Given the slow policy response by governments, climate leadership by other institutions has become an essential part of maintaining policy momentum, driving innovation, and fostering social dialogue. Despite growth in carbon pricing in government and the private sector, our review suggests low, but growing, adoption of internal carbon prices (ICPs) by higher education institutions (HEIs), who may be uniquely suited to implement and refine these tools. We analyze the range of ICP tools in use by eleven U.S. HEIs and discuss tradeoffs. Our analysis identifies several reasons why proxy carbon prices may be especially well-suited to decisions (especially at the system-scale) around carbon neutrality at a wide range of institutions. Using a unique dataset covering 10 years of real-world analysis with a proxy carbon price, we analyze the interaction of ICPs with life cycle cost analysis to start to identify when and how internal carbon pricing will be most likely to shift decisions. We discuss how schools and other institutions can collaborate and experiment with these tools to help drive good climate decision-making and inform climate policy at larger scales.

Young people are both among the generations to be most affected by climate change and critical advocates for climate action. In the face of growing urgency surrounding the climate crisis, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has become an important institutional framework for political progress. We developed a community-based participatory action research project centered on youth involved in the COP climate negotiations. A “leverage points” approach guided our research; this paper is the first time the framework has been applied in an international negotiations context. Our findings point to the structural power, networks, and paradigms that youth might engage with for international climate justice work. We identify actionable leverage points through which youth organizers might increase their social power in the COP process to bring about climate action. Many of these leverage points are rooted in dynamics of power, which we expand upon and connect to broader literature. Moving forward, these findings can benefit and inform the strategies of youth as they participate in the COP process.

The substitution of hazardous substances with safer alternatives is being driven by policy pressures and business demands. As a result, scientific techniques for chemical alternatives assessment (CAA) have been established and communities of practice are emerging. Interest in safer chemical substitution is widely shared throughout a range of stakeholder groups across science, industry, public policy, and advocacy. Yet there is an unmet need for intentionally designed public information infrastructure to support the highly knowledge-intensive nature of CAA. We report here on the process of developing the Chemical Hazard Data Commons, an experimental project intended to support a diverse community of practitioners by providing publicly accessible chemical hazard data and tools for understanding it. In an arena where market forces and regulatory regimes have largely failed to generate the necessary knowledge, this project represents a novel application of a commons-based approach emphasizing building shared intellectual and technical capacity for CAA. The Data Commons—now a part of the related Pharos Project—includes an online portal providing simultaneous access to many different sources of information and enabling effective interactions with it. Foremost among these interactions are search and retrieval of hazard information about chemical substances, uniform display of the most relevant information, and the ability to automatically screen substances against consistent and transparent hazard-based criteria. We describe the motivation for the project and report on the principles and key considerations that guided its design as a participatory information infrastructure. We present our approach to organizing chemical information; the process of community engagement and planning; and how we constructed the system to provide functional tools. We discuss the outcomes of the project and highlight important challenges—such as fostering active participation and planning for long-term governance. With this article, we hope to inform future efforts for the collaborative development of knowledge resources for chemical alternatives assessment.

People in contemporary industrial societies encounter countless novel materials that did not exist previously, many of which present risks to health and environment. In this article, we build on the concept of “materials sovereignty” as the right of people to use and be surrounded by environmentally benign, non-toxic, and renewing materials in their everyday lives. As a rights-based approach, materials sovereignty may help change the politics of governing materials. We suggest that social movements that explicitly base interventions into design on materials sovereignty may be better able to gain traction in changing industrial production. We consider the case of nanotechnology as a particularly challenging field for social movement intervention. We review several pathways that have been used by social movement organizations in attempts to influence the development of nanomaterials, but which have met with limited success. We more closely examine three participatory pathways through which social movements could intervene more directly into material design: participatory technology assessment, collaboration with industry, and co-design. We identify three key elements of materials sovereignty: participatory knowledge systems, which create multi-directional flows of knowledge and agency; the embedding of citizen voices into design processes; and building accountability systems. Of the pathways we examine here, co-design appears to be the most promising from a theoretical and ethical perspective, but there remain significant institutional and organizational challenges for bringing it into practice.

Many trends in agricultural biotechnology have extended fluidly from the first era of genetic modification using recombinant DNA techniques to the era of gene editing. But the high-profile, explicit, and assertive discourse of democratization with gene editing — especially CRISPR-Cas9 — is something new. In this paper, I draw on semi-structured interviews with gene editors, policy analysts, and communications experts as well as with critical academic and civil society experts. I use Science and Technology Studies and political ecology lenses to unpack democratization in three main parts. First is democratizing discourses: On what grounds is CRISPR said to be democratic? Who is saying so? How do dissident communities respond to these narratives? Second is agricultural applications, with a focus on the Innovative Genomics Institute’s work in developing gene-edited food crops, including a case of saveable clonal hybrid rice. Third is governance, where I contrast US Department of Agriculture regulations and the CRISPRcon conference as “closed” and “invited” spaces, respectively, for democratic participation. Next, I argue that “created spaces,” in which power is held by typically delegitimized actors and ideas, offer an opening for working out democracy on the terrain of biotechnology. I conclude with a set of principles and practices for CRISPR governance based on the idea that democratization of biotechnology requires epistemic justice. By gathering multiple, partial knowledges together, we move beyond narrow risk-benefit framings to better evaluate not just what CRISPR is and does, but what democracy means and whom it serves.

Aquaculture, the fastest growing food sector, is expected to expand to produce an additional 30 million metric tons of fish by 2030, thus filling the gap in supplies of seafood for humans. Salmonids aquaculture exploits the vast majority of fishmeal and fish oil rendered from ocean-dwelling forage fish. Most forage fish diverted to these commodities are human-food grade, and all are primary prey for marine predators. Rising costs, price volatility, and environmental sustainability concerns of using these commodities for aquaculture feed are driving the global search for alternatives, including marine microalgae originating from the base of marine food webs but produced in culture. We report the first evaluation of two marine microalgae, Nannochloropsis sp. and Isochrysis sp., for their potential to fully replace fishmeal and fish oil in diets of rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ), an important model for all salmonid aquaculture. We conducted a digestibility experiment with dried whole cells of Nannochloropsis sp. and Isochrysis sp., followed by a growth experiment using feeds with different combinations of Nannochloropsis sp., Isochrysis sp., and Schizochytrium sp. We found that digestibilities of crude protein, crude lipid, amino acids, fatty acids, omega 3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n3 PUFA), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), n6 (omega 6) PUFA in Isochrysis sp. were significantly higher than those in Nannochloropsis sp. Digestibility results suggest that for rainbow trout diets Isochrysis sp. is a better substitute for fishmeal and fish oil than Nannochloropsis sp. The lower feed intake by fish fed diets combining multiple microalgae, compared to fish fed the reference diet, was a primary cause of the growth retardation. In trout fillets, we detected an equal amount of DHA in fish fed fish-free diet and reference diet. This study suggests that Isochrysis sp. and Schizochytrium sp. are good candidates for DHA supplementation in trout diet formulations.

A common theme in speculative fiction concerns technological overreach. All manner of scenarios have been developed by science fiction authors and filmmakers, warning of the potential for subjugation, obliteration, or alienation as technologies grow in power and scale. Yet within environmental circles, even though the dangers inherent in technological development are well appreciated, environmental challenges are coming to be defined more and more as technical matters to be resolved via technological means. This article explores some of the meaning and limits of this contemporary environmental techno-optimism, through engagement with the “Culture” novels of Iain M. Banks. The Culture novels chronicle a space-faring, post-scarcity civilization, and stand as a kind of best-case extension, in environmental terms, of humanity’s present technological trajectory. The article wrestles with the potential for great benefit but also extraordinary risk that comes with treading down Banks’ path and outlines the kinds of questions that must be asked and answered in an increasingly technology-saturated world. The article distills lessons from comparing Banks’ novels to the “Biosphere 2” experiment. It also explores a few of the ways in which speculative fiction might be deployed in the classroom to better equip students and citizens to wrestle with existing and emerging technologies and their implications.

Scenario development has been recognized as a potential method to explore future change and stimulate a reflective process that can contribute to more informed decision-making. The assessment process under IPBES (the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) has however shown that the current predominantly biophysical and economic models and scenario processes for exploring the future of biodiversity, ecosystem services and their contributions to human wellbeing are insufficient to capture the complexity and context-specific nature of the problems facing these sectors. Several important challenges have been identified that require a more in-depth analysis of where more imaginative scenario efforts can be undertaken to address this gap. In this paper, we identify six key characteristics necessary for scenario processes: adaptability across diverse contexts, inclusion of diverse knowledge and value systems, legitimate stakeholder engagement that foregrounds the role of power and politics, an ability to grapple with uncertainty, individual and collective thinking mechanisms and relevance to policy making. We compared four cases of imaginative, arts-based scenario processes that each offer aspects of meeting these criteria. These approaches emphasise the importance of engaging the imagination of those involved in a process and harnessing it as a tool for identifying and conceptualising more transformative future trajectories. Drawing on the existing literature, we argue that there is value in fostering more inclusive and creative participatory processes that acknowledge the importance of understanding multiple value systems and relationships in order to reimagine a more inclusive and just future. Based on this, we reflect on future research to understand the transformative role that imagination can play in altering and enhancing knowledge-making for global assessments, including IPBES. We conclude that creative scenario co-development processes that promote imagination and create an opening for more empathetic responses should be considered as complementary tools within the suite of methodologies used for future IPBES scenario development.

Sustainability transitions tend to be seen as technical, not social, affairs. Mainstream scholars and practitioners do not very often acknowledge environmental and social justice in their transitions work. They seldom recognize rights for racially marginalized people, or the possible existence of rights of Earth. Nor do they query whether they are exaggerating the reach of scientific and technological solutions. By contrast, some recent ecological science fiction writing has begun to place these issues at the center of transitions. In the Broken Earth series, N.K. Jemisin explores Earth through the lens of racial and ecological injustice. She interrogates four themes relevant to transitions. How should we live in a climate-changed world? What role does racial and social subordination play in destroying the environment? What are the dangers of hubris in seeking out a fundamental change through science and technology that cannot be readily controlled after all? How should we think about Earth itself? I conclude with some thoughts on how Earth could be made ‘unbroken’ again through integrating recognition, humility, renewal, and redistribution into transitions.

Sustainable agriculture is among the most urgently needed work in the United States, for at least three reasons: we face an environmental crisis, a health crisis, and a rural economic crisis. Addressing these pressing crises through sustainability transition will require growing our agricultural workforce: both because the current farm population is aging, and because sustainable agriculture is knowledge-intensive work that substitutes experiential knowledge of farm ecosystems for harmful industrial inputs. Given its social value, sustainable agriculture ought to be a welcoming profession. But at present, US agriculture is decidedly unwelcoming for nearly all who work in it – and it puts new entry and sustainable farmers at a distinct disadvantage. In this paper, we first examine why it is so hard to enter and succeed in sustainable farming. We find that new entrants struggle to gain critical access, assets, and assistance, encountering substantial barriers that stand between them and the land, capital, markets, equipment, water, labor, and training and technical assistance they need to succeed. Secondly, we review promising policy and civil society interventions targeted at addressing these barriers, nearly all of which have already been piloted at the local and state levels or through modest public funding. These interventions are most effective, we find, when they are linked up through robustly governed networks to provide “wraparound” coverage for new entry sustainable farmers. Such networks can help patch together complementary sources of support (e.g. federal, state, local, NGO, cooperative) and synergistically address multiple barriers at once. Finally, we propose additional interventions that are more aspirational today, but that could offer important pathways to support new sustainable farmers in the longer term.

Participatory Modeling (PM) is becoming increasingly common in environmental planning and conservation, due in part to advances in cyberinfrastructure as well as to greater recognition of the importance of engaging a diverse array of stakeholders in decision making. We provide lessons learned, based on over 200 years of the authors’ cumulative and diverse experience, about PM processes. These include successful and, perhaps more importantly, not-so-successful trials. Our collective interdisciplinary background has supported the development, testing, and evaluation of a rich range of collaborative modeling approaches. We share here what we have learned as a community of participatory modelers, within three categories of reflection: a) lessons learned about participatory modelers; b) lessons learned about the context of collaboration; and c) lessons learned about the PM process. First, successful PM teams encompass a variety of skills beyond modeling expertise. Skills include: effective relationship-building, openness to learn from local experts, awareness of personal motivations and biases, and ability to translate discussions into models and to assess success. Second, the context for collaboration necessitates a culturally appropriate process for knowledge generation and use, for involvement of community co-leads, and for understanding group power dynamics that might influence how people from different backgrounds interact. Finally, knowing when to use PM and when not to, managing expectations, and effectively and equitably addressing conflicts is essential. Managing the participation process in PM is as important as managing the model building process. We recommend that PM teams consider what skills are present within a team, while ensuring inclusive creative space for collaborative exploration and learning supported by simple yet relevant models. With a realistic view of what it entails, PM can be a powerful approach that builds collective knowledge and social capital, thus helping communities to take charge of their future and address complex social and environmental problems.

Over the past decade within Hollywood speculative fiction (SF), the natural environment has become more prominent as a cause of societal collapse. Interstellar, Elysium, Wall-E, Mad Max, and Tomorrowland, as a few examples, all include environmental change and deterioration as prominent plot points, rather than merely as settings. I analyze the political and ideological tenor of these films with a discourse framework to assess the influence of certain real-world discourses, as well as their optimism or pessimism in the context of real-world sustainability transformations. Within this genre, one continues to find a degree of ‘Prometheanism,’ or techno-optimism, but the distinctive discursive influence of the past decade and a half has been the rise of ‘Survivalism,’ a more dystopian or post-apocalyptic discourse. When the environment is prominent as a theme, that is, these films more often explore its destruction—often by humans—and the conditions of existence within such environments.

Mitigation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adaptation to climate risk are two essential ingredients of climate change policy. Both are needed and co-benefits may exist. Yet, mitigation and adaptation are not usually pursued together. Part of remedying this shortcoming is understanding the relationship between GHG emissions and climate vulnerability reduction and recognizing when and where they trend together. Here, we compare changes in fossil fuel CO 2 emissions per capita and in climate vulnerability scores over the past two decades in 179 countries. We use climate vulnerability scores from the well-established ND-GAIN Country Index, a composite metric constructed from thirty-six indicators covering three components of vulnerability (exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity). We find that 69% of the countries decreased climate vulnerability, while increasing their per capita fossil fuel CO 2 emissions. These countries are successfully reducing climate vulnerability but are increasing their GHG emissions and thus failing in mitigation efforts. In contrast, 23% of the countries have been successful in simultaneously reducing per capita CO 2 emissions and climate vulnerability. Furthermore, in highly vulnerable countries, increasing CO 2 emissions are not correlated with decreasing climate vulnerability. These findings underscore that climate vulnerability reduction may be due only partly to economic development. This finding also changes our prevailing view that increases in CO 2 emissions are associated with vulnerability reduction. Finally, examining mitigation and climate-vulnerability reduction by sector, we show that a majority of countries are able to reduce vulnerability in ecosystem services. Those countries and sectors with positive trends provide examples for others to follow, as solutions at the mitigation-climate vulnerability reduction interface are essential for sustainable economic development.

The Cuban government has implemented a series of agricultural transformations since 2007 to increase the country’s agricultural self-sufficiency and reduce its dependence on food imports. These include the transfer in usufruct, i.e. use rights only, of State-owned land to non-State producers (i.e. cooperatives and private farmers), moderate price reforms, the decentralization of decision making, and the gradual relaxation of existing forms of agricultural commercialization. As a result of these measures, the area planted, as well as physical output and agricultural yields (in selected non-sugar crop categories) have shown mixed results, and still remain below desired levels. There are three fundamental unresolved issues that have prevented Cuba’s agricultural sector from achieving desired levels: (1) the need to achieve the “realization of property”; (2) recognition and acceptance of the market as a complementary economy in coordination with a planning mechanism; and (3) absence of a systemic focus to achieve the successful completion of the agricultural production cycle (i.e. the value chain). These unresolved issues should be addressed through: (1) consolidating markets for inputs, where producers can obtain essential inputs at prices that correspond to the prices they can obtain for their output; (2) granting greater autonomy to agricultural producers to allow them to decide when, where, and to whom they can sell their output, after social contracts have been fulfilled; (3) diversifying types of agricultural commercialization to permit greater participation by non-State economic actors; (4) allowing agricultural producers to freely hire the labor necessary to sustain and increase production; and (5) providing agricultural producers with needed financing and technical assistance. Please refer to Supplementary Materials , Full text Spanish version of this article , for a full text Spanish version of this article .

A number of factors in Cuba today contribute to the urgent need to develop family farming based on agroecological practices across the island. These factors include: soil deterioration, high external dependence for inputs and food, damaging effects of climate change, loss of farmer traditions, and the next generation’s disinterest in a farming lifestyle, coupled with the essential contribution that family farming makes to supplying food for the country, often in small spaces, together offer the real possibility of repairing the damage caused by conventional farming practices. Given this urgent need and possibility, it is important to identify and share successful experiences built on innovative practices. The study presented here aims to do just that by sharing the experiences of a farm representative of the cooperative sector in Cuba. This is a longitudinal study of the agroecological transition that occurred in one farm’s socio-ecological system between 1995 and 2015. In particular, the study evaluates the socio-ecological resilience of the family farm during three periods of transition, which are considerably different from one another given the strategies of the family and the design and management of the socio-ecological system. We define socio-ecological resilience as the capacity of agroecosystems to adaptively change in its socio-ecological structure and interactions in order to withstand and overcome disturbances, stress and change, and to maintain production levels in harmony with the culture, social organization, and satisfaction of the needs and capacity of ecosystems, in an ecologically possible and socially desirable context ( Altieri et al., 2012 ; Casimiro Rodríguez, 2016 ; Koohafkan et al., 2011 ). We used the Evaluation Methodology of the Socio-ecological Resilience of family farms (MERS in its Spanish acronym) ( Casimiro Rodríguez, 2016 ), based on the evolution of an array of indicators of efficiency and indexes of food, technological and energy sovereignty, as well as from the transformation process from conventional farming practices to agroecological practices. Based on the results of the study, we show a set of elements that address the need to transform Cuban agriculture by implementing an agroecological base, the importance of family farming, as well as aspects that can come into play in the socio-ecological resilience of other family farms in the country. Please refer to Supplementary Materials , Full text Spanish version of this article , for a full text Spanish version of this article .

We analyze the role biological control plays in the Cuban agri-food system and discuss an experience at the country level that demonstrates that the pest problem can be handled through an ecological and sustainable approach. Biological control is one of the key components of a systemic approach that characterizes pest management. Its implementation has led to the removal of a group of highly dangerous pesticides from the Official List of Authorized Pesticides and reduced use of others. Greater emphasis has been placed on augmentative biological control, which is a tendency repeated throughout the world. In Cuba, rudimentary production occurs in 176 Centers for the Reproduction of Entomophages and Entomopathogens (CREE) located throughout the country; four industrial production plants are in operation, as are pilot plants and facilities in research centers. The biological control agents that are most reproduced are the parasitoids Lixophaga diatraeae (Townsend) (Diptera: Tachinidae) and Trichogramma Westwood (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae), the entomopathogens Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner (Bacillales: Bacillaceae), and Beauveria bassiana sensu lato (Bals.-Criv.) Vuill. (Hypocreales: Cordycipitaceae); the antagonist Trichoderna Persoon (Ascomycota: Hypocreales: Hypocreaceae); and the nematodes of the Heterorhabditis Poinar (Nematoda: Rhabditida: Heterorhabditidae) genus. The use of predatory mites in inoculative strategies is limited due to their restricted availability, in spite of the fact that different alternatives have been evaluated for their massive reproduction with encouraging results. The achievements and progress obtained in classical and augmentative biological control and the changes in the understanding and thinking in Cuban agricultural have laid strong foundations for biological control through conservation of natural enemies. This latter strategy is greatly valued in sustainable agriculture. Please refer to Supplementary Materials , Full text Spanish version of this article , for a full text Spanish version of this article .

The main constraint to sustainable agrarian development in Cuba has been a poorly balanced agrobiodiversity in its agroecosystems. This is the result of mainstream agrarian policy that focuses on sugarcane monocropping, following the principles of modern agriculture as promoted over the last 50 years. This paper discusses the development of a new Index of Agrobiodiversity (IDA), a tool used to identify the extent to which agroecosystems are sustainable, based on their agrobiodiversity. It describes the research carried out to identify the index components, how the index was developed and how its efficiency was assessed. The paper also presents a practical experience whereby agroecosystems from Cuba’s urban agriculture movement were measured. Our analysis suggests that the Index of Agrobiodiversity is a valid proposal: its main success lies in the fact that few material and human resources are needed, and that the required information is generated through the work of local farmers themselves. Moreover, the results can encourage farmers to increase agrobiodiversity in their agroecosystems. Please refer to Supplementary Materials , Full text Spanish version of this article , for a full text Spanish version of this article .

Cuba’s transition to agroecology is perhaps as widely known as it is misunderstood. In response to the economic crisis of the early 1990s, the Cuban agricultural sector largely departed from the industrial model of food production that it had previously pursued. The subsequent transition towards an agroecological model has been a dynamic and uneven process, elevating Cuba on the world stage as a global leader in sustainable agriculture while at the same time producing unique challenges for Cuban farmers, policy makers, researchers and academics. This article synthesizes and updates contemporary literature on the Cuban agricultural system, paying attention to both successes and shortcomings of agroecology in Cuba to date. In particular, it situates these literatures alongside contributions from academics and practitioners alike, bringing a number of data sets, experiences, and perspectives into conversation in the context of changing realities within Cuba and the nation’s evolving geopolitical relationship with the United States. By analyzing both the historical and contemporary processes through which agroecology has taken root in Cuba, we demonstrate that, despite its uneven and incomplete implementation, such a sustainable agroecological transition holds great, untapped potential. Agroecology in Cuba currently faces pressure from normalizing Cuba-US relations, with potentially profound implications for agriculture in both countries. But increasing opportunities are also emerging for investment, collaboration, knowledge exchange, and solidarity. In this paper, we provide an overview of the evolution of the Cuban agroecology movement; analyze the state of food security and challenges to food sovereignty on the island today; outline US-Cuba policy changes occurring since December 2014 that may affect the agrifood sector; and conclude with recommendations for supporting agroecology – for food security, food sovereignty, and sustainability – under this new and evolving relationship. Please refer to Supplementary Materials , Full text Spanish version of this article , for a full text Spanish version of this article .

This paper presents a review of relevant literature and research on the potential of silvopastoral systems for milk and meat production in Cuba. This work emphasizes the contribution of trees in pasture systems, which are known to improve the plant community as well as increase the productive efficiency of steers, reproductive females and dairy cattle. Results from this research suggest that, due to the association effect, both the availability of dry matter and the total protein content of gramineous plants is increased in pastoral systems that incorporate trees while also maintaining pasture. In systems of gramineous plants that have been mixed with Leucaena leucocephala and that support cows of average potential, it is possible to obtain milk production of 10 kg/cow/day in addition to live-weight gains of 0.500–0.600 kg/animal day –1 in Cebú cattle. This work concludes that the use of silvopastoral systems is a viable option for the production of milk and meat under low-input conditions, such as those in Cuba. Please refer to Supplementary Materials , Full text Spanish version of this article , for a full text Spanish version of this article .

Cuba’s experience in sustainable agriculture and agroecology has been the subject of much international attention, particularly as advocates of agroecology aim to demonstrate the feasibility of implementing alternatives to industrial agriculture on a national scale to support ecological resilience, food security, food sovereignty, and human wellbeing. Such attention has increased since relations between the U.S. and Cuba began to normalize, stimulating speculation as to how this will affect Cuba’s advances in sustainability. The Special Feature Cuba Agrifood Systems in Transition analyses the nuances of agroecological development in Cuba. We emphasized amplifying the voices of locally-based researchers and practitioners by targeting manuscript invitations to Cuban scholars and publishing in both Spanish and English. We outline the process, challenges and goals of this unique endeavor and introduce seven articles, all contributions from Cuba except for one, which is a collaboration between U.S. based and Cuba based scholars. These articles unpack some of the complexities of Cuba’s agrifood system transition and draw on specific information and experiences to discuss successes and challenges of this transition. We thus underline the instructive value of the Cuban experience regarding the path to agrifood system sustainability and hope to spark new collaborative opportunities as scholars and citizens around the world look to develop agrifood systems that will sustain human society long into the future. Please refer to Supplementary Materials , Full text Spanish version of this article , for a full text Spanish version of this article .