness and reflexivity). Ultimately the goal is to guide and inspire the systematic study of how societies prepare for accelerated climate change and wider earth system change, as well as policy responses.