This paper presents the overview of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and their energy, land use, and emissions implications. The SSPs are part of a new scenario framework, established by the climate change research community in order to facilitate the integrated analysis of future climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation, and mitigation. The pathways were developed over the last years as a joint community effort and describe plausible major global developments that together would lead in the future to different challenges for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. The SSPs are based on five narratives describing alternative socio-economic developments, including sustainable development, regional rivalry, inequality, fossil-fueled development, and middle-of-the-road development. The long-term demographic and economic projections of the SSPs depict a wide uncertainty range consistent with the scenario literature. A multi-model approach was used for the elaboration of the energy, land-use and the emissions trajectories of SSP-based scenarios. The baseline scenarios lead to global energy consumption of 400–1200 EJ in 2100, and feature vastly different land-use dynamics, ranging from a possible reduction in cropland area up to a massive expansion by more than 700 million hectares by 2100. The associated annual CO 2 emissions of the baseline scenarios range from about 25 GtCO 2 to more than 120 GtCO 2 per year by 2100. With respect to mitigation, we find that associated costs strongly depend on three factors: (1) the policy assumptions, (2) the socio-economic narrative, and (3) the stringency of the target. The carbon price for reaching the target of 2.6 W/m 2 that is consistent with a temperature change limit of 2 °C, differs in our analysis thus by about a factor of three across the SSP marker scenarios. Moreover, many models could not reach this target from the SSPs with high mitigation challenges. While the SSPs were designed to represent different mitigation and adaptation challenges, the resulting narratives and quantifications span a wide range of different futures broadly representative of the current literature. This allows their subsequent use and development in new assessments and research projects. Critical next steps for the community scenario process will, among others, involve regional and sectoral extensions, further elaboration of the adaptation and impacts dimension, as well as employing the SSP scenarios with the new generation of earth system models as part of the 6th climate model intercomparison project (CMIP6).

/pdf/the-shared-socioeconomic-pathways-and-their-energy-land-use-atxud52ccd.pdf

The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview

The transition within business from a linear to a circular economy brings with it a range of practical challenges for companies. The following question is addressed: What are the product design and business model strategies for companies that want to move to a circular economy model? This paper develops a framework of strategies to guide designers and business strategists in the move from a linear to a circular economy. Building on Stahel, the terminology of slowing, closing, and narrowing resource loops is introduced. A list of product design strategies, business model strategies, and examples for key decision-makers in businesses is introduced, to facilitate the move to a circular economy. This framework also opens up a future research agenda for the circular economy.

/pdf/product-design-and-business-model-strategies-for-a-circular-27xi6fbnmo.pdf

Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy

The Global Syndemic of Obesity, Undernutrition, and Climate Change: The Lancet Commission report

Safeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: report of The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on planetary health

Most people think climate change and sustainability are important problems, but too few global citizens engaged in high-greenhouse-gas-emitting behavior are engaged in enough mitigating behavior to stem the increasing flow of greenhouse gases and other environmental problems. Why is that? Structural barriers such as a climate-averse infrastructure are part of the answer, but psychological barriers also impede behavioral choices that would facilitate mitigation, adaptation, and environmental sustainability. Although many individuals are engaged in some ameliorative action, most could do more, but they are hindered by seven categories of psychological barriers, or “dragons of inaction”: limited cognition about the problem, ideological worldviews that tend to preclude pro-environmental attitudes and behavior, comparisons with key other people, sunk costs and behavioral momentum, discredence toward experts and authorities, perceived risks of change, and positive but inadequate behavior change. Structural barriers must be removed wherever possible, but this is unlikely to be sufficient. Psychologists must work with other scientists, technical experts, and policymakers to help citizens overcome these psychological barriers.

/pdf/the-dragons-of-inaction-psychological-barriers-that-limit-2vo4tnc8lj.pdf

The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Energy is essential for human development and energy systems are a crucial entry point for addressing the most
pressing global challenges of the 21st century, including sustainable economic and social development, poverty
eradication, adequate food production and food security, health for all, climate protection, conservation of ecosystems,
peace and security. Yet, more than a decade into the 21st century, current energy systems do not meet these challenges.
A major transformation is therefore required to address these challenges and to avoid potentially catastrophic future
consequences for human and planetary systems. The Global Energy Assessment (GEA) demonstrates that energy
system change is the key for addressing and resolving these challenges. The GEA identifies strategies that could help
resolve the multiple challenges simultaneously and bring multiple benefits. Their successful implementation requires
determined, sustained and immediate action.

Summary for Policymakers

Energy supply mitigation options

The Global Energy Assessment is a major initiative launched at the RIO+20 conference to assess worldwide global energy challenges. Interviewed by FEEM, Thomas B. Johansson, Executive Committee Co-Chair of the GEA, and Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Deputy Director of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, give an overview of the GEA report.

Thomas B. Johansson

Papers

Summary for Policymakers

Energy supply mitigation options

The Global Energy Assessment

Chapter 1: Energy primer

Global Energy Assessment (GEA): Energy Primer