Our society depends on the effective management of phosphorus (P). Phosphorus is a key component of agricultural fertilizers to improve crop yields, and also plays a critical role in many industrial processes and consumer products. In the past decade, there have been numerous calls for innovative approaches to manage P more sustainably, as it is a nonrenewable resource that can adversely impact aquatic ecosystems from runoff and inefficiencies in P use. To develop more sustainable solutions that will ultimately be adopted, diverse stakeholder perspectives must be recognized, including those in industry, government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and other civil groups. This study responds to this need by identifying stakeholder views, needs, concerns, and challenges regarding P sustainability. An online survey was developed and deployed to individuals identified as P sustainability experts and professionals in the U.S. and abroad. Based on responses from 96 stakeholder participants from a range of sectors, areas of expertise, and geographies, we found that the vast majority of stakeholders considered current P use to be unsustainable and were very concerned about the ability to manage P sustainably. Stakeholder participants did not distinguish between urgent and long-term challenges, and perceived financial and regulatory issues to be of greatest importance. Stakeholder participants expressed a range of needs to improve P management systems, including improved management practices, new technologies, enhanced regulations, and better approaches for engagement. Outcomes from this work can help inform future research, engagement, and policy priorities to ensure sustainable P management solutions based on stakeholder-identified perspectives and needs.
In this Perspective we take an in-depth look at what coordinated stakeholder engagement could entail for phosphorus sustainability. The element phosphorus is critical to life on Earth and to the continued functioning of society as we know it. Yet, how society uses phosphorus is currently unsustainable, both as a resource in support of global food production where inequitable distribution creates food security challenges, but also from an environmental aspect, where mismanagement has led to negative impacts on the quality of agricultural soils, human health, and freshwater and marine ecosystems. A number of initiatives and cross-sector consortia have come together to address sustainable phosphorus management at either global or regional scales. However, these efforts could benefit from a more coordinated approach to stakeholder engagement to identify the diversity of needs and perspectives involved in this complex challenge. Herein we examine some examples of different approaches to developing such coordinated stakeholder engagement in other areas of environmental sustainability. We consider how to apply the lessons learned from those efforts toward stakeholder coordination in the realm of phosphorus sustainability. Particularly, we discuss the value of a coordinating body to manage the communications and knowledge sharing necessary to develop trust and cooperation among diverse stakeholder groups and to transition society to more sustainable phosphorus use.
more » « less- Award ID(s):
- 2019435
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10396568
- Publisher / Repository:
- Springer Science + Business Media
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Environment Systems and Decisions
- Volume:
- 43
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 2194-5403
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 371-378
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
Abstract Around the world today, the magnitude and rates of environmental, social, and economic change are undermining the sustainability of many rural societies that rely directly on natural resources for their livelihoods. Sustainable development efforts seek to promote livelihood adaptations that enhance food security and reduce social-ecological vulnerability, but these efforts are hampered by the difficulty of understanding the complexity and dynamism of rural livelihood systems. Disparate research avenues are strengthening our ability to grapple with complexity. But we are only just beginning to find ways to simultaneously account for problematic complexities, including multiscalar feedbacks in the ecosystems that that support livelihoods, the heterogeneous benefits garnered by different segments of society, and the complex contingencies that constrain people’s decisions and capacities to adapt. To provide a more nuanced analysis of the dynamics of transformation in rural livelihood systems, we identified key complementarities between four different research approaches, enabling us to integrate them in a novel research framework that can guide empirical and modeling research on livelihood adaptation. The framework capitalizes upon parallel concepts of sequentiality in (1) ecosystem services and (2) livelihood adaptation scholarship, then incorporates principles from (3) adaptation in social-ecological systems research to account for the dynamism inherent in these often rapidly-transforming systems. Lastly, we include advances in (4) agent-based modeling, which couples human decisions and land use change and provides tools to incorporate complex social-ecological feedbacks in simulation studies of livelihood adaptation. Here we describe the new Ecosystem Services—Livelihood Adaptation (ESLA) framework, explain how it links the contributing approaches, and illustrate its application with two case studies. We offer guidance for its implementation in empirical and modeling research, and conclude with a discussion of current challenges in sustainability science and the contributions that could be gained through research guided by the ESLA framework.
-
Sustainability, including environmental and social sustainability, has been identified across all sectors, from government to industry to academia, as a critical area for action. Sustainability goals and actions, by necessity, require input from many fields, but engineers play a potentially outsized role due to the structures and products they build, and the associated choices they make. The Engineering for One Planet (EOP) initiative aims to address this challenge by ensuring all future engineers, no matter their discipline, are equipped with the skills, knowledge, understanding, and mindsets to design, build, and create in sustainable ways. Much has been achieved to date by the EOP initiative, through a process of multi-stakeholder engagement, in both understanding and piloting solutions to realize the EOP vision. However, in order to achieve the far reaching systemic changes desired, a roadmap for a Collective Impact-informed, cross-sector, collaborative initiative was developed. This roadmap leverages the approaches yielded from the recent National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded EOP Scaling for Impact Workshop, the lessons learned and results achieved from the initiative to date, and key considerations drawn from a Collective Impact approach that centers equity. This roadmap calls for stakeholders—including academia, industry, accrediting and professional organizations, community organizations, non-profits, funders, and those communities most impacted by the negative impacts of environmental and social sustainability challenges— to move beyond singular programmatic interventions, and instead work to collaboratively understand and construct coordinated solutions, to integrating sustainability into engineering education and the engineering profession. The roadmap’s call to action invites collaborators to join this initiative and engage with the roadmap as a starting point for their work together; the roadmap provides immediate action steps, and invites collaborators to further shape the roadmap into a collective, achievable plan for systems change, that they, their institutions/organizations, and other cross-sector collaborators can embrace. For systems change is never complete and the solutions not finite; it is only through ongoing, collective action that we can fully understand, and learn how to address the lack of sustainability in engineering as the complex, social problem it is.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract 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 intertwinedlevers 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. -
more » « less
Abstract The rapid depletion of US groundwater resources and rising number of dying wells in the Western US brings attention to the significance of groundwater governance and sustainability restrictions. However, such restrictions on groundwater withdrawals are likely to generate spillover effects causing further environmental stresses in other locations and adding to the complexity of sustainability challenges. The goal of this paper is to improve our understanding of the implications of growing global food demand for local sustainability stresses and the implications of local sustainability policies for local, regional, and global food production, land use, and prices. We employ SIMPLE-G-US (Simplified International Model of agricultural Prices, Land use, and the Environment—Gridded version for the United States) to distangle the significance or remote changes in population and income for irrigation and water resources in the US. Then we examine the local-to-global impacts of potential US groundwater sustainability policies. We find that developments in international markets are significant, as more than half of US sustainability stresses by 2050 are caused by increased commodity demand from abroad. Furthermore, a US sustainable groundwater policy can cause overseas spillovers of US production, thereby potentially contributing to environmental stresses elsewhere, even as groundwater stress in the US is alleviated. These unintended consequences could include deforestation due to cropland expansion, as well as degradation in water quality due to intensification of production in non-targeted areas.
