• Energy Research
• social sciences close
• 13. Climate action close
• Aurora Universities Network close

A focus on land-use and forests as a means to reduce carbon dioxide levels in the global atmosphere has been at the heart of the international climate change debate since the United Nations Kyoto Protocol was agreed in 1997. This environmental management practice is a process technically referred to as mitigation. These largely technical projects have aimed to provide sustainable development benefits to forest-dependent people, as well as to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, these projects have had limited success in achieving these local development objectives. This article argues that this is due in part to the patriarchal underpinnings of the sustainable development and climate-change policy agendas. The author explores this theory by considering how a climate mitigation project in Bolivia has resulted in different outcomes for women and men, and makes links between the global decision-making process and local effects.

Recent theoretical literature in social policy argued that climate change posed a new risk to the states and called for transformation from a traditional welfare state to an ‘eco’ state. From a theoretical point of view, different welfare regimes may manage environmental/climate change risks in a similar way to social risks. However, not much has been done to explore the issue empirically. To this end, this paper aims to investigate public attitudes towards environmental and traditional welfare policies given that environmental change is a new social risk the welfare states have to address. Do individuals that care for one area also care for the other? That is, do the preferences in these two policy spheres complement or substitute one another? We test these hypotheses both at the individual- and country-level, using data from 14 countries included in all three waves (1993, 2000, and 2010) of the environmental module in the International Social Survey Programme. Specifically, we investigate the relationship between attitudes towards income redistribution (indicator of support for welfare policy) and willingness to pay for environmental protection (indicator of support for environmental policy). Our findings suggest that attitudes in the two areas are substitutes in the total sample, but that the relationship is very small and only statistically significant in some specifications. When we explore country differentials, we observe clear heterogeneity in the relationship, which can be explained by differences in political and historical contexts across countries.

This paper uses data from Understanding Society: the UK Household Longitudinal Study to explore the association between fuel poverty and a set of wellbeing outcomes: life-satisfaction, self-reported health measures and more objectively measured biomarker data. Over and above the conventional income–fuel cost indicators, we also use more proximal heating deprivation indicators. We create and draw upon a set of composite indicators that concomitantly capture (the lack of) affordability and thermal comfort. Depending on which fuel deprivation indicator is used, we find heterogeneous associations between fuel poverty and our wellbeing outcomes. Employing combined fuel deprivation indicators, which takes into account the income–fuel cost balance and more proximal perceptions of heating adequacy, reveals the presence of more pronounced associations with life satisfaction and fibrinogen, one of our biological health measures. The presence of these strong associations would have been less pronounced or masked when using separately each of the components of our composite fuel deprivation indicators as well as in the case of self-reported generic measures of physical health. Lifestyle and chronic health conditions play a limited role in attenuating our results, while material deprivation partially, but not fully, attenuates our associations between fuel deprivation and wellbeing. These results remain robust when bounding analysis, IV and panel data models are employed to test the potential role of various sources of endogeneity biases. Our analysis suggests that composite fuel deprivation indicators may be useful energy policy instruments for uncovering the underlining mechanism via which fuel poverty may get “under the skin”.

PurposeThe pressure of globalization has raised social concerns related to the protection of the environment, forced companies to use sustainability as a strategic weapon to fulfill the legal obligations and achieve overall competitiveness. It is reported that small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are globally responsible for approximately 70 percent of the industrial pollution, justifying urgent attention to the operations of these businesses. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the impact of sustainability orientation (SO) and supply chain (SC) integration implemented by SMEs on their sustainable procurement (SP) and design. Moreover, this study examines how SMEs’ SP and design affect their environmental and cost performance (CP).Design/methodology/approachThe authors develop a comprehensive model to test the relationships among SC, SC integration, SP, sustainable design (SD), environmental performance (EP) and CP at the SMEs level. The authors investigate the relationships of the mentoned factors by a data set that is collected from 358 Indian manufacturing SMEs.FindingsThe results indicate that in the SMEs’ context: SO positively influences both SP and SD; external integration positively affects SP; internal integration positively affects SD; SP positively influences EP and has not impact on CP; and SD positively influences both EP and CP.Originality/valueThis study provides a broad view of the relation between driving factors that may direct SMEs toward a better sustainability performance and offers practical managerial insights into these important business entities.

PurposeValue chain analysis (VCA) can expose strategic and operational misalignments within chains, and the consequential misallocation of resources, and hence opportunities for improvements which create value and economic sustainability. This paper's purpose is to argue why and how VCA needs to integrate the social and environmental aspects of sustainability in pursuit of sustainable competitive advantage.Design/methodology/approachBased on a review of existing methods and case studies, the paper proposes three dimensions of VCA, which illustrate the flaws in narrow tools, and the need to broaden the boundaries of VCA, the interpretation of “value” and relationships along the chain in order to highlight opportunities for creating sustainable value chains.FindingsTo date VCA has largely focused on economic sustainability and paid inadequate attention to social and environment consequences of firm behaviour and the (re) allocation of resources within and between firms in the chain. This risks producing recommendations which either ignore the competitive advantage offered from improving environmental management and social welfare, or have such detrimental external consequences as to render any proposals unsustainable when exposed to government or broader (public) scrutiny.Research limitations/implicationsVCA variants need to be developed which incorporate all three pillars of sustainability. Some initial experiences are presented and ideas for future research and applications proposed.Practical implicationsThe development of sustainable VCA tools should identify business opportunities consistent with Porter and Kramer's imperative for value chains to create shared value between business and society.Originality/valueAdopting the broader dimensions identified will allow VCA to become more widely applicable, and more relevant in business scenarios where there is a growing imperative to include social and environmental impacts into “mainstream” business strategies.

Abstract To improve food security a conceptual integration beyond the scope of production in the agricultural sector due to examination of critical supply chain system compartments and levels of services (“integrated food production and supply systems”) is proposed. For creating systematic results, a platform integrating various perspectives of experts has been established following the principle of triple helix stakeholdership (business practice, public management/policy and also science). During a series of workshops, the main actors, success factors, challenges and communication strategies have been identified for shaping sustainable food supply chains under use of systems thinking and the application of Participatory Systems mapping (PSM). In this line, the paper presents how “system maps” based on the method of PSM are used to gain insights into sustainable logistics services facilitating sustainable consumption patterns, enabling participatory considerations and the productive exchange of knowledge.

Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement stand as milestone diplomatic achievements. However, immense discrepancies between political commitments and governmental action remain. Combined national climate commitments fall far short of the Paris Agreement's 1.5/2°C targets. Similar political ambition gaps persist across various areas of sustainable development. Many therefore argue that actions by nonstate actors, such as businesses and investors, cities and regions, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), are crucial. These voices have resonated across the United Nations (UN) system, leading to growing recognition, promotion, and mobilization of such actions in ever greater numbers. This article investigates optimistic arguments about nonstate engagement, namely: (a) “the more the better”; (b) “everybody wins”; (c) “everyone does their part”; and (d) “more brings more.” However, these optimistic arguments may not be matched in practice due to governance risks. The current emphasis on quantifiable impacts may lead to the under‐appreciation of variegated social, economic, and environmental impacts. Claims that everybody stands to benefit may easily be contradicted by outcomes that are not in line with priorities and needs in developing countries. Despite the seeming depoliticization of the role of nonstate actors in implementation, actions may still lead to politically contentious outcomes. Finally, nonstate climate and sustainability actions may not be self‐reinforcing but may heavily depend on supporting mechanisms. The article concludes with governance risk‐reduction strategies that can be combined to maximize nonstate potential in sustainable and climate‐resilient transformations.This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

The optimal response to a potential productivity shock which becomes more imminent with global warming is to have carbon taxes to curb the risk of a calamity and to accumulate precautionary capital to facilitate smoothing of consumption. This paper investigates how differences between regions in terms of their vulnerability to climate change and their stage of development affect the cooperative and non-cooperative responses to this aspect of climate change. It is shown that the cooperative response to these stochastic tipping points requires converging carbon taxes for developing and developed regions. The non-cooperative response leads to a bit more precautionary saving and diverging carbon taxes. We illustrate the various outcomes with a simple stylized North–South model of the global economy.

The so-called “Traffic Light Index” (TLI) is a meta-sustainability label aimed at condensing the information provided by existing sustainability labels into an overarching message on food products’ environmental footprints. Such an overarching message is critical to reduce the confusion caused by existing labels and to foster more sustainable dietary habits among consumers. While research shows that the TLI is a viable and effective choice, its actual development and implementation are impeded by debates between relevant stakeholders in the European food system. This study examines those debates and adopts a multi-stakeholder perspective to address the following question: How do different stakeholder groups involved in the discussion towards a meta-sustainability label inhibit the adoption of the TLI label? Exploratory interviews with representatives from non-governmental organizations, social enterprises, academia, multi-national corporations, and governmental organizations show that each stakeholder group (1) adopts either optimistic or skeptical attitudes towards the TLI label, (2) perceives different types and magnitudes of barriers to its adoption (i.e., cognitive, methodological, and processual), and (3) proposes solutions to overcome those barriers that are either of an entrepreneurial or risk-averse nature. Findings further reveal that multi-stakeholder interactions influence attitudes and thereby inhibit or favor TLI adoption. Hence, entrepreneurial (vs. risk-averse) solutions proposed by optimistic (vs. skeptical) stakeholders may alter the attitudes of skeptical (vs. optimistic) stakeholders and the barriers they perceive to TLI adoption. By responding to calls for holistic approaches towards food labelling, our study shows how the diversity of stakeholders’ perceptions towards the TLI inhibits its adoption. We propose a theoretical framework and a set of propositions that can serve as springboards for policy ideas to propel progress in food labelling for environmental sustainability.

In this article, we outline the multifaceted roles played by non‐state actors within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and place this within the wider landscape of global climate governance. In doing so, we look at both the formation and aftermath of the 2015 Paris Agreement. We argue that the Paris Agreement cements an architecture of hybrid multilateralism that enables and constrains non‐state actor participation in global climate governance. We flesh out the constitutive features of hybrid multilateralism, enumerate the multiple positions non‐state actors may employ under these conditions, and contend that non‐state actors will play an increasingly important role in the post‐Paris era. To substantiate these claims, we assess these shifts and ask how non‐state actors may affect the legitimacy, justice, and effectiveness of the Paris Agreement.WIREs Clim Change2018, 9:e497. doi: 10.1002/wcc.497This article is categorized under:Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance