ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

X
feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Other Sources  (3,043)
  • English  (3,043)
  • 2020-2024  (3,043)
Collection
Source
Keywords
Publisher
Language
Years
Year
  • 1
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Loss and damage and climate litigation: The case for greater interlinkage (2021)
    In:  Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: With the negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) failing to provide adequate support to climate victims, vulnerable countries, nongovernmental organizations and affected communities are increasingly exploring legal avenues to obtain recourse for loss and damage. This article contributes to the emerging scholarship on climate litigation by exploring whether, how and with what effects such litigation interacts with the UNFCCC negotiations. For this purpose, the article contextualizes normative claims about the influence of climate court cases through practice‐embedded views of stakeholders in the loss and damage context and provides a typology of loss and damage‐related cases. Having due regard to the fact that litigation for liability and compensation of climate harms is still at an early stage, it argues that this legal avenue offers significant potential to advance the UNFCCC negotiations on loss and damage, and provides recommendations on how both spheres can be more strongly interlinked.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 2
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Does climate action bring peace? Assessing the geopolitics of renewables using global investment data (2023)
    In:  npj climate action
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: The transition toward renewables is central to climate action. The paper empirically tests whether renewables also enhance international peace, a hypothesis discussed in the International Political Economy (IPE) of renewables literature. It develops and tests hypotheses about the pacifying effects of renewables, with a view to establishing the foundations for analyzing more detailed causal mechanisms. These mechanisms rest on the ‘energy democracy’ debate, suggesting that a low carbon world sees less interstate tension thanks to more states being democratic; the ‘capitalist peace’ theorem, establishing that the deployment of renewables brings about economic development, reducing conflict; and the human security literature, positing that renewables reduce local-level reduce vulnerabilities, thus enhancing social stability and reducing violence. Using a longitudinal dataset on global renewable energy investment, econometric tests suggest that distributed renewable energy systems do not seem to foster democratic rule, nor do they have a significant influence on human development. Countering the energy democracy literature, it is a higher concentration of renewable investment that tends to increase stability/ absence of violence and human development, instead of decentralized investment patterns. We find no evidence for the ‘peace through prosperity’ argument. Overall, there is no support for the assumption that renewables bring about peace and reduce conflict. The paper critically discusses the limitations of these findings and suggests further avenues for empirical research.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 3
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Visions for our future regional electricity system: Citizen preferences in four EU countries (2024)
    In:  iScience
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: As climate targets tighten, all countries must transition toward a renewable electricity system, but conflicts about generation and infrastructure deployment impede transition progress. Although the triggers of opposition are well studied, what people want remains understudied. We survey citizen preferences for a renewable electricity future through a conjoint analysis among 4,103 individuals in Denmark, Portugal, Poland, and Germany. With our study we go beyond the Likert scale survey approach specifically seeking trade-offs and contextualized preferences for regional electricity system designs. We show the importance of identifying both the ‘‘least preferred’’ and ‘‘most preferred’’ solutions and highlighting the possibility of identifying very different systems with identical utility. Lastly, our research actively bridges the divide between social aspects and techno-economic modeling, promoting their integration. We show that the most preferred system design in all four countries is a predominantly regional one, based on rooftop solar, communally owned, and not relying on transmission expansion.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 4
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    From regime‐building to implementation: Harnessing the UN climate conferences to drive climate action (2022)
    In:  Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews - Climate Change
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: The gap between the internationally agreed climate objectives and tangible emissions reductions looms large. We explore how the supreme decision-making body of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Conference of the Parties (COP), could develop to promote more effective climate policy. We argue that promoting implementation of climate action could benefit from focusing more on individual sectoral systems, particularly for mitigation. We consider five key governance functions of international institutions to discuss how the COP and the sessions it convenes could advance implementation of the Paris Agreement: guidance and signal, rules and standards, transparency and accountability, means of implementation, and knowledge and learning. In addition, we consider the role of the COP and its sessions as mega-events of global climate policy. We identify opportunities for promoting sectoral climate action across all five governance functions and for both the COP as a formal body and the COP sessions as conducive events. Harnessing these opportunities would require stronger involvement of national ministries in addition to the ministries of foreign affairs and environment that traditionally run the COP process, as well as stronger involvement of non-Party stakeholders within formal COP processes. This article is categorized under: Policy and Governance 〉 International Policy Framework
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 5
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Process ownership in science–practice collaborations: the special role of transdisciplinary processes in sustainable transitioning (2023)
    In:  Sustainability science
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: The complexity and importance of environmental, societal, and other challenges require new forms of science and practice collaboration. We first describe the complementarity of method-driven, theory-based, and (to the extent possible) validated scientific knowledge in contrast to real-world, action-based, and contextualized experimental knowledge. We argue that a thorough integration of these two modes of knowing is necessary for developing ground-breaking innovations and transitions for sustainable development. To reorganize types of science–practice collaborations, we extend Stokes’s Pasteur’s quadrant with its dimensions for the relevance of (i) (generalized) fundamental knowledge and (ii) applications when introducing (iii) process ownership, i.e., who controls the science–practice collaboration process. Process ownership is a kind of umbrella variable which comprises leadership (with the inflexion point of equal footing or co-leadership) and mutuality (this is needed for knowledge integration and developing socially robust orientations) which are unique selling points of transdisciplinarity. The extreme positions of process ownership are applied research (science takes control) and consulting (practice takes process ownership). Ideal transdisciplinary processes include authentic co-definition, co-representation, co-design, and co-leadership of science and practice. We discuss and grade fifteen approaches on science–practice collaboration along the process ownership scale and reflect on the challenges to make transdisciplinarity real.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 6
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Codes of Conduct for Collaboration as Social Rule Systems for Transdisciplinary Processes (2024)
    In:  Systemic practice and action research
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: This paper addresses the need for effective and fair codes of conduct for public-good-oriented transdisciplinary processes. These processes are characterized by the production of socially robust orientations (SoROs) through mutual learning and developing better action strategies by merging knowledge from practice and science. We argue that transdisciplinary processes should be governed by an appropriate social rule system that comprises codes of conduct for collaboration (CCC) in transdisciplinary discourses. In our view, participants in a transdisciplinary process must (1) follow rules of mutuality between science and practice (accepting the otherness of the other) and (2) enable the use and integration of knowledge from science and practice (e.g., through responsibility and/or co-leadership at all levels of a project). This requires (3) a protected discourse arena similar to an expanded Chatham House Rule that facilitates the generation of groundbreaking, novel ideas for sustainable transition. In transdisciplinary processes, CCC are based on these three perspectives and can be explicitly introduced yet require cultural and situational adaptations. Many aspects of transdisciplinary processes, such as legal status (e.g., who owns the data generated, whether it is a group or formal organization), are often unclear and need further investigation.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 7
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Is carbon dioxide removal ‘mitigation of climate change’? (2021)
    In:  Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is often characterized as separate from climate change mitigation. Discussion of CDR governance – despite enjoying growing interest – tends to overlook how key provisions on mitigation apply. Similarly, many climate policy processes have ignored CDR. CDR may have been discursively held separate from ‘mitigation’ due to a partial conceptual overlap with ‘geoengineering’. We unpack how the ‘mitigation of climate change’ – as defined in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Paris Agreement – includes CDR as defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. We point to important implications and opportunities for strengthening governance by enhanced clarity regarding parties’ obligations, principled equitable distribution of removal efforts, prioritization of rapid emissions reductions and careful paths to long-term removals, and a need for considering sustainability and human rights issues in the pursuit of CDR.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 8
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Five priorities to advance transformative transdisciplinary research (2024)
    In:  Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: In response to the climate and biodiversity crisis, the number of transdisciplinary research projects in which researchers partner with sustainability initiatives to foster transformative change is increasing globally. To enable and catalyze substantial transformative change, transformative transdisciplinary research (TTDR) is urgently needed to provide knowledge and guidance for actions. We review prominent discussions on TTDR and draw on our experiences from research projects in the Global South and North. Drawing on this, we identify key gaps and stimulate debate on how sustainability researchers can enable and catalyze transformative change by advancing five priority areas: clarify what TTDR is, conduct meaningful people-centric research, unpack how to act at deep leverage points, improve engagement with diverse knowledge systems, and explore potentials and risks of global digitalization for transformative change.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 9
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Towards a relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice, and education (2021)
    In:  Ambio: a journal of human environment
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: Relational thinking has recently gained increasing prominence across academic disciplines in an attempt to understand complex phenomena in terms of constitutive processes and relations. Interdisciplinary fields of study, such as science and technology studies (STS), the environmental humanities, and the posthumanities, for example, have started to reformulate academic understanding of nature-cultures based on relational thinking. Although the sustainability crisis serves as a contemporary backdrop and in fact calls for such innovative forms of interdisciplinary scholarship, the field of sustainability research has not yet tapped into the rich possibilities offered by relational thinking. Against this background, the purpose of this paper is to identify relational approaches to ontology, epistemology, and ethics which are relevant to sustainability research. More specifically, we analyze how relational approaches have been understood and conceptualized across a broad range of disciplines and contexts relevant to sustainability to identify and harness connections and contributions for future sustainability-related work. Our results highlight common themes and patterns across relational approaches, helping to identify and characterize a relational paradigm within sustainability research. On this basis, we conclude with a call to action for sustainability researchers to codevelop a research agenda for advancing this relational paradigm within sustainability research, practice, and education.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
  • 10
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Sustainable lifestyles: towards a relational approach (2022)
    In:  Sustainability science
    Details
    Publication Date: 2024-06-19
    Description: The concept of sustainable lifestyles is said to have reached the limits of its usefulness. As commonly understood, it impedes an effective response to our increasingly complex world, and the associated societal challenges. In this context, the emerging paradigm of relationality might offer a way forward to renew our current understanding and approach. We explore this possibility in this study. First, we systematize if, and how, the current dominant social paradigm represents a barrier to sustainable lifestyles. Second, we analyze how a relational approach could help to overcome these barriers. On the basis of our findings, we develop a Relational Lifestyle Framework (RLF). Our aim is to advance the current knowledge by illustrating how sustainable lifestyles are a manifestation of identified patterns of thinking, being, and acting that are embedded in today’s “socioecological” realities. The RLF revitalizes the field of sustainable lifestyle change, as it offers a new understanding for further reflection, and provides new directions for policy and transformation research.
    Language: English
    Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    CITATION RIFS
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...