Jump to content

Planetary boundaries

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 99.19.43.126 (talk) at 07:54, 7 July 2011 (Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere = Atmospheric carbon dioxide). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Not to be confused with Planetary boundary layer.

Planetary boundaries is the central concept in an Earth system framework proposed by a group of Earth system and environmental scientists led by Johan Rockström and Will Steffen from the Stockholm Resilience Centre. In 2009, the group proposed a framework for planetary boundaries which can potentially identify a safe operating space for government and management agencies as a precondition for sustainable development. The scientists identified nine Earth system processes which have boundaries that, to the extent that they are not crossed, mark the safe zone for the planet. However, because of human activities some of these dangerous thresholds and possible tipping points have already been crossed, while others are in imminent danger of being crossed.[1]

Rockström and Steffen collaborated with 26 leading academics, including Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen, NASA climate scientist James Hansen and the German Chancellor's chief climate adviser Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. The group identified nine "planetary life support systems" essential for human survival, and attempted to quantify just how far seven of these systems have been pushed already. They then estimated how much further we can go before our own survival is threatened; beyond these boundaries there is a risk of "irreversible and abrupt environmental change" which could make Earth less habitable.[2] Estimates indicate that the threshold for three of these boundaries—climate change, biodiversity loss, and the biogeochemical flow boundary—appears to have been crossed. The boundaries are "rough, first estimates only, surrounded by large uncertainties and knowledge gaps" that interact in ways that are complex and not well understood. Boundaries can help identify where there is room and define a "safe space for human development", which is an improvement on approaches which aim at just minimizing human impacts on the planet.[2]

The group published their full findings in a 2009 report[2]and presented it to the General Assembly of the Club of Rome in Amsterdam.[3] An edited summary of the report was subsequently published as the featured article in a special edition of Nature.[4] Nature also published critical commentary from leading academics they invited to comment on each of the seven planetary boundaries which had been quantified, including comments from Nobel laureate Mario J. Molina and biologist Cristián Samper.[5]

The idea of planetary boundaries or limits

With few exceptions, economics as a discipline has been dominated by a perception of living in an unlimited world, where resource and pollution problems in one area were solved by moving resources or people to other parts. The very hint of any global limitation as suggested in the report The Limits to Growth was met with disbelief and rejection by businesses and most economists. However, this conclusion was mostly based on false premises.

– Meyer and Nørgård, 2010[6]

The idea that our planet has limits regarding human activities, load or burden, has been around for some time. In 1972, The Limits to Growth was published. It presented a model in which five variables: world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resources depletion, are examined, and considered to grow exponentially, whereas the ability of technology to increase resources availability is only linear.[7] Subsequently, the report was widely dismissed, particularly by economists and businessmen,[6] and it has often been claimed that history has proved the projections to be incorrect.[8]

In 2008, Graham Turner from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) published a paper called "A comparison of The Limits to Growth with thirty years of reality".[9] Turner found that the observed historical data from 1970 to 2000 closely matches the simulated results of the "standard run" limits of growth model for almost all the outputs reported. "The comparison is well within uncertainty bounds of nearly all the data in terms of both magnitude and the trends over time."[9]: 37  Turner also examined a number of the reports, particularly by economists, which over the years purported to discredit the limits to growth model. Turner says these reports are flawed, and reflect misunderstandings about the model.[9] In 2010, Nørgård, Peet and Ragnarsdóttir called the book a "pioneering report", and said that it "has withstood the test of time and, indeed, has only become more relevant."[10]

Our Common Future[11] was published in 1987 by United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development. It tried to recapture the spirit of the Stockholm Conference. Its aim was to interlock the concepts of development and environment for future political discussions. It introduced the famous definition for sustainable development:

"development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."

Of a different kind is the approach made by James Lovelock. In the 1970's he and microbiologist Lynn Margulis presented the Gaia theory or hypothesis, that states that all organisms and their inorganic surroundings on Earth are integrated into a single self-regulating system. [12][13] The system has the ability to react to perturbations or deviations, much like a living organism adjusts its regulation mechanisms to accommodate environmental changes such as temperature (homeostasis). Nevertheless, this capacity has limits, and like an organism has not capacity to react in front of too big deviations, neither the Earth has. In his book The Revenge of Gaia, he affirms that the destruction of rainforests and biodiversity, compounded with the increase of greenhouse gases made by humans, is producing global warming.

The nine boundaries

Rockström et al. defined planetary boundaries as "scientifically informed values of the control variable established by societies at a 'safe' distance from dangerous thresholds".[2]

Planetary Boundaries[14]
Earth-system process Control variable[15] Boundary
value		 Current
value		 Boundary crossed Preindustrial
value		 Commentary
1. Climate change Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration (ppm by volume)[16]
See also: Tipping point (climatology)
350
387
yes
280
[17][18][19][20]
Increase in radiative forcing (W/m2)
1.0
1.5
yes
0
(by definition)
[17]
2. Biodiversity loss Extinction rate (number of species per million per year)
10
> 100
yes
0.1–1
[21][22][23][24][25]
3. Biogeochemical (a) anthropogenic nitrogen removed from the atmosphere (millions of tonnes per year)
35
121
yes
0
[26][27][28]: 28–29 [29][30]
(b) anthropogenic phosphorus going into the oceans (millions of tonnes per year)
11
8.5–9.5
no
-1
[26][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]
4. Ocean acidification Global mean saturation state of aragonite in surface seawater (omega units)
2.75
2.90
no
3.44
[38][28]: 36–37 [39][40]
5. Freshwater Global human consumption of water (km3/yr)
4000
2600
no
415
[41][42][43][44][45]
6. Land use Land surface converted to cropland (percent)
15
11.7
no
low
[46][47][48][49][50]
7. Ozone depletion Stratospheric ozone concentration (Dobson units)
276
283
no
290
[51][52][53]
8. Atmospheric aerosols Overall particulate concentration in the atmosphere, on a regional basis
not yet quantified
[54]
9. Chemical pollution Concentration of toxic substances, plastics, endocrine disruptors, heavy metals and radioactive contamination into the environment
not yet quantified
[55][56]

The proposed framework of planetary boundaries lays the groundwork for shifting approach to governance and management, away from the essentially sectoral analyses of limits to growth aimed at minimizing negative externalities, toward the estimation of the safe space for human development. Planetary boundaries define, as it were, the boundaries of the “planetary playing field” for humanity if major human-induced environmental change on a global scale is to be avoided

Transgressing one or more planetary boundaries may be highly damaging or even catastrophic, due to the risk of crossing thresholds that trigger non-linear, abrupt environmental change within continental- to planetary-scale systems. The 2009 study identified nine planetary boundaries and, drawing on current scientific understanding, the researchers proposed quantifications for seven of them. These seven are climate change (CO2 concentration in the atmosphere < 350 ppm and/or a maximum change of +1 W/m2 in radiative forcing); ocean acidification (mean surface seawater saturation state with respect to aragonite ≥ 80% of pre-industrial levels); stratospheric ozone (less than 5% reduction in total atmospheric O3 from a pre-industrial level of 290 Dobson Units); biogeochemical nitrogen (N) cycle (limit industrial and agricultural fixation of N2 to 35 Tg N/yr) and phosphorus (P) cycle (annual P inflow to oceans not to exceed 10 times the natural background weathering of P); global freshwater use (< 4000 km3/yr of consumptive use of runoff resources); land system change (< 15% of the ice-free land surface under cropland); and the rate at which biological diversity is lost (annual rate of < 10 extinctions per million species). The two additional planetary boundaries for which the group had not yet been able to determine a boundary level are chemical pollution and atmospheric aerosol loading.

Interaction among boundaries

The boundary values in the table above were set on the assumption that interactions are not occurring if other boundaries are being crossed. However, a given planetary boundary may interact in a manner that changes the safe operating level of other boundaries. Rockström et al. did not analyze such interactions, but they suggested that many of these interactions will reduce rather than expand the proposed boundary levels.

For example, the land use boundary could shift downward if the freshwater boundary is breached, causing lands to become arid and unavailable for agriculture. At a regional level, water resources may decline in Asia if deforestation continues in the Amazon. Such considerations suggest the need for "extreme caution in approaching or transgressing any individual planetary boundaries."[2]

Another example has to do with coral reefs and marine ecosystems. In 2009, De’ath et al. showed that, since 1990, calcification in the reefs of the Great Barrier that they examined decreased at a rate unprecedented over the last 400 years (14% in less than 20 years). Their evidence suggests that the increasing temperature stress and the declining ocean saturation state of aragonite is making it difficult for reef corals to deposit calcium carbonate.[57] Bellwood et al. explored how multiple stressors, such as increased nutrient loads and fishing pressure, move corals into less desirable ecosystem states.[58] Guinotte and Fabry showed that ocean acidification will significantly change the distribution and abundance of a whole range of marine life, particularly species "that build skeletons, shells, and tests of biogenic calcium carbonate.[59] "Increasing temperatures, surface UV radiation levels and ocean acidity all stress marine biota, and the combination of these stresses may well cause perturbations in the abundance and diversity of marine biological systems that go well beyond the effects of a single stressor acting alone."[60]

From Holocene to Anthropocene

Our planet’s ability to provide an accommodating environment for humanity is being challenged by our own activities. The environment—our life-support system—is changing rapidly from the stable Holocene state of the last 12,000 years, during which we developed agriculture, villages, cities, and contemporary civilizations, to an unknown future state of significantly different conditions.

– Steffen, Rockström and Costanza[14]

The Holocene began about 10,000 years ago. It is the current interglacial period, and it has proven to be a relatively stable environment for the Earth. There have been natural environmental fluctuations during the Holocene, but the key atmospheric and biogeochemical parameters have been relatively stable.[61][62][63] This stability and resilience has allowed the development of agriculture and thriving and complex societies.[64] According to Rockström et al, we "have now become so dependent on those investments for our way of life, and how we have organized society, technologies, and economies around them, that we must take the range within which Earth System processes varied in the Holocene as a scientific reference point for a desirable planetary state."[2]

External image
image icon The last glacial cycle of δ18O indicative of the stability of the Holocene over the last 10,000 years
– Adapted from Young and Steffen (2009)[65]

Since the industrial revolution, according to Paul Crutzen, Will Steffen and others, the planet has entered a new epoch, the Anthropocene. In the Anthropocene, humans have become the main agents of change to the Earth system.[66][67] There have been well publicized scientific warnings about risks in the areas of climate change and stratospheric ozone.[68][69] However, other biophysical processes are also important.[70][71][72] For example, since the advent of the Anthropocene, the rate at which species are being extinguished has increased over 100 times,[73] and humans are now the driving force altering global river flows[74] as well as water vapor flows from the land surface.[75] Continuing pressure on the Earth's biophysical systems from human activities raises concerns that further pressure could be destabilizing, and precipitate sudden or irreversible changes to the environment. It is difficult to address the issue, because the predominant paradigms of social and economic development are largely indifferent to the looming possibilities of large scale environmental disasters triggered by humans.[76][2]

Safe operating space

External image
image icon Graphic representation of the safe operating space for humanity – Rockström et al. (2009)[2]

Debate on the framework

From the Stockholm Memorandum

Science indicates that we are transgressing planetary boundaries that have kept civilization safe for the past 10,000 years. Evidence is growing that human pressures are starting to overwhelm the Earth’s buffering capacity. Humans are now the most significant driver of global change, propelling the planet into a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. We can no longer exclude the possibility that our collective actions will trigger tipping points, risking abrupt and irreversible consequences for human communities and ecological systems.

– Stockholm Memorandum,[77] 2011

The framework of planetary boundaries and the associated planetary safety zone is new and evolving. It is drawing strong responses from scientists and advisors.

Christopher Field, director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology, is impressed: "This kind of work is critically important. Overall, this is an impressive attempt to define a safety zone."[78] But the conservation biologist Stuart Pimm is not impressed: "I don’t think this is in any way a useful way of thinking about things… The notion of a single boundary is just devoid of serious content. In what way is an extinction rate 10 times the background rate acceptable?"[78]

In 2011, at their second meeting, the High-level Panel on Global Sustainability[79] of the United Nations incorporated the concept of planetary boundaries into their framework, stating that their goal was: "To eradicate poverty and reduce inequality, make growth inclusive, and production and consumption more sustainable while combating climate change and respecting the range of other planetary boundaries."[80]

Elsewhere in their proceedings, panel members have expressed reservations about the political effectiveness of using the concept of "planetary boundaries" : "Planetary boundaries are still an evolving concept that should be used with caution […] The planetary boundaries question can be divisive as it can be perceived as a tool of the “North” to tell the “South” not to follow the resource intensive and environmentally destructive development pathway that rich countries took themselves… This language is unacceptable to most of the developing countries as they fear that an emphasis on boundaries would place unacceptable brakes on poor countries."[81]

In summary, the planetary boundary concept is a very important one, and its proposal should now be followed by discussions of the connections between the various boundaries and of their association with other concepts such as the 'limits to growth'. Importantly, this novel concept highlights the risk of reaching thresholds or tipping points for non-linear or abrupt changes in Earth-system processes. As such, it can help society to reach the agreements required for dealing effectively with existing global environmental threats, such as climate change.

– Nobel laureate Mario Molina[51]

However, the concept is routinely used in the proceedings of the United Nations,[82] and in the UN Daily News. For example, the UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner states that the challenge of agriculture is to "feed a growing global population without pushing humanity's footprint beyond planetary boundaries."[83] The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Yearbook 2010 also repeated Rockström's message, conceptually linking it with ecosystem management and environmental governance indicators.[28]

The planetary boundaries concept is also used in proceedings by the European Commission,[84][85] and was referred to in the European Environment Agency synthesis report "The European environment – state and outlook 2010".[86] This later report questions whether it is meaningful to calculate a global rate for processes some of which are inherently localised, the scientific justification, the possibility of choosing exact values that are non-arbitrary and the problems of reducing the complexity of interactions into single boundary values. Problems might arise with regard to balancing limits with ethical and economic issues and confusing values with targets.

Debate on the boundaries

There has also been debate about which boundaries are most relevant, and how or whether they can be usefully quantified.

Earth-system process Critical opinion
1. Climate change The climate scientist Myles Allen thinks setting "a limit on long-term atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations merely distracts from the much more immediate challenge of limiting warming to 2 °C." He says the concentration of carbon dioxide is not a control variable we can "meaningfully claim to control", and he questions whether keeping carbon dioxide levels below 350 ppm will avoid more than 2 °C of warming.[17]
2. Biodiversity loss According to the biologist Cristián Samper, a " boundary that expresses the probability of families of species disappearing over time would better reflect our potential impacts on the future of life on Earth."[21]
3. Biogeochemical The biogeochemist William Schlesinger says that "for nitrogen deposition as for other pollution, waiting until we approach the limits of environmental degradation merely allows us to continue our bad habits until it's too late to change them."[26]
4. Ocean acidification The ocean chemist Peter Brewer thinks "ocean acidification has impacts other than simple changes in pH, and these may need boundaries too."[38]
5. Freshwater The hydrologist David Molden says "a global limit on water consumption is necessary, but the suggested planetary boundary of 4,000 cubic kilometres per year is too generous."[41]
6. Land use The environment advisor Steve Bass says "humanity must learn to live within a stable Holocene environment, but the boundary limit for land use depends on more than the amount of surface covered".[46]
7. Ozone depletion The Nobel laureate in chemistry, Mario Molina, says "five per cent is a reasonable limit for acceptable ozone depletion, but it doesn't represent a tipping point".[51]
8. Atmospheric aerosols
9. Chemical pollution A Bayesian emulator for persistent organic pollutants has been developed which can potentially be used to quantify the boundaries for chemical pollution.[55]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Earth's boundaries? Editorial, Nature, 461, 447–448. 24 September 2009, doi:10.1038/461447b
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin III FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B, de Wit CA, Hughes T, van der Leeuw S, Rodhe H, Sörlin S, Snyder PK, Costanza R, Svedin U, Falkenmark M, Karlberg L, Corell RW, Fabry VJ, Hansen J, Walker B, Liverman D, Richardson K, Crutzen P and Foley JA (2009) "Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity" Ecology and Society, 14(2): 32.
  3. ^ Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity Johan Rockström's presentation to the Club of Rome General Assembly, 26th Oct 2009.
  4. ^ Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin III FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B, de Wit CA, Hughes T, van der Leeuw S, Rodhe H, Sörlin S, Snyder PK, Costanza R, Svedin U, Falkenmark M, Karlberg L, Corell RW, Fabry VJ, Hansen J, Walker B, Liverman D, Richardson K, Crutzen P and Foley JA (2009) "A safe operating space for humanity" Nature, 461: 472–475. Error: Bad DOI specified!.
  5. ^ Planetary boundaries Nature reports: climate change, 23 September 2009. A series of commentaries on the planetary boundaries concept set out in the original paper.
  6. ^ a b Meyer NI and Nørgård JS (2010) "Policy Means for Sustainable Energy Scenarios" International Conference on Energy, Environment and Health – Optimisation of Future Energy Systems, Denmark. Pages 133–137.
  7. ^ Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J and Behrens III WW (1972) The Limits to Growth: a report for the Club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind Universe Books. ISBN 0-87663-165-0
  8. ^ van Vuuren DP and Faber A (2009) "Growing within Limits" - A Report to the Global Assembly 2009 of the Club of Rome, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Page 23.
  9. ^ a b c Graham Turner (2008) "A comparison of The Limits to Growth with thirty years of reality" Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Sustainable Ecosystems.
  10. ^ Nørgård JS, Peet J and Ragnarsdóttir KV (2010) "The History of The Limits to Growth" Solutions, 2(1): 59–63.
  11. ^ Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment & Development (HTML)
  12. ^ J. E. Lovelock (1972). "Gaia as seen through the atmosphere". Atmospheric Environment. 6 (8): 579–580. doi:10.1016/0004-6981(72)90076-5.
  13. ^ Lovelock, J.E. (1974). "Atmospheric homeostasis by and for the biosphere – The Gaia hypothesis". Tellus. 26 (1): 2–10. Bibcode:1974Tell...26....2L. doi:10.1111/j.2153-3490.1974.tb01946.x. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  14. ^ a b Steffen W, Rockström J and Costanza R (2011) "How defining planetary boundaries can transform our approach to growth" Solutions, 2(3).
  15. ^ The nine planetary boundaries Stockholm Resilience Centre, 17 September 2009.
  16. ^ Recent Mauna Loa CO2 Earth System Research Laboratory, NOAA Research.
  17. ^ a b c Allen M (2009) Planetary boundaries: Tangible targets are critical Commentary. Nature reports: climate change: commentary. doi:10.1038/climate.2009.95
  18. ^ Heffernan O (2009) A safe space Nature reports: climate change. Editorial, 2 October 2009. doi:10.1038/climate.2009.103
  19. ^ Morris, Adele (2010) Climate Change in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  20. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Climate change Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  21. ^ a b Samper C (2009) Planetary boundaries: Rethinking biodiversity Commentary. Nature reports: climate change: commentary. doi:10.1038/climate.2009.93
  22. ^ Daily, Gretchen (2010) Biodiversity Loss in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  23. ^ Faith DP, Magallon S, Hendry AP, Conti E, Yahara T and Donoghue MJ (2010) "Evosystem services: an evolutionary perspective on the links between biodiversity and human well-being" Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2(1-2): 66–74. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2010.04.002
  24. ^ Biodiversity: a crisis in search of a policy? Friends of Europe, Policy briefing for pricing the Earth, policy summit, Green Week 1–2 June 2010.
  25. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Biodiversity Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  26. ^ a b c Schlesinger WH (2009) "Planetary boundaries: Thresholds risk prolonged degradation" Commentary. Nature reports: climate change. doi:10.1038/climate.2009.93
  27. ^ The Nitrogen Fix: Breaking a Costly Addiction Fred Pearce, Yale Environment 360, 22 February 2011.
  28. ^ a b c UNEP Year Book 2010: New Science and Developments in Our Changing Environment UNEP, ISBN 978-92-807-3044-9.
  29. ^ Howarth, Robert (2010) Nitrogen Cycle in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  30. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Nitrogen and phosphorus cycles Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  31. ^ Carpenter, SR and Bennett EM (2011) "Reconsideration of the planetary boundary for phosphorus" Environmental Research Letters 6 : 014009. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/1/014009 News report
  32. ^ Townsend AR and Porder S (2011) "Boundary issues" Environ. Res. Lett. 6: 011001.
  33. ^ Ragnarsdottir KV, Sverdrupb HU and Koca D (2011) "Challenging the planetary boundaries I: Basic principles of an integrated model for phosphorous supply dynamics and global population size" Applied Geochemistry, 26(1): S303–S306.
  34. ^ Sverdrupa HU and Ragnarsdottirb KV (2011) "Challenging the planetary boundaries II: Assessing the sustainable global population and phosphate supply, using a systems dynamics assessment model" Applied Geochemistry, 26(1): S307-S310.
  35. ^ UNEP Year Book 2011: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment Pages 35–46. ISBN 978-92-807-3101-9.
  36. ^ Ulrich A, Malley D and Voora V (2009) "Peak Phosphorus: Opportunity in the Making" International Institute for Sustainable Development, on Sustainable Sanitation Alliance (SuSanA)
  37. ^ Vaccari, David (2010) Phosphorus Cycle in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  38. ^ a b Brewer P (2009) Planetary boundaries: Consider all consequences Commentary. Nature reports: climate change: commentary. doi:10.1038/climate.2009.98
  39. ^ Doney, Scott (2010) Ocean Acidification in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  40. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Acid oceans Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  41. ^ a b Molden D (2009) Planetary boundaries: The devil is in the detail Commentary. Nature reports: climate change: commentary. Published online, doi:10.1038/climate.2009.97
  42. ^ Falkenmark M and Rockström J (2010) ["Back to basics on water as constraint for global food production: Opportunities and limitations"] In: Water for food in a changing world, 2nd volume. Contributions from the Rosenberg International Forum on Water Policy, eds. A Garrido and H Ingram. Routledge.
  43. ^ Timmermans J, Kwakkel J, van de Giesen N and Thissen W (2011) Blue limits of the Blue Planet: an exploratory analysis of safe operating spaces for human water use under deep uncertainty" Geophysical Research Abstracts, 13: EGU2011-7446. EGU General Assembly 2011.
  44. ^ Gleick, Peter (2010) Freshwater Use in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  45. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Fresh water Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  46. ^ a b Bass S (2009) Planetary boundaries: Keep off the grass Commentary. Nature reports: climate change. Published online, doi:10.1038/climate.2009.94
  47. ^ Euliss NH Jr, Smith LM, Liu S, Feng M, Mushet DM, Auch RF and Loveland TR (2010) "The Need for Simultaneous Evaluation of Ecosystem Services and Land Use Change" Environmental Science & Technology, 44(20):7761–3.
  48. ^ The Other Inconvenient Truth: The Crisis in Global Land Use Jonathan Foley, Yale Environment 360, 22 February 2011.
  49. ^ Lambin, Eric (2010) Land Use in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  50. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Land use Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  51. ^ a b c Molina MJ (2009) Planetary boundaries: Identifying abrupt change Commentary. Nature reports: climate change: commentary. Published online, doi:10.1038/climate.2009.96
  52. ^ Fahey, David (2010) Ozone Depletion in "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet" by J Foley et al., Scientific American, April 2010.
  53. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Ozone depletion Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  54. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Aerosol loading Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  55. ^ a b Itsuki CH and Kawai T (2011) "Bayesian Uncertainty Analysis of the Global Dynamics of Persistent Organic Pollutants: Towards Quantifying the Planetary Boundaries for Chemical Pollution" In: Interdisciplinary Studies on Environmental Chemistry—Marine Environmental Modeling & Analysis, Omori K, Guo X, Yoshie N, Fujii N, Handoh IC, Isobe A and Tanabe S. Pages 179–187.
  56. ^ Earth's nine life-support systems: Chemical pollution Fred Pearce, New Scientist, 24 February 2010.
  57. ^ De'ath G, Lough JM and Fabricius KE (2009) "Declining coral calcification on the Great Barrier Reef" Science, 323: 116–119.
  58. ^ Bellwood DR, Hughes TP, Folke C and Nyström M (2004) "Confronting the coral reef crisis" Review article, Nature, 429(6994): 827–833.
  59. ^ Guinotte JM and Fabry VJ (2008) "Ocean acidification and its potential effects on marine ecosystems" Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1134:320–342.
  60. ^ Appendix 1. Supplementary Information from "Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity", Rockström et al., 2009.
  61. ^ Dansgaard W, S. J. Johnsen SJ, Clausen HB, Dahl-Jensen D, Gundestrup NS, Hammer CU, Hvidberg CS, Steffensen JP, and Sveinbjörnsdottir AE (1993) "Evidence for general instability of past climate from a 250-kyr ice-core record" Nature, 364: 218–220.
  62. ^ Petit JR, Jouzel J, Raynaud D, Barkov NI, Barnola JM, Basile I, Bender M, Chappellaz J, Davis M, Delaygue G, Delmotte M, Kotlyakov VM, Legrand M, Lipenkov VY, Lorius C, Pépin L, Ritz C, Saltzman E and Stievenard M (1999) "Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica" Nature, 399: 429–436.
  63. ^ Rioual P, Andrieu-Ponel V, Rietti-Shati M, Battarbee RW, de Beaulieu JL, Cheddadi R, Reille M, Svobodova H, and Shemesh A (2001) "http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v413/n6853/abs/413293a0.html High-resolution record of climate stability in France during the last interglacial period" Nature, 413: 293–296.
  64. ^ van der Leeuw SE (2008) "Climate and society: lessons from the past 10 000 years" Ambio 14:476–482. Special Issue.
  65. ^ Young O R and Steffen W (2009) "The Earth system: sustaining planetary life-support systems" Pages 295–315 in FS Chapin III, GP Kofinas and C Folke (eds) Principles of ecosystem stewardship: resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world. Springer. ISBN 9780387730325.
  66. ^ Crutzen PJ (2002) "Geology of mankind - The Anthropocene" Nature, 415:23.
  67. ^ Steffen W, Crutzen PJ and J. R. McNeill JR (2007) "The Anthropocene: are humans now overwhelming the great forces of Nature?" Ambio, 36:614–621.
  68. ^ IPCC Assessment Reports: Climate Change Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
  69. ^ WMO statement on the status of the global climate in 2010 World Meteorological Organization, Switzerland. ISBN 978-92-63-11074-9.
  70. ^ Guide to the Millennium Assessment Reports Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.
  71. ^ Folke C, Carpenter SR, Walker B, Scheffer M, Elmqvist T, Gunderson L and Holling CS (2004) "Regime shifts, resilience and biodiversity in ecosystem management" Annual Review in Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 35: 557–581.
  72. ^ Gordon L, Peterson G and Bennett E (2008) "Agricultural modifications of hydrological flows create ecological surprises" Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 23: 211–219.
  73. ^ Mace G, Masundire H and Baillie J (2005) "Biodiversity" Pages 79–115 in H Hassan, R Scholes and N J Ash (eds) Ecosystems and human well being: current state and trends: findings of the Condition and Trends Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press. ISBN 9781559632287.
  74. ^ Shiklomanov IA and Rodda JC (2004) World water resources at the beginning of the twenty-first century Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521617222.
  75. ^ Gordon L, Steffen W, Jönsson BF, Folke C, Falkenmark M and Johannessen Å (2005) "Human modification of global water vapor flows from the land surface" Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102:7612–7617.
  76. ^ Stern N (2007) Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-70080-9.
  77. ^ Stockholm Memorandum Third Nobel Laureate Symposium on Global Sustainability, Stockholm, 16–19 May 2011.
  78. ^ a b Provocative New Study Warns of Crossing Planetary Boundaries Carl Zimmer, Yale Environment 360, 23 September 2009.
  79. ^ High-level Panel on Global Sustainability United Nations
  80. ^ United Nations.: High-level Panel on Global Sustainability: Second meeting of the Panel Cape Town, 24–25 February 2011. Page 5.
  81. ^ United Nations.: High-level Panel on Global Sustainability: Sherpa Meeting Report Madrid, 13-14 April 2011.
  82. ^ Implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development Report of the Secretary-General to the General Assembly of the United Nations, 16 August 2010.
  83. ^ Sustainable agriculture key to green growth, poverty reduction UN Daily News, 1 June 2011, page 8.
  84. ^ The Budapest Declaration May 2011 Standing committee on Agriculture Research, European Commission, Brussels.
  85. ^ Discussion input for the 4th session: Corporate social responsibility in a globalised economy European Conference: “Towards a Greater Understanding of the Changing Role of Business in Society, Brussels, 22 April 2010.
  86. ^ The European environment – state and outlook 2010 Chapter 7: environmental challenges in a global context

Further reading

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Planetary_boundaries&oldid=438199698"