Ambio https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-022-01721-3 PERSPECTIVE Earth stewardship: Shaping a sustainable future through interacting policy and norm shifts F. Stuart Chapin III , Elke U. Weber , Elena M. Bennett, Reinette Biggs , Jeroen van den Bergh , W. Neil Adger , Anne-Sophie Crépin , Stephen Polasky , Carl Folke , Marten Scheffer, Kathleen Segerson , John M. Anderies , Scott Barrett, Juan-Camilo Cardenas, Stephen R. Carpenter , Joern Fischer , Nils Kautsky, Simon A. Levin , Jason F. Shogren, Brian Walker, James Wilen, Aart de Zeeuw Received: 20 May 2021 / Revised: 30 October 2021 / Accepted: 18 February 2022 Abstract Transformation toward a sustainable future toward more sustainable pathways. The purpose of this requires an earth stewardship approach to shift society paper is to outline a vision and a new pragmatic approach from its current goal of increasing material wealth to a to transform toward sustainability. This approach focuses vision of sustaining built, natural, human, and social on interactions, synergies, and alignment between incen- capital—equitably distributed across society, within and tives and social norms to shape a more sustainable future among nations. Widespread concern about earth’s current for society and the biosphere. trajectory and support for actions that would foster more A broad body of recent sustainability research and the- sustainable pathways suggests potential social tipping ory has identified many factors that inform practical points in public demand for an earth stewardship vision. stewardship strategies (e.g., Bennett et al. 2016; Loorbach Here, we draw on empirical studies and theory to show that et al. 2017; O’Brien 2018; Dı́az et al. 2019; Clark and movement toward a stewardship vision can be facilitated Harley 2020; Folke et al. 2021). These conclude the fol- by changes in either policy incentives or social norms. Our lowing: (1) Transformation requires fundamental changes, novel contribution is to point out that both norms and rather than minor tweaks, to restore a sustainable rela- incentives must change and can do so interactively. This tionship between society and nature as part of the bio- can be facilitated through leverage points and sphere. (2) Transformation results from interacting changes complementarities across policy areas, based on values, in many elements through multiple processes. (3) The system design, and agency. Potential catalysts include resulting complexity creates high uncertainty in outcomes, novel democratic institutions and engagement of non- requiring responses to be resilient to unforeseen circum- governmental actors, such as businesses, civic leaders, and stances. (4) Transformation creates both winners and social movements as agents for redistribution of power. losers, requiring careful attention to equitable distribution Because no single intervention will transform the world, a of resources and redistribution of power to shape change. key challenge is to align actions to be synergistic, Building on these insights, we identify a suite of approa- persistent, and scalable. ches that are grounded in theory, sensitive to context, and provide practical guidance to support transformative Keywords Anthropocene  Earth stewardship  change at local-to-global scales. Institutions  Market economy  Social norms  We define earth stewardship as the proactive shaping of Transformation physical, biological, and social conditions to sustain, rather than disrupt, critical earth-system processes in support of nature and human wellbeing at local-to-planetary scales INTRODUCTION (Chapin et al. 2010; Steffen et al. 2011). Its key policy- relevant element is prioritization of approaches that shape Nature and society stand at a critical juncture. Rates of sustainable and equitable future changes rather than return climate change, environmental degradation, and levels of to some prior system state. This approach recognizes that social inequality are rising (IPCC 2018; Dı́az et al. 2019). society, as part of, and dependent on, a resilient biosphere, However, society has been unsuccessful in transforming affects and responds to many interacting earth-system  The Author(s) 2022 www.kva.se/en 123 Ambio processes and globally networked risks (Galaz et al. 2017), that adaptive challenges (e.g., addressing social equity or including climate-driven changes in water and food supply, climate change) require both a new way of viewing prob- increased frequency and severity of natural disasters, sea lems (i.e., vision) and solution-focused policies that target level rise, loss of ecosystem services (e.g., water filtration, implementation. pollination, and flood control), and disease risk due to In this paper, we bridge these frameworks by focusing antibiotic resistance, changing wildlife habitat, and on the integration and interactions among multiple leverage increasing mobility. Motivations for stewardship include points. Our approach is to provide (1) a systemic vision to responsibility to care for vulnerable people, species, and guide choices of pathways toward sustainable and ecosystems (Enqvist et al. 2018), concern for the safety of equitable change, (2) identification of feedbacks and design others and of one’s community and nation (Brown et al. features (e.g., norms and incentives) that can be shaped to 2019), and the values that link people with nature (Klain align desired changes among multiple system components, et al. 2017). Stewardship has a temporal dimension and (3) examples of policies, institutions, and novel actors encompassing care for the future; an environmental that might trigger or support desired changes (Fig. 1). Our dimension entailing care for the earth and other species; novel contribution is a focus on linkages, complementarity, and an equity dimension focusing on a fairer distribution of and alignment among leverage points to maximize their resources, rights, responsibilities, and power across society, effectiveness. within and among nations. We describe five pragmatic strategy elements to trigger In this paper, we emphasize approaches that can be transformation (see Table 1 for a numbered overview) initiated now by all countries, but need to be reflective of drawing on studies such as ‘‘Seeds of good Anthropoce- their current and historical responsibilities and uneven nes,’’ which synthesized 100 bottom-up studies of trans- access to power and resources to implement potential formative change (Bennett et al. 2016; Pereira et al. 2018). solutions between elements of society. The underlying This synthesis, which now incorporates 500 studies, illus- principles are that all countries and sections of society trates interactions among vision, system dynamics, and should have the opportunities, resources, and capacity to initiating triggers. For example, depopulation of agricul- develop stewardship approaches that meet their goals and tural landscapes in rural Japan had reduced the diversity needs to ensure that all people have equitable access and and productivity of food crops. One vision for restoring power to develop sustainably. these landscapes was to rejuvenate Satoyama traditional agriculture that integrated terraced rice paddies with a diversity of food crops and other cultural features LEVERAGE POINTS FOR OPERATIONALIZING (Takeuchi et al. 2016). A scenario (pathway) to accomplish EARTH STEWARDSHIP this vision was to draw on a growing interest among urban residents to learn about and participate in traditional food Stewardship-based transformation involves change toward production. The trigger that enabled this to occur was a a new system with fundamentally different human–envi- program of homestays for urban residents who provided ronment interactions and feedbacks (Westley et al. 2011). financial support and volunteer labor for the agricultural Both planned changes and unanticipated events contribute initiative. Although the long-term sustainability of this to transformation. The planned components of transfor- initiative cannot be predicted, the pathway met agricultural mation require a vision of desired outcomes and an and cultural goals that were unavailable in the depopulated approach to implementing that vision (Olsson et al. 2006; landscape that it replaced. Bennett et al. 2016). The abolition of slavery in Britain illustrates how One reason for society’s limited success in transforming interactions among multiple leverage points can contribute toward sustainability in many countries is the predominant to systemwide changes (Hochschild 2005). In 1787, twelve focus on specific policies with limited breadth of impact. influential religious men began to advocate a vision of the Meadows (1999) and Abson et al. (2017) identified several moral unacceptability of slavery (A1 in Table 1). Over categories of interventions (leverage points) that differ in 46 years, multiple processes (public education, boycotts, feasibility and potential impact. They argued that the and activist campaigns) shifted societal norms to the point greatest potential for deep systemic change comes from a that slavery and slave-produced goods were deemed shift in the vision that guides societal goals. In contrast, ‘‘unacceptable’’ (B2). Development of a sugar-beet indus- more modest leverage points, such as specific policies, may try in Europe and financial compensation to slave-owners be easier to implement and enforce but are unlikely to after slavery abolition shifted economic incentives away cause broad systemic change. O’Brien (2018) emphasized from slavery as an institution necessary for sugar  The Author(s) 2022 123 www.kva.se/en Ambio advocacy of a different paradigm, shifting of social norms and behavior, and policy interventions that changed eco- nomics, laws, and norms. Next, we discuss items A to C of Table 1 in more detail. A: Vision, goals, and values Vision, goals, and values represent the deepest leverage and relate to the intent and target of earth stewardship (what society should do). A1: Change vision and goals Our guiding vision is that sustainable earth processes (both Fig. 1 Leverage points for transformation, based on Abson et al. social and biophysical) are a prerequisite for wellbeing of (2017) and O’Brien (2018). Arrows indicate interactions among people and the rest of nature. This system perspective categories of leverage points. See Table 1 and accompanying text for aligns with key intents of most major religions and examples of specific transformation approaches indigenous worldviews—for example, to care for the earth and vulnerable people (Pope Francis 2015; UN Environ- ment Programme 2021). To address this intent, institutions production (B3). Local anti-slavery committees in indi- (e.g., religions, non-governmental organizations [NGOs], vidual British towns coordinated efforts and engaged par- social movements, businesses, and government) should liamentarians (C5). Lord Wilberforce recruited colleagues advocate actions that enhance the wellbeing of people and and built a political case that led to legislation prohibiting nature by halting climate change and ecosystem degrada- the trading of slaves within the British Empire in 1807 and tion and by reducing social inequity. This vision would be abolishing slavery altogether in 1833 (C4 and C5). It took fostered if society’s goals expanded beyond provision of another 55 years until the last country (Brazil) abolished material goods and private wealth, which characterized the slavery. It is doubtful that any one of these campaign policies of many nations in the nineteenth and twentieth strategies or unforeseen events would have single-handedly centuries, to a commitment to ensure the equitable wellbe- transformed Britain and its colonies away from slavery, but ing of current and future generations of humanity and other the application of multiple strategies focused on multiple species and the persistence of their life-support systems interacting leverage points contributed to this paradigm- (Trebeck and Williams 2019). In the absence of a long- shifting transformation. These interventions included term guiding vision for sustainability, short-term vested Table 1 Leverage points for operationalizing an earth stewardship approach, with details provided in sections A, B, and C Transformation approaches Illustrative goals and actions A. Vision, goals, and values 1. Change vision and goals Identify a set of broadly accepted goals and values that, if acted upon, would reduce consumption- driven changes in climate and ecosystems that currently threaten the wellbeing of people and nature B. System design and feedbacks 2. Shift social norms and behavior Shift social norms to foster less-consumptive behaviors in order to contribute to sustainable wellbeing of people and nature within and among nations 3. Incentivize sustainable Internalize environmental and social costs in market economies to support societal needs for built, production/consumption decisions natural, human, and social capital C. Agency to influence institutions and policies 4. Engage influential actors Engage businesses, NGOs, civic leaders, and social movements to support sustainability goals and foster social–ecological resilience 5. Foster deliberative democracy Design new institutions, such as citizen assemblies, that foster prosocial change and constrain the power of forces that resist such changes  The Author(s) 2022 www.kva.se/en 123 Ambio interests and concerns will likely continue to predominate, (Fagan and Huang 2019, United Nations Development and humanity is unlikely to effectively address planetary Programme [https://www.undp.org/press-releases/worlds- degradation. largest-survey-public-opinion-climate-change-majority-people- Aiming for continuous economic growth is a widespread call-wide]) suggest that public opinion in developed and paradigm that currently guides many governmental, busi- developing nations now supports concerted actions to ness, and personal decisions. This paradigm has con- trigger transformation toward more sustainable pathways. tributed to environmental degradation and inequality by Such actions would be consistent with growing scientific accelerating resource extraction and use by those who can consensus that such a sustainability transformation is afford it (Escobar 2015; Dasgupta 2021). If the concept of urgently needed to meet the needs of people and nature wealth were broadened from material goods (built capital) now and in the future and to reduce the risks of transfor- to include natural capital (natural resources and ecosystem mations that would otherwise be unfavorable to most services), human capital (the capacity of people to people and to nature and increasingly difficult to reverse accomplish their goals through health, education, and (IPCC 2018; Dı́az et al. 2019). training) and social capital (empowerment for collective action) equitably distributed across society, this would B: System design and feedbacks provide a more sustainable social-ecological foundation for human wellbeing (Polasky et al. 2015; Clark and Harley The market economy, which matches resource extraction 2020). Enhancing human and social capital, in particular, and use with consumer demand, is often blamed for global often reduces inequality. Fostering these four pillars of environmental degradation and rising inequality (Klein capital, fairly distributed across society, within and among 2014). However, production decisions that internalize nations, addresses the fundamental unsolved problems of social and environmental costs (the supply side of market the twenty-first century, i.e., environmental degradation dynamics) and purchasing choices that reflect a commit- and social inequality (Polasky et al. 2015). ment to stewardship goals (the demand side of market Some nations, segments of society, and business sectors dynamics) could shift a market economy toward more have high levels of material wealth and consumption, sustainable outcomes, but only if both sides of the mar- contribute disproportionately to global environmental ket align with stewardship goals. This alignment would degradation, and have greater scope to reduce consumption require changes in both social norms and incentives. This than do people living in poverty. Goals for reducing could occur if a shift in social norms increases public environmental degradation through reduced consumption acceptance of incentives for sustainable behavior or if must therefore focus on those who consume the most, changes in incentives trigger changes in social norms, as rather than those with insufficient access to natural, mate- described in Section B3. Either incentives or social rial, social, and human capital to meet their needs (Princen norms can push or pull the other through a system of 2005). feedbacks, but ultimately both must change. Society is often slow to recognize and address problems Market prices emerging from regulated markets enable that are serious but novel—for example, those listed in the producers and consumers to adjust their behavior to introduction—because shifts in public opinion about novel approximately balance supply and demand for the per- problems lag behind their recognition by science. How- ceived benefit of both, within the limitations of information ever, if societal opinion approaches a tipping point, rapid and transaction costs (Arrow 1951). This dynamic helps transformation can occur (Scheffer et al. 2003). A survey consumers make choices that are consistent with their by Global Commons Alliance of citizens in 20 developed preferences, given prices and available supplies. By anal- (G20) nations (n = 1000 per country) showed that most ogy with the 80/20 Pareto Rule (80% of environmental people are very worried about the state of the planet (58%), problems may come from 20% of market exchanges), as believe that we are close to dangerous tipping points in our backed up by examples from Kane (2014), market-medi- biosphere because of human actions (73%), and support a ated interaction between supply and demand could con- shift of their country’s economic priorities to move beyond tribute substantially to sustainability solutions, if key profit toward greater focus on human wellbeing and eco- consumer preferences (e.g., less meat-intensive diet) and logical protection (74%) rather than prioritizing jobs corporate preferences (e.g., carbon–neutral supply chains) despite impacts on nature (25%) (https://globalcommonsa changed to reflect sustainability norms and values. For lliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Global-Commons- example, the carbon taxes that would induce the needed G20-Survey-full-report.pdf). These and other surveys behavioral changes could be reduced by about 40%, if  The Author(s) 2022 123 www.kva.se/en Ambio socially embedded preferences spill over from reduced models (Nyborg et al. 2016). Analogously, environmen- carbon-intensive consumption to other environmentally tally negative social norms are likely to decline if people motivated choices as a result of communication through engage less in visible behaviors associated with nonpre- social networks (Konc et al. 2021). Carbon taxes are par- ferred norms (e.g., a reduction in conspicuous consumption ticularly effective in stimulating low-carbon innovation of cars, housing, or clothes, frequent air travel, and (van den Bergh and Savin 2021). The identity and mag- smoking). nitude of key behavior shifts and required incentives Some consumption, such as electricity use, is less visible remain to be empirically determined. and thus less susceptible to social pressure (Fischer et al. In general, the market is most effective in communi- 2012). Inconspicuous consumption can be made more cating sustainability tradeoffs for private goods such as the apparent, for example, by reporting in electricity bills a choice between carbon-based and renewable energy, person’s electricity use relative to neighbors. Combining whereas management of common property resources, such regulations, pricing instruments, and social norm policies as clean air, species diversity, and ecosystem services or might provide the greatest positive synergy. the rights of vulnerable people and nations, typically Several social theories suggest potential approaches for requires additional government policies and intervention in shifting citizen behavior. These may involve shifting social markets. This argument suggests that changes in both norms (value theory), encouraging behavior that is con- market dynamics and government policies are essential, as sistent with professed social norms (social identity theory elaborated in section B3 (what society can do). and terror management theory), shifting behavior regard- Individuals and businesses that benefit from environ- less of social norms (social comparison theory), and mental degradation or social inequity often have the wealth strategic approaches to triggering policy change (query and power to influence legislation and structure rules that theory) (Box 1). The effectiveness of each approach shape market-driven prices (Kashwan et al. 2019; Aklin depends on interactions between individual deliberation and Mildenberger 2020). For example, small groups of and social influence (Lorenz et al. 2011). These and other industry-funded scientists, acting as ‘‘merchants of doubt,’’ bodies of social science theory suggest a suite of comple- were able to garner public and political support that mentary strategies to foster changes in citizen behavior delayed regulation of environmental threats for decades by (Fehr and Fischbacher 2003). amplifying perceived uncertainty about societal impacts of Instincts for dominance/competition and empathy/shar- pollution, smoking, and climate change (Oreskes and ing are fundamental to our evolutionary success as a spe- Conway 2010). Although such pushback forces are for- cies (Gilbert and Basran 2019). Excessive consumption is midable, they can in principle be revealed and neutralized sometimes motivated by competition (Box 1, social com- by social movements, NGOs, outspoken leaders, and gov- parison theory) and contributes to environmental degrada- ernment regulations—an interaction between system tion. However, people also have an evolved tendency to design (B3) and agency for transformation (C4 and C5). behave altruistically and to punish freeloaders and social- So, what are the possible steps forward? norm violators. Altruistic punishment behavior involves neurological pathways that generate aversion to inequity B2: Shift social norms and behavior and promote empathy toward others who are less fortunate (Fehr and Gächter 2002). This can lead to a shared stew- The key challenge in transforming society from a consumer ardship ethic that emphasizes contributions to societal to a stewardship vision is to shift social norms from wellbeing rather than a person’s own selfish interests materialistic consumption to align more closely with (Schill et al. 2019). stewardship goals. Society may be close to such a tipping Social norms propagate across scales through many point (Section A1). Such a shift is critical both to facilitate pathways. Norms sometimes diffuse upward through the institutional changes needed to internalize social and political processes (e.g., voting and lobbying) from indi- environmental costs (section B3) and to shift demand viduals to national political agendas and from government toward more sustainable consumption patterns and greater leaders to their negotiators in international conferences of alignment with social equity concerns. parties (Section C5). The actions of international conven- Social norms, by providing normative or descriptive tions also diffuse downward to influence national, com- social information, influence individual and societal choi- munity, and individual norms and behaviors. This cross- ces in support of either self-interest or prosocial prefer- scale diffusion of norm changes is sometimes accelerated ences (Weber 2015). Environmentally positive social by environmental or social crises that increase public norms spread most readily when the behavior is highly awareness of climate risks or social inequities (Hale 2020). visible, such as cycling to work, and/or conforms to the National leaders or other institutional entrepreneurs also behavior of one’s own group or to that of admired role  The Author(s) 2022 www.kva.se/en 123 Ambio BOX 1: Examples of evidence-based strategies for shifting social norms and behavior under different circumstances Education and civic engagement: Value theories, based on normative ethics, describe what individuals feel they should do. Public support for school programs and community activities (e.g., stream restoration projects) that foster civic responsibility have been shown to promote multi-generational social-norm shifts toward prosocial behavior (Dixit and Levin 2017). High environmental concern, in turn, can make people more responsive to stewardship- information campaigns (Delmas et al. 2013; Furth-Matzkin and Sunstein 2018). Aligning behavior with professed stewardship identity: Social identity theory stresses the drive to belong to a group (Turner and Oakes 1986). Because most people (88% of citizens) in industrialized nations view climate change as a threat (Fagan and Huang 2019), information campaigns targeted at specific audiences by groups with which these people identify (e.g., family, close friends, businesses, or religious groups) can elicit behavior that is consistent with their professed stewardship concerns (Dasgupta and Ramanathan 2014; Weber 2015). Showcasing stewardship behavior: Social comparison theory describes how people’s comparison with others motivates their behavior (Suls et al. 2002). Civic programs and leaders that promote highly visible stewardship behavior (e.g., recycling, cycling to work) rather than a focus on icons of conspicuous consumption (e.g., expensive clothes and frequent air travel) foster stewardship behavior by people who share that identity. Recruitment to group efforts: Terror management theory stresses how fear of social irrelevance or death promotes a wish to be part of something larger than oneself, such as a social movement (Solomon et al. 2015). Evidence of imminent catastrophic climate change can motivate people to join citizen actions such as marches, protests, and letter- writing or social-media campaigns that advocate stewardship actions (Gustafson et al. 2019). This can contribute to public support for stewardship initiatives at local, national, and international scales (Hale 2020). Conveying preferred choices to decision makers: Query theory describes the importance of presenting the preferred choice option first when shaping other people’s decisions (Weber et al. 2007). Designing clear policy messages that focus first on the preferred option and solutions (rather than describing the status-quo and the costs and complexities of change) significantly increases their likelihood of being chosen. influence movement of norms across scales (Galaz et al. Recent modeling suggests that, if policies were coordi- 2017; Aklin and Mildenberger 2020). nated among nations, a carbon tax policy combined with cuts in biofuel subsidies could have positive spillover to a wide range of interlinked global environmental risks such B3: Incentivize sustainable production/consumption as climate change, land system change, biodiversity loss, decisions freshwater use, biogeochemical flows, ocean acidification, and atmospheric aerosol loading (Galaz et al. 2017; For a market economy to promote overall social wellbeing, Engström et al. 2020). economists argue that institutions and policies must, at a Getting the prices right to foster highly visible sustain- minimum, ‘‘get the prices right,’’ a leverage point based on able behavior sometimes spills over to foster broader documented environmental and social costs, in order to behavioral change. For example, a tax on plastic bags in internalize environmental and social externalities and England reduced plastic bag use across age, gender, and provide correct incentives. For example, taxing carbon income groups within a month and was associated with emissions or shifting subsidies from fossil-fuel to renew- increased support for other charges to reduce plastic able energy can have multiple desirable effects (Konc et al. waste—a positive policy spillover to wider waste aware- 2021), such as economic incentives to reduce consumption ness by the British public (Thomas et al. 2019). of fossil fuels that drive climate warming (World Bank Complex policy changes, such as carbon pricing, must 2021), jump-starting price drops in renewable technologies often occur sequentially, beginning with ‘‘second-best (Patt 2015), and signaling a change in societal values (point policies’’ that have low barriers to acceptance. This can A1 in Table 1). The practical challenges are to garner the reduce transaction costs for more optimal policies, as necessary political support among voters and elites and to modest barriers are overcome (Klenert et al. 2018; Pahle assess and avoid potential distributional inequities among et al. 2018). For example, Germany and California devel- stakeholders (Scoones et al. 2015; Galaz et al. 2017). oped a sequence of policies to reduce greenhouse gas  The Author(s) 2022 123 www.kva.se/en Ambio emissions by first addressing cost barriers through eco- climate-friendly policies. This could generate full, nomic incentives, then equity effects based on social equitable participation in the long run, reinforced by an norms, then institutional design reflecting an intersection of emerging spirit of cooperation and a commitment to economic incentives and social norms, and finally free- address climate change (Al Khourdajie and Finus 2020)—a riding among actors, using economic incentives to imple- leverage-point interaction between incentives (B3) and ment shared social norms (Pahle et al. 2018). Each step social norms (B2). Even in the absence of free-riding reduced the transaction cost of tackling the next most dif- concerns, crises such as climate change sometimes catalyze ficult barrier (often at a larger scale) and involved different unilateral leadership in climate action based on interna- interactions between incentives (B3) and social norms tional pro-environmental norms such as the precautionary (B2). principle (Galaz et al. 2017; Aklin and Mildenberger 2020; The role of incentives is particularly important in the Sect. C5). However, international policies must also ensure context of public goods, such as the atmosphere, that are that developing nations can participate equitably in such held in common by society. These goods tend to be over- trade agreements, for example by supporting green devel- exploited as each individual or nation acts in its own per- opment that provides new jobs and revenue when these ceived self-interest (open access) (Gordon 1954). This can countries lose revenue from excessive resource extraction result in a ‘‘prisoner’s dilemma’’ in which individuals or by developed nations. nations have an incentive to under-provide the public good (or over-exploit the resource) and free-ride on the conser- C: Agency to influence institutions and policies vation efforts of others. To overcome this dilemma, either the rules (institutions) must change or participants must Given the important interactions between incentives and change their views of the utility of outcomes. More gen- social norms, we suggest two ways to initiate transforma- erally, moving to a more sustainable situation may require tion toward stewardship (experiments in governance): actions that push the system across a ‘‘positive social tip- ping point’’ beyond which the fundamental nature of the C4: Engage influential actors system shifts to a preferred outcome (Lenton 2020, Sect. A1), for example from a prisoner’s dilemma to a coordi- Transnational corporations (TNCs), NGOs, civic leaders, nation challenge. Crises, such as climate change or and social movements have the potential to create new recognition of social inequities, can create conditions that pathways that build resilience for transformation toward catalyze such a transition (Hale 2020), which can then be stewardship—complementing the more traditional roles of implemented through policy changes. However, if infor- governments and international conventions (Vandenbergh mation and transaction costs are high, it will likely also and Gilligan 2017). Many business sectors are dominated require changes in the awareness, perceived urgency, and by a handful of TNCs (Folke et al. 2019). In the absence of moral beliefs (i.e., social norms) of individuals (Schill et al. adequate environmental agreements and regulations, TNCs 2019) and nations (Galaz et al. 2017). See Sect. B2. have the economic power to set barriers to entry that stifle Each of these steps involves interactions among multiple sustainable practices and lobby to weaken environmental leverage points (Fig. 1). For example, at the international and social standards. However, TNCs are also susceptible scale, a stewardship vision in which each nation preferred to naming-and-shaming campaigns led by NGOs and social to play its part to address climate change—provided a movements that publicize environmentally or socially majority of others committed themselves to play their destructive practices. For example, the MacDonalds part—would reduce the temptation of a nation to defect restaurant chain, in response to Greenpeace protests, when most others cooperate. In theoretical terms, this stopped purchasing beef raised on soy produced on Ama- changes a prisoner’s dilemma (under which selfish choices zon-deforested lands. This decision contributed to a 50% lead to only bad outcomes for society) to a coordination decline in deforestation rate in the Brazilian Amazon.1 challenge with multiple equilibria, some of which are Institutional entrepreneurs such as CEOs that champion preferred by all (Barrett 2013). The Montreal Protocol the publicity benefits of responsible environmental and illustrates the feasibility of international coordination to societal stewardship may trigger a shift in social norms protect a global public good—the ozone layer. This was across an entire sector (Folke et al. 2019), as in the Seafood achieved in part by the threat to restrict trade against non- Business for Ocean Stewardship (SeaBOS) initiative parties. As a similar strategy, Nordhaus (2015) suggested (Österblom et al. 2017). The World Business Council for that free-riding in a climate change agreement could be Sustainable Development convenes corporate and scientific overcome if participating nations provided trade benefits to each other that were unavailable to non-participants. 1 https://www.ukessays.com/essays/environmental-studies/environmental- Additional nations could join this agreement by agreeing to issues-with-mcdonalds-in-the-uk.php.  The Author(s) 2022 www.kva.se/en 123 Ambio leaders to co-create strategies for more sustainable design gas emissions to net zero by 2050. Their recommendations and management of supply chains by TNCs (Williams will be debated by the UK parliament (https://www. et al. 2019). Investment in renewable rather than carbon- climateassembly.uk). Local and regional assemblies are intensive energy, for example, enables businesses to being trialed in the UK and are expanding globally with account for and advertise their actions that reduce climate encouragement from the United Nations (Capstick et al. risks. Such stewardship investment can be motivated on 2020). many fronts, including government policies and pressure In 2019, widespread protests in Chile sparked by rising from corporate investors, NGOs, employees, and other economic inequality triggered hundreds of self-organized stakeholders. However, policy makers and social groups townhall assemblies (cabildos) across the country, where must be wary of greenwashing by firms and act to incen- people discussed causes and solutions to current inequality tivize firms to move from compliance to ‘corporate bio- and social unrest. As a result, parties across the political sphere stewardship’ (Folke et al. 2019). Current spectrum called for a fundamental rewriting of the consti- engagement of businesses as potential leaders of global tution to replace the constitution written by the Pinochet sustainability efforts is too recent to assess their long-term dictatorship four decades earlier. This resulted in a national impacts on transition toward sustainability pathways. plebiscite supported by 78% of the people to elect a body to The rapid development of new technologies, such as the draft the new constitution (McGowan 2020). internet and artificial intelligence, provides powerful new Deliberative (national or global) citizens’ assemblies tools that can facilitate transformation toward or away from (DCAs) of randomly selected representative participants, stewardship. For example, internet communication offered such as those described above, have generally been more ways for groups to meet virtually in 2020, when COVID- effective in reaching agreement on solutions that are 19 triggered reductions in air travel, increased telecom- mutually acceptable, long-term, and reflective of the global muting, and a shift to on-line meetings. Despite marginal good compared to conferences of parties (COPs) appointed effects on the climate system, this created opportunities to by governments to address complex global issues such as learn how to sustain communication with less dependence climate change (Dryzek et al. 2011; Vlerick 2020). on fossil-fuel-based transportation. The internet also gen- Governments that participate in COPs often advocate erates opportunities for rapid (‘‘viral’’) spreading of new positions that reflect their short-term economic benefits or social norms, as in the #me-too movement and Arab domestic political realities (Aklin and Mildenberger 2020). Spring. In the absence of regulation, the internet also DCA solutions are less prone to free-riding and more likely spreads conspiracy theories and deliberate disinformation to incorporate local knowledge, preferences, and concerns campaigns. and coordination mechanisms because they tend to be less partisan and more oriented to perceived fairness. When C5: Foster deliberative democracy proposals are developed through a transparent process that is widely perceived as legitimate (Galaz et al. 2017), the Experiments with novel democratic institutions that draw public, their elected leaders, and international organiza- on civil society have emerged in many nations in response tions are more amenable to implementing these solutions to public concerns about government failure to address (Vlerick 2020), as in the Irish Citizens’ Assembly (Hotz critical issues (Hotz 2019). In Ireland, for example, a 2019) and the UN-backed global citizens’ climate Citizens’ Assembly (An Tionól Saoránach) of randomly assembly. selected citizens was established in 2016 to consider the Important institutional innovation can also occur outside politically polarizing question of access to abortion, for of government—for example by scenario workshops that which government had found difficulty gaining consensus. compare alternative futures or by bridging organizations Over eighteen months it produced a consensus report on that collaborate with diverse groups to explore novel abortion to which the government responded. Although this pathways to solutions. A bridging program by The Nature new forum took considerable heat for allowing a con- Conservancy, for example, led to 40 globally distributed tentious issue to be debated and had no power to make water funds to facilitate economic exchanges between decisions, it facilitated a referendum about abortion that water providers and users (Calvache 2021). yielded a publicly acceptable resolution. Well-established institutions, such as the courts, can The same format is now being used elsewhere to address play new roles in fostering transformation. For example, other contentious issues. For example, the Climate most countries have signed international human rights Assembly UK is a group of 110 citizens representative of treaties, which create legal obligations. In principle, the UK population selected by civic lottery. The assembly affected individuals and communities can sue in their own has recommended ways that the UK can meet the country’s courts to seek enforcement of these rights or Government’s legally binding target to reduce greenhouse enactment of new domestic laws and regulations  The Author(s) 2022 123 www.kva.se/en Ambio Fig. 2 Interactions between changes in the social and natural world (outer arrows) with changes in beliefs, norms, values, and worldviews (inner circle) that are needed to sustain complex social-ecological systems. Also shown are many of the diverse social subsystems that mediate these interactions and provide potential entry points to trigger or support transformation toward more sustainable pathways (McInerney-Lankford et al. 2013). For example, in political and economic contexts and details of institutional response to a suit by an NGO, a Dutch court required its design and linkage (Scoones et al. 2015). The challenge is national government to reduce emissions in order to reduce to identify circumstances when multiple leverage points environmental threats to its citizens (Setzer and Vanhala align across scales and move norms and actions toward a 2019). In addition, countries are increasingly adding con- positive social tipping point. When alignment occurs, stitutional rights to nature in various forms, creating new changes sometimes propagate upward to more profound mechanisms for courts to pressure states to act more dili- leverage points. For example, changes in rules (gender- gently. For example, Ecuador, India, Bolivia, Colombia, related formal institutions) in southwestern Ethiopia facil- and New Zealand are increasingly giving rights to partic- itated increased participation by women in public activi- ular ecosystem components such as rivers (Kauffman and ties, which gradually altered perceptions about women’s Martin 2018). capabilities (change in social norms) that were acknowl- edged by both men and women as improved household- Synergies among leverage points level wellbeing (Manlosa et al. 2019). The necessity of pursuing multiple approaches to stew- No single intervention can shift society toward a more ardship transformations demands close attention to har- sustainable future because of the complexity of multiple monizing stewardship efforts (Vlerick 2020). For example, problems at multiple scales, linked by many interacting efforts to reduce environmental degradation should also feedbacks that involve numerous actors with different lessen, or at least not exacerbate, social inequities. In a interests (O’Brien 2018; Fig. 2). Instead, sets of synergistic general sense, actions that diminish environmental degra- actions that address leverage-point interactions will be dation improve delivery of ecosystem services and lower necessary at local, national, and global scales, requiring exposure to environmental hazards, particularly to vulner- polycentric coordination and governance (Ostrom 2010; able people (Hamann et al. 2018). However, at the local Galaz et al. 2017; Hale 2020). These actions range from scale, these efforts are sometimes antagonistic, for example acceptance of a sustainability vision to specific features of when conservation efforts prevent local communities from institutional design, policy parameters, and societal accessing ecosystems on which they depend. engagement. These multiple starting points provide many In broad outline, the types of actions needed to trigger pathways by which stewardship can be initiated and fos- transformation toward earth stewardship at each leverage tered. Their relative merits depend on local and global point are clear:  The Author(s) 2022 www.kva.se/en 123 Ambio • Acceptance of new approaches, such as earth steward- economists through their annual workshops on the island of Askö in ship, to displace the present consumption-focused the Baltic Sea. economic paradigm that drives current crises in global Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons environmental change and rising inequality. Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, • A shift in social norms of citizens, businesses, and adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as nations from competitive consumerism toward behavior long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate based on an ethic of responsibility, care, and empathy. if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this • Application of well-established institutional solutions, article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless such as tax incentives to reduce fossil fuel use, at indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not national and other scales to shift incentives by industry included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted and citizens toward sustainability. use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright • Engagement of new actors and novel institutions to holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons. initiate new pathways toward sustainability in ways that org/licenses/by/4.0/. are sensitive to local contexts and conditions. Such changes can happen rapidly during times of crisis, especially when there is a vision, preparedness, and REFERENCES capacity for transitions to new transformative pathways (Scheffer et al. 2003; Galaz et al. 2017; Walker et al. Abson, D.J., J. Fischer, J. Leventon, J. Newig, T. Schomerus, U. 2020). Transitions toward stewardship are already emerg- Vilsmaier, H. von Wehrden, P. Abernethy, et al. 2017. Leverage points for sustainability transformations. Ambio 46: 30–39. ing at local scales (Bennett et al. 2016). For example, in https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y. less than a decade, 1,200 transition initiatives sprang up Aklin, M., and M. Mildenberger. 2020. Prisoners of the wrong from NGOs and communities in 50 countries to support dilemma. Why distributive conflict, not collective action, sustainable planning by neighborhoods, communities, and characterizes the politics of climate change. Global Environ- mental Politics 20: 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00578. cities (Hopkins and Astruc 2017). Similarly, Local Al Khourdajie, A., and M. Finus. 2020. Measures to enhance the Governments for Sustainability, a global network of more effectiveness of international climate agreements. The case of than 1,700 cities, towns, and regions that serve 25% of the border carbon adjustments. European Economic Review 124: global urban population, has committed to a sustainable 103405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103405. Arrow, K.J. 1951. An extension of the basic theorems of classical future by developing green, resource-efficient economies welfare economics. Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Sym- (https://iclei.org). The emergence of climate activism by posium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 507–532. youth directly addresses the issue of changing social norms Berkeley, University of California Press. (the Greta Thunberg effect). As trusted members of their Barrett, S. 2013. Climate treaties and approaching catastrophes. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 66: families and social networks, youth can speak compellingly 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2012.12.004. across segments of society that share a concern for their Bennett, E.M., M. Solan, R. Biggs, T. McPhearson, A.V. Norström, P. children’s future despite differences in political perspec- Olsson, L. Pereira, G.D. Peterson, et al. 2016. Bright spots. Seeds tives (Sunstein 1995). The challenges are to assess the of a good Anthropocene. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environ- ment 14: 441–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1309. effectiveness of these and other efforts and approaches and Brown, K., W.N. Adger, P. Devine-Wright, J.M. Anderies, S. Barr, F. to strengthen and integrate them as a basis for hope and Bousquet, C. Butler, L. Evans, et al. 2019. Empathy, place and action rather than disengagement and despair. The global identity interactions for sustainability. Global Environmental Change COVID-19 response demonstrates that massive concerted 56: 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.03.003. Calvache, A. 2021. We’re learning to assess water according to a monetary global action can be launched quickly despite short-term value for the services it provides. The Nature Conservancy. https:// economic costs. The COVID-19 response invites us to www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/latin-america/stories- reimagine how to create a large-scale stewardship effort in-latin-america/water-funds-of-south-america/. Accessed 29 Oct 2021 that coordinates top-down and bottom-up actions to build Capstick, S., C. Demski, C. Cherry, C. Verfuerth, and K. Steentjes. 2020. Climate change citizens’ assemblies. CAST Briefing Paper new pathways toward a more sustainable future for nature 03. Cardiff: Center for Climate Change and Social Transforma- and society. Transformation toward a more sustainable tions. https://cast.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CAST- future is never guaranteed but will certainly not occur Briefing-03-Climate-Change-Citizens-Assemblies.pdf without a concerted effort by individuals, institutions, and Chapin, F.S., III., S.R. Carpenter, G.P. Kofinas, C. Folke, N. Abel, W.C. Clark, P. Olsson, D.M. Stafford Smith, et al. 2010. nations to seek a better world for people and for nature. Ecosystem stewardship. Sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25: 241–249. Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge the Beijer Institute https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.10.008. of Ecological Economics of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Clark, W.C., and A.G. Harley. 2020. Sustainability science. Toward a for sustained support of collaborations among ecologists and synthesis. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 45: 331–386. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012420-043621.  The Author(s) 2022 123 www.kva.se/en Ambio Dasgupta, P. 2021. The economics of biodiversity. The Dasgupta review. Gordon, H.S. 1954. The economic theory of a common property London, HM Treasury. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ resource. The fishery. Journal of Political Economy 62: final-report-the-economics-of-biodiversity-the-dasgupta-review 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1086/257497. Dasgupta, P., and V. Ramanathan. 2014. Pursuit of the common good. Gustafson, A., A. Leiserowiz, and E. Maibach. 2019. Americans are Science 345: 1457–1458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259406. increasingly ‘‘alarmed’’ about global warming. Accessed 12 Feb 2019 Delmas, M., M. Fischlein, and O. Asensio. 2013. Information https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/americans-are- strategies and energy conservation behavior. A meta-analysis increasingly-alarmed-about-global-warming/. of experimental studies from 1975–2011. Energy Policy 61(C): Hale, T. 2020. Catalytic cooperation. Global Environmental Politics 729–739. 20: 73–98. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00561. Dı́az, S., J. Settele, E.S. Brondizio, H.T. Ngo, J Agard, A. Arneth, P. Hamann, M., K. Berry, T. Chaigneau, T. Curry, R. Heilmayr, P.J.G. Balvanera, K.A. Brauman, et al. 2019. Pervasive human-driven Henriksson, J. Hentati-Sundberg, A. Jina, et al. 2018. Inequality and the decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative biosphere. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 43: 61–83. change. Science 366: aax3100. https://doi.org/10.1126/science. Hochschild, A. 2005. Bury the chains. Prophets and rebels in the fight aax3100 to free an empire’s slaves. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Dixit, A., and S. Levin. 2017. Social creation of pro-social Hopkins, R., and L. Astruc. 2017. The transition starts here, now and preferences for collective action. In The theory of externalities together. Paris: Actes Sud. and public goods, ed. W. Buchholz and D. Rübbelke, 127–143. Hotz, J. 2019. Explaining ‘citizens assemblies,’ a real kind of democracy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Retrieved 18 December, 2019, from https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/ Dryzek, J.S., A. Bächtiger, and K. Milewicz. 2011. Toward a pkeydg/explaining-citizens-assemblies-a-real-kind-of-democracy?utm_ deliberative global citizens’ assembly. Global Policy 2: 33–42. source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2010.00052.x. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2018. Global Engström, G., J. Gars, C. Krishnamurthy, D. Spiro, R. Calel, T. warming of 1.5C above pre-industrial levels and related global Lindahl, and B. Narayanan. 2020. Carbon pricing and planetary greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strength- boundaries. Nature Communications 11: 4688 ening the global response to the threat of climate change, Enqvist, J.P., S. West, V.A. Masterson, L.J. Haider, U. Svedin, and M. sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty, eds. Tengö. 2018. Stewardship as a boundary object for sustainability V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H.-O, Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, research. Linking care, knowledge and agency. Landscape and P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, et al. Geneva: Urban Planning 179: 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. World Meteorological Organization. landurbplan.2018.07.005. Kane, G. 2014. Accelerating sustainability using the 80/20 rule. Escobar, A. 2015. Degrowth, postdevelopment, and transitions. A London: Routledge. preliminary conversation. Sustainability Science 10: 451–462. Kashwan, P., L.M. MacLean, and G.A. Garcı́a-López. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0297-5 Rethinking power and institutions in the shadows of neoliber- Fagan, M., and C. Huang. 2019. A look at how people around the alism. World Development 120: 133–146. https://doi.org/10. world view climate change. Pew Research Center. Accessed 18 1016/j.worlddev.2018.05.026. Apr 2019 https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/18/a- Kauffman, C.M., and P.L. Martin. 2018. Constructing rights of nature look-at-how-people-around-the-world-view-climate-change/ norms in the US, Ecuador, and New Zealand. Global Environ- Fehr, E., and U. Fischbacher. 2003. The nature of human altruism. mental Politics 18: 43–62. RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:18:y:2018:i: Nature 425: 785–791. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02043. 4:p:43–62 Fehr, E., and S. Gächter. 2002. Altruistic punishment in humans. Klain, S.C., P. Olmsted, K.M.A. Chan, and T. Satterfield. 2017. Nature 415: 137–140. https://doi.org/10.1038/415137a. Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic Fischer, J., R. Dyball, I. Fazey, C. Gross, S. Dovers, P.R. Ehrlich, R.J. or instrumental values, or the New Ecological Paradigm. PLoS Brulle, C. Christensen, et al. 2012. Human behavior and ONE 12 (8): e0183962. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone. sustainability. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10: 0183962. 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1890/110079. Klein, N. 2014. This changes everything. Capitalism vs the climate. Folke, C., H. Österblom, J.-B. Jouffray, E.F. Lambin, W.N. Adger, M. New York: Simon and Schuster Paperbacks. Scheffer, B.I. Crona, M. Nyström, et al. 2019. Transnational Klenert, D., L. Mattauch, E. Combet, O. Edenhofer, C. Hepburn, R. corporations and the challenge of biosphere stewardship. Nature Rafaty, and N. Stern. 2018. Making carbon pricing work for Ecology & Evolution 3: 1396–1403. citizens. Nature Climate Change 8: 669–677. https://doi.org/10. Folke, C., S. Polasky, J. Rockström, V. Galaz, F. Westley, M. 1038/s41558-018-0201-2. Lamont, M. Scheffer, H. Österblom, et al. 2021. Our future in the Konc, T., I. Savin, and J.C.J.M. van den Bergh. 2021. The social Anthropocene biosphere. Ambio 50: 834–869. https://doi.org/10. multiplier of environmental policy. Application to carbon 1007/s13280-021-01544-8. taxation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Furth-Matzkin, M., and C.R. Sunstein. 2018. Social influences on 105: 102396. policy preferences: Conformity and reactance. Minnesota Law Lenton, T.M. 2020. Tipping positive change. Philosophical Transac- Review 101: 1339–1379. tions of the Royal Society B 375: 20190123. https://doi.org/10. Galaz, V., J. Tallberg, A. Boin, C. Ituarte-Lima, E. Hey, P. Olsson, 1098/rstb.2019.0123. and F. Westley. 2017. Global governance dimensions of globally Loorbach, D., N. Frantzeskaki, and F. Avelino. 2017. Sustainability networked risks. The state of the art in social science research. transitions research. Transforming science and practice for Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy 8: 4–27. https://doi.org/ societal change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 10.1002/rhc3.12108. 42: 599–626. Gilbert, P., and J. Basran. 2019. The evolution of prosocial and Lorenz, J., H. Rauhut, F. Schweitzer, and D. Helbing. 2011. How antisocial competitive behavior and the emergence of prosocial social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. and antisocial leadership styles. Frontiers in Psychology 10: 610. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00610. 108: 9020–9025. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1008636108.  The Author(s) 2022 www.kva.se/en 123 Ambio Manlosa, A.O., J. Schultner, I. Dorresteijn, and J. Fischer. 2019. Solomon, S., J. Greenberg, and T. Pyszczynski. 2015. The worm at Leverage points for improving gender equality and human well- the core. On the role of death in life. New York: Random House. being in a smallholder farming context. Sustainability Science Steffen, W., Å. Persson, L. Deutsch, J. Zalasiewicz, M. Williams, K. 14: 529–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0636-4. Richardson, C. Crumley, P. Crutzen, et al. 2011. The Anthro- McGowan, C. 2020. Celebrations as Chile votes by huge majority to pocene. From global change to planetary stewardship. Ambio 40: scrap Pinochet-era constitution. The Guardian. Accessed 26 Oct 739–761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0185-x 2020 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/26/chile- Suls, J., R. Martin, and L. Wheeler. 2002. Social comparison. Why, vote-scrap-pinochet-constitution?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other. with whom, and with what effect? Current Directions in McInerney-Lankford, S., M. Darrow, and L. Rajamani. 2013. Human Psychological Science 11: 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/ rights and climate change. A Review of the International Legal 1467-8721.00191. Dimensions. Washington: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/ Sunstein, C.R. 1995. Incompletely theorized agreements. Harvard 978-0-8213-8720-7. Law Review 108: 1733–1772. Meadows, D. 1999. Leverage points. Places to intervene in a system. Takeuchi, K., K. Ichikawa, and T. Elmqvist. 2016. Satoyama Hartland, VT: Sustainability Institute. landscape as social–ecological system. Historical changes and Nordhaus, W. 2015. Climate clubs. Overcoming freeriding in interna- future perspective. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustain- tional climate policy. American Economic Review 105: 1339–1370. ability 19: 30–39. Nyborg, K., J.M. Anderies, A. Dannenberg, T. Lindahl, C. Schill, M. Thomas, G.O., E. Sautkina, W. Poortinga, E. Wolstenholme, and L. Schlüter, W.N. Adger, K.J. Arrow, et al. 2016. Social norms as Whitmarsh. 2019. The English plastic bag charge changed solutions. Science 354: 42–43. https://doi.org/10.1126/science. behavior and increased support for other charges to reduce aaf8317. plastic waste. Frontiers in Psychology 10: 266. https://doi.org/ O’Brien, K. 2018. Is the 1.5C target possible? Exploring the three 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00266. spheres of transformation. Current Opinion in Environmental Trebeck, K., and J. Williams. 2019. The economics of arrival: Ideas Sustainability 31: 153–160. for a grown-up economy. Bristol: Policy Press. Olsson, P., L.H. Gunderson, S.R. Carpenter, P. Ryan, L. Lebel, C. Turner, J.C., and P.J. Oakes. 1986. The significance of the social Folke, and C.S. Holling. 2006. Shooting the rapids: Navigating identity concept for social psychology with reference to transitions to adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. individualism, interactionism and social influence. British Jour- Ecology and Society 11 (1): 18. nal of Social Psychology 25: 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. Oreskes, N., and E.M. Conway. 2010. Merchants of doubt. How a 2044-8309.1986.tb00732.x. handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco UN Environment Programme. 2021. Faith for earth initiative. Accessed smoke to global warming. New York: Bloomsbury Press. 29 Oct 2021 https://www.unep.org/about-un-environment/faith- Österblom, H., J.-B. Jouffray, C. Folke, and J. Rockström. 2017. earth-initiative Emergence of a global science-business initiative for ocean stew- Van den Bergh, M.P., and J.M. Gilligan. 2017. Beyond politics: The ardship. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the private governance response to climate change. Cambridge: USA 114: 9038–9043. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704453114. Cambridge University Press. Ostrom, E. 2010. Polycentric systems for coping with collective action van den Bergh, J., and I. Savin. 2021. Impact of carbon pricing on and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change low-carbon innovation and deep decarbonization. Controversies 20: 550–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004. and path forward. Environmental and Resource Economics 80: Pahle, M., D. Burtraw, C. Flachsland, N. Kelsey, E. Biber, J. 705–715. Meckling, O. Edenhofer, and J. Zysman. 2018. Sequencing to Vlerick, M. 2020. Towards global cooperation. The case for a ratchet up climate policy stringency. Nature Climate Change 8: deliberative global citizens’ assembly. Global Policy 11: 861–867. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0287-6. 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12785. Patt, A. 2015. Transforming energy. Solving climate change with Walker, B., S.R. Carpenter, C. Folke, L. Gunderson, G.D. Peterson, technology policy. New York: Cambridge University Press. M. Scheffer, M. Schoon, and F.R. Westley. 2020. Navigating the Pereira, L.M., T. Hichert, M. Hamann, R. Preiser, and R. Biggs. 2018. chaos of an unfolding global cycle. Ecology and Society 25 (4): Using futures methods to create transformative spaces. Visions 23. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12072-250423. of a Good Anthropocene in southern Africa. Ecology and Society Weber, E.U. 2015. Climate change demands behavioral change: What 23 (1): 19. are the challenges? Social Research. An International Quarterly Polasky, S., B. Bryant, P. Hawthorne, J. Johnson, B. Keeler, and D. 82: 561–581. Pennington. 2015. Inclusive wealth as a metric of sustainable Weber, E.U., E.J. Johnson, K.F. Milch, H. Chang, J.C. Brodscholl, development. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 40: and D.G. Goldstein. 2007. Asymmetric discounting in intertem- 445–446. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-101813-013253. poral choice. A query-theory account. Psychological Science 18: Pope Francis. 2015. Laudato Si’. The Vatican. http://w2.vatican.va/content/ 516–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01932.x. francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_ Westley, F., P. Olsson, C. Folke, T. Homer-Dixon, H. Vredenburg, D. enciclica-laudato-si.html Loorbach, J. Thompson, M. Nilsson, et al. 2011. Tipping towards Princen, T. 2005. The logic of sufficiency. Boston: MIT Press. sustainability. Emerging pathways of transformation. Ambio 40: Scheffer, M., F. Westley, and W. Brock. 2003. Slow response of societies 762–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0186-9 to new problems. Causes and costs. Ecosystems 6: 493–502. Williams, A., G. Whiteman, and J.N. Parker. 2019. Backstage Schill, C., J.M. Anderies, T. Lindahl, C. Folke, S. Polasky, J.C. interorganizational collaboration. Corporate endorsement for the Cárdenas, A.-S. Crépin, M.A. Janssen, et al. 2019. A more sustainable development goals. Academy of Management Dis- dynamic understanding of human behaviour for the Anthro- coveries 5: 367–395. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2018.0154. pocene. Nature Sustainability 2: 1075–1082. World Bank. 2021. Pricing carbon. Retrieved 29 October, 2021, from Scoones, I., M. Leach, and P. Newell. 2015. The politics of green http://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/pricing-carbon transformation. Milton Park, UK: Routledge. Setzer, J., and L.C. Vanhala. 2019. Climate change litigation. A Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to review of research on courts and litigants in climate governance. jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. WIREs Climate Change 10: e580.  The Author(s) 2022 123 www.kva.se/en Ambio AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES Address: Department of Applied Economics, University of Min- nesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA. F. Stuart Chapin III (&) is a professor Emeritus at the Institute of e-mail: polasky@umn.edu Arctic Biology, University of Alaska Fairbanks. His research interests include ecology, stewardship, and sustainability solutions. Carl Folke is a professor at the Beijer Institute of Ecological Eco- Address: Professor Emeritus, Institute of Arctic Biology, University nomics, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and the Stockholm of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA. Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, His interests include resi- e-mail: terry.chapin@alaska.edu lience, social–ecological transformation, and adaptive governance. Address: Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics, Royal Swedish Elke U. Weber is a professor at the Andlinger Center, Princeton Academy of Sciences, 104 05 Stockholm, Sweden. University. Her research interests include psychology, social norms, Address: Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, and citizen preferences. Stockholm, Sweden. Address: Andlinger Center, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ e-mail: carl.folke@beijer.kva.se 08544, USA. e-mail: eweber@princeton.edu Marten Scheffer is a professor at the Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University. His interests include stability of Elena M. Bennett is a professor at the Bieler School of Environment complex systems, transformation, and art-science linkages. and Department of Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University. Address: Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen Her interests include ecology, ecosystem services, and Anthropocene University, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands. dynamics. e-mail: marten.scheffer@wur.nl Address: Bieler School of Environment, McGill University, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Quebec H9X 3V9, Canada. Kathleen Segerson is a professor at the Department of Economics, e-mail: elena.bennett@mcgill.ca University of Connecticut. Her interests include environmental and resource economics, and incentive effects of policy instruments. Reinette Biggs is a professor at the Centre for Complex Systems in Address: Department of Economics, University of Connecticut, Transition, Stellenbosch University and the Stockholm Resilience Storrs, CT 06269-1063, USA. Centre, Stockholm University. Her interests include ecology, social– e-mail: kathleen.segerson@uconn.edu ecological resilience, and transformation. Address: Centre for Sustainability Transitions, Stellenbosch Univer- John M. Anderies is a professor at the School of Human Evolution sity, Stellenbosch, South Africa. and Social Change and the School of Sustainability, Arizona State Address: Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, 104 05 University. His interests include dynamic modeling for sustainability Stockholm, Sweden. science and environmental social science. e-mail: oonsie@sun.ac.za Address: School of Human Evolution and Social Change and School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-2401, Jeroen van den Bergh is a research professor at the Institute of USA. Environmental Science and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de e-mail: m.anderies@asu.edu Barcelona and the School of Business and Economics & Institute for Environmental Studies at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. His Scott Barrett is a professor at the Earth Institute, Columbia interests include environmental economics, climate policy, and University. His interests include economics of global challenges and innovation studies. laws and treaties for international cooperation. Address: ICTA, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bel- Address: Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, laterra, Spain. USA. Address: SBE & IVM, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV e-mail: sb3116@columbia.edu Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e-mail: Jeroen.Bergh@uab.es Juan-Camilo Cardenas is a professor at the Department of Eco- nomics, University of Massachusetts Amherst. His interests include W. Neil Adger is a professor at the College of Life and Environ- environmental and resource economics and institutional design. mental Sciences, University of Exeter. His interests include human Address: Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts geography, ecological economics, and climate change and vulnera- Amherst, Amherst, MA 01002, USA. bility. e-mail: juancamilo@umass.edu Address: College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4RJ, UK. Stephen R. Carpenter is a professor at the Center for Limnology, e-mail: N.Adger@exeter.ac.uk University of Wisconsin. His interests include freshwater ecology and social–ecological resilience. Anne-Sophie Crépin is an associate professor at the Beijer Institute Address: Center for Limnology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, of Ecological Economics, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. Her WI 53706-1413, USA. interests include abrupt change and the complex connections between e-mail: steve.carpenter@wisc.edu society, the economy, and nature on a human-dominated planet. Address: Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics, Royal Swedish Joern Fischer is a professor at the Faculty of Sustainability, Leu- Academy of Sciences, 104 05 Stockholm, Sweden. phana Universität Lüneburg. His interests include landscape ecology e-mail: asc@beijer.kva.se and conservation in human-modified systems. Address: Faculty of Sustainability, Leuphana Universität Lüneburg, Stephen Polasky is a professor at the Department of Applied Eco- 21335 Lüneburg, Germany. nomics, University of Minnesota. His interests include bio-economic e-mail: joern.fischer@uni.leuphana.de modeling, regime shifts, and policy design.  The Author(s) 2022 www.kva.se/en 123 Ambio Nils Kautsky is a professor emeritus at the Department of Ecology, Brian Walker is a fellow at the CSIRO Land and Water. His interests Environment and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University, His interests include ecological sustainability and social–ecological resilience. include marine ecology and sustainable development. Address: CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia. Address: Professor Emeritus, Department of Ecology, Environment e-mail: brian.walker@csiro.au and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Swe- den. James Wilen is a professor at the Department of Agriculture and e-mail: nils.kautsky@su.se Resource Economics, University of California, Davis. His interests include natural resource economics and environmental economics. Simon A. Levin is a professor at the Department of Ecology and Address: Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics, Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University. His interests include University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA. ecology and evolution and dynamics of complex systems. e-mail: wilen@primal.ucdavis.edu Address: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544-1003, USA. Aart de Zeeuw is a emeritus professor at the Tilburg School of e-mail: slevin@princeton.edu Economics and Management. His interests include environmental economics and institutional aspects of economics. Jason F. Shogren is a professor at the Department of Economics, Address: Tilburg School of Economics and Management, 5000 LE University of Wyoming. His interests include environmental and Tilburg, The Netherlands. resource economics and behavioral and institutional economics. e-mail: A.J.deZeeuw@uvt.nl Address: Department of Economics, University of Wyoming, Lar- amie, WY 82071-3985, USA. e-mail: jramses@uwyo.edu  The Author(s) 2022 123 www.kva.se/en