Accelerating climate actions and progress towards a just transition is essential to reducing climate risks and addressing sustainable development priorities, including water, food and human security (robust evidence, high agreement). Accelerating action in the context of sustainable development involves not only expediting the pace of change (speed) but also addressing the underlying drivers of vulnerability and high emissions (quality and depth of change) and enabling diverse communities, sectors, stakeholders, regions and cultures (scale and breadth of change) to participate in just, equitable and inclusive processes that improve the health and well-being of people and the planet. Looking at climate change from a justice perspective means placing the emphasis on (i) the protection of vulnerable populations and low-income countries from the impacts of climate change, (ii) mitigating the effects of the transformations, and (iii) ensuring an equitable decarbonised world. {17.1.1}

While transition pathways will vary across countries, they are likely to be challenging in many contexts (robust evidence, high agreement) . Climate change is the result of decades of unsustainable production and consumption patterns (for example, energy production and land use), as well as governance arrangements and political economic institutions that lock in resource-intensive development patterns (robust evidence, high agreement ). Reframing development objectives and shifting development pathways towards sustainability can help transform these patterns and practices, allowing space for transitions to transform unsustainable systems (medium evidence, high agreement ). {17.1.1.2}

Sustainable development can enhance sectoral integration and social inclusion (robust evidence, high agreement). Inclusion merits attention because equity within and across countries is critical to transitions that are not simply rapid but also sustainable and just. Resource shortages, social divisions, inequitable distributions of wealth, poor infrastructure and limited access to advanced technologies can constrain the options and capacities for developing countries to achieve sustainable and just transitions (medium evidence, high agreement ). {17.1.1.2}

Concrete actions aligning sustainable development and climate mitigation and partnerships can support transitions. Strengthening different stakeholders’ ‘response capacities’ to mitigate and adapt to a changing climate will be critical for a sustainable transition (robust evidence, high agreement). Response capacities can be increased by means of alignment across multiple stakeholders at different levels of decision-making. This alignment will also help achieve synergies and manage trade-offs between climate and sectoral policies by breaking down sectoral silos and overcoming the multiple barriers that prevent transitions from gaining traction and gathering momentum (medium evidence, high agreement ). {17.1.1.1}

Economics, psychology, governance, and systems research have pointed to a range of factors that influence the speed, scale and quality of transitions (robust evidence, high agreement). Views nonetheless differ on how much market-correcting policies; shift preferences (economics); shifts in individual and collective mindsets (psychology); and multi-level governance arrangements and inclusive political institutions (governance) contribute to system transitions (medium evidence, high agreement ). {17.2}

While economics, psychology, governance and systems thinking emphasise different enablers of transitions, they often share a view that strengthening synergies and avoiding trade-offs between climate and sustainable development priorities can overcome barriers to transitions (medium evidence, high agreement). A growing body of research and evidence can show which factors in the views from economics, psychology, governance and systems affect how interrelationships are managed between climate, mitigation policies and sustainable development. Greater integration between studies based on different methodological approaches can show how to construct an enabling environment that increases the feasibility and sustainability of transitions. {17.2, 17.3, 17.4}

Short- and long-term studies of transformations using macroeconomic models and integrated assessment models (IAMs) have identified synergies and trade-offs of mitigation options in the context of development pathways that align sustainable development and climate change (robust evidence, high agreement). IAMs often look at climate change mitigation and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in an aggregate manner: supplementing this aggregate view with detail-rich studies involving SDGs can build support for transitions within and across countries (medium evidence, medium agreement ). {17.3.2}

The impacts of climate change mitigation and adaptation responses, are highly context-specific and scale-dependent. There are synergies and trade-offs between adaptation and mitigation as well as synergies and trade-offs with sustainable development (robust evidence, high agreement). A strong link exists between sustainable development, vulnerability and climate risks, as limited economic, social and institutional resources often result in low adaptive capacities and high vulnerability, especially in developing countries. Resource limitations in these countries can similarly weaken the capacity for climate mitigation and adaptation. The move towards climate-resilient societies requires transformational or deep systemic change. This has important implications for countries’ sustainable development pathways (medium evidence, high agreement ). {17.3.3.6}

Sectoral mitigation options present synergies with the SDGs, but there are also trade-offs, which can become barriers to implementation. Such trade-offs are particularly identified in relation to the use of land for bioenergy crops, water and food access, and competition for land between forest or food production (robust evidence, high agreement). Many industrial mitigation options, such as efficiency improvements, waste management and the circular economy, have synergies with the SDGs relating to access to food, water and energy (robust evidence, high agreement ). The promotion of renewable energy in some industrial sectors can imply stranded energy supply investments, which need to be taken into consideration (medium evidence, medium agreement ). The agriculture, forestry, and other land uses (AFOLU) sector offers many low-cost mitigation options, but actions aimed at producing bioenergy, extending food access and protecting biodiversity can also create trade-offs between different land uses (robust evidence, high agreement ). Some options can help to minimise these trade-offs, for example, integrated land management, cross-sectoral policies and efficiency improvements. Lifestyle changes, including dietary changes and reduced food waste, have several synergies with climate mitigation and the SDGs (medium evidence, medium agreement ). Cross-sectoral policies are important in avoiding trade-offs, to ensure that synergies between mitigation and SDGs are captured, and to ensure local people are involved in the development of new products, as well as production and consumption practices. There can be many synergies in urban areas between mitigation policies and the SDGs, but capturing these depends on the overall planning of urban structures and on local integrated policies, where, for example, affordable housing and spatial planning as a climate mitigation measure are combined with walkable urban areas, green electrification and clean renewable energy. Such integrated options can also reduce the pressures on agricultural land by reducing urban growth, thus improving food security. Access to green electricity can also support quality education (medium evidence, medium agreement ). {17.3.3, 17.3.3.1, 17.3.3.3}

Digitalisation could facilitate a fast transition to sustainable development and low-emission pathways by contributing to efficiency improvements, cross-sectoral coordination and a circular economy with new IT services and decreasing resource use (low evidence, medium agreement). Several synergies with SDGs could emerge in terms of energy, food and water access, health and education, as well as trade-offs, for example, in relation to reduced employment, increasing energy demand and increasing demand for services, all implying increased GHG emissions. However, developing countries with limited internet access and poor infrastructure could be excluded from the benefits of digitalisation (medium evidence, medium agreement ). {17.3.3}

Actions aligning sustainable development and climate mitigation and partnerships can support transitions. Strengthening different stakeholders’ ‘response capacities’ to mitigate and adapt to a changing climate will be critical for a sustainable transition (robust evidence, high agreement) . Response capacities can be increased by means of alignment across multiple stakeholders at different levels of decision-making. This alignment will also help achieve synergies and manage trade-offs between climate and sectoral policies by breaking down sectoral silos and overcoming the multiple barriers that prevent transitions from gaining traction and gathering momentum (medium evidence, high agreement ). {17.1.1.1}

The landscape of transitions to sustainable development is changing rapidly, with multiple transitions already underway. This creates the room to manage these transitions in ways that prioritise the needs for workers in vulnerable sectors (land, energy) to secure their jobs and maintain secure and healthy lifestyles, especially as the risks multiply for those exposed to heavy industrial jobs and associated outcomes (medium evidence, high agreement). A just transition incorporates key principles, such as respect and dignity for vulnerable groups, the creation of decent jobs, social protection, employment rights, fairness in energy access and use, and social dialogue and democratic consultation with the relevant stakeholders, while coping with the effects of asset-stranding and the transition to green and clean economies (medium evidence, medium agreement ). The economic implications of the transition will be felt especially strongly by developing countries, with high dependence on hydrocarbon products for revenue streams, as they will be exposed to reduced fiscal incomes given a low demand for oil and consequent fall in oil prices (limited evidence, medium agreement ). {17.3.2, 17.3.2.3}

Countries with assets that are at risk of becoming stranded may lack the relevant resources, knowledge, autonomy or agency to reorientate, or to decide on the speed, scale and quality of the transition (limited evidence, medium agreement). The urgency of mitigation might overshadow some of the other priorities related to the transition, like climate change adaptation and its inherent vulnerabilities. Consequently, the transition imperative could reduce the scope and autonomy for local priority-setting and could ignore the additional risks in countries with a low capacity to adapt. A just transition will depend on local contexts, regional priorities, the starting points of different countries in the transition and the speed at which they want to travel. Both mitigation and adaptation warrant urgent and prompt action given current and continuing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and associated negative impacts on humanity and ecosystems (limited evidence, medium agreement ). {17.3.2}

A wide range of factors have been found to enable sustainability transitions, ranging from technological innovations to shifts in markets, and from policies and governance arrangements to shifts in belief systems and market forces (robust evidence, high agreement). Many of these factors come together in a co-evolutionary process that has unfolded globally, internationally and locally over several decades (low evidence, high agreement ). Those same conditions that may serve to impede the transition (i.e., organisational structure, behaviour, technological lock-in) can also ‘flip’ to enable both it and the framing of sustainable development policies to create a stronger basis and policy support (robust evidence, high agreement ). It is important to note that strong shocks to these systems, including accelerating climate change impacts, economic crises and political changes, may provide crucial openings for accelerated transitions to sustainable systems. For example, rebuilding more sustainably after an extreme event, or renewed public debate about the drivers of social and economic vulnerability to multiple stressors (medium evidence, medium agreement ). {17.4}

Sustainable development and deep decarbonisation will involve people and communities being connected through various means, including globally via the internet and digital technologies, in ways that prompt shifts in thinking and behaviour consistent with climate change goals (medium evidence, medium agreement). Individuals and organisations like institutional entrepreneurs can function to build transformative capacity through collective action (robust evidence, high agreement ), but private-sector entrepreneurs can also play an important role in fostering and accelerating the transitions to sustainable development (robust evidence, medium agreement ). Ultimately, the adoption of coordinated, multi-sectoral policies targeting new and rapid innovation can help national economies take advantage of widespread decarbonisation. Green industrial policies that focus on building domestic supply chains and capacities can help states prepare for the influx of renewable CDR-methods, or mechanisms for carbon capture and storage (CCS) (medium evidence, medium agreement ). {17.4.2}

Accelerating the transition to sustainability will be enabled by explicit consideration being given to the principles of justice, equality and fairness. Interventions to promote sustainability transitions that account for local context (including unequal access to resources, capacity and technology) in the development process are necessary but not sufficient in creating a just transition (low evidence, high agreement) . {17.4.6}

This chapter focuses on the opportunities and challenges for ‘accelerating the transition in the context of sustainable development’. The chapter suggests that accelerating transitions in the context of sustainable development requires more than concentrating on speed. Rather, it involves expediting the pace of change (speed) while also removing the underlying drivers of vulnerability and high emissions (quality and depth), and aligning the interests of different communities, regions, sectors, stakeholders and cultures (scale and breadth). One key to enabling deep and broad transitions is integrating the views of different government agencies, businesses and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in transition processes. Another critical driver of deep and broad transitions is engaging and empowering workers, youth, women, the poor, minorities and marginalised stakeholders in just, equitable and inclusive processes. The result of such processes will be the transformation of large-scale socio-economic systems to restore the health and well-being of the planet and the people on it.

Section 17.1 begins by reviewing how climate and sustainability issues have been discussed in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as well as international climate change and sustainable development processes at different levels. It further introduces key themes addressed in the chapter’s remaining subsections. Section 17.2 provides an overview of how key theories understand transitions and transformation, and notes a shared concern over leveraging synergies and managing trade-offs between climate change and sustainable development across different disciplines. Section 17.3 provides an assessment of the mitigation options that can help achieve these synergies and avoid trade-offs. Section 17.4 pulls together the theoretical and empirical aspects by detailing the essential elements of an enabling environment that helps drive forward transitions that are quick, deep, broad and, ultimately, sustainable.

This section focuses on how different theoretical frameworks can help us understand and explain what is meant by accelerating transitions in the context of sustainable development. As suggested in Section 17.1, the reference to ‘in the context of sustainable development’ suggests that sustainable transitions require more than speed, also necessitating removing the underlying drivers of vulnerability and high emissions (quality and depth of transitions), while also aligning the interests of different individuals, communities, sectors, stakeholders and cultures (scale and breadth of transitions).

The outcome of sustainable transitions is a sustainable transformation. While transitions involve ‘processes that shift development pathways and reorient energy, transport, urban and other subsystems’ (Loorbach et al. 2017) (Chapter 16), transformation is the resulting ‘fundamental reorganisation of large-scale socio-economic systems’ (Hölscher et al. 2018). Such a fundamental reorganisation often requires dynamic multi-stage transition processes that change everything from public policies and prevailing technologies to individual lifestyles, and social norms to governance arrangements and institutions of political economy. This set of factors can lock-in development pathways and prevent transitions from gathering the momentum needed for transformations. Chapter 16 provides an overview of the multi-stage transition dynamics involved in moving from experimentation to commercialisation to integration to stabilisation. That overview describes how transitions can break through lock-ins and result in a transformation.

While there may be a relatively consistent set of transition dynamics for all countries, pathways are likely to vary across and even within countries. This variation is due to different development levels, starting points, capacities, agencies, geographies, power dynamics, political economies, ecosystems and other contextual factors. Given the diversity of contributing factors, a sustainable transition is likely to be a complex and multi-faceted process which cannot be reduced to a single dimension (Köhler et al. 2019). Even with this multi-dimensionality, transition processes are likely to gain speed and become more sustainable as decision-makers adopt targeted policies and other interventions. Many disciplines have reflected on the roles of and relative influence on the policies and interventions that can drive transitions. The following discussion describes this diversity of views with a survey of how prominent lines of economic, psychological, institutional and systems thinking explain transitions. Though these disciplines differ greatly, they often stress that leveraging synergies and managing trade-offs between climate change and sustainable development can help advance a transition.

This section provides a deep and broad synthesis of theory (Section 17.2) and evidence (Section 17.3) in order to identify the conditions that either enable or inhibit transitions to sustainable low-carbon futures. Following the literature on sustainability transitions (Cross-Chapter Box 12 in Chapter 16), the section finds that there is rarely any one single factor promoting or preventing such transitions. Rather, marked departures from business as usual typically involve several factors, including technological innovations, shifts in markets, concerted efforts by scientists and civil-society organisations to raise awareness of the costs of continued emissions, social movements, policies and governance arrangements, and changes in belief systems and values.

All of this comes together in a co-evolutionary process that has unfolded globally, internationally and locally over several decades (Hansen and Nygaard 2014; Rogge et al. 2017; Sorman et al. 2020), and that may be guided or facilitated by interventions that target leverage points in the underlying development path (Burch and Di Bella 2021; Leventon et al. 2021). While transitions necessarily follow context-specific trajectories, more general lessons can be drawn by comparing the empirical details with both system-level and narrower explanations of change.

Sections 17.2 and 17.3 show that transitions often face multiple barriers, including infrastructure lock-in, behavioural, cultural and institutional inertia (Markard et al. 2020), trade-offs between transitions and other social or political priorities (Chu 2016), cost and a reliable (and growing) supply of renewable-energy technologies and constituent materials (García-Olivares et al. 2018). Transitions away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy-based systems, for instance, will require significant land-use decisions to avoid negative trade-offs with biodiversity and food security (Capellán-Pérez et al. 2017). Previous sections underline a related need to move beyond focusing on ‘rational’ assessments of the costs and benefits of policies and technologies to involve people at all levels in order to overcome these multiple barriers. A transition to a lower carbon system is unlikely to happen even if models find it technically feasible and cost-effective. Rather, achieving a transition requires breaking locked-in high-carbon technological trajectories, path dependencies and resistance to change from the industries and actors that are benefiting from the current system (Rogge et al. 2017). Lock-in effects may be weaker in sectors and policy areas where fewer technologies exist, potentially opening the door to innovations that embed the climate in broader sustainability objectives (e.g., technologies and innovations that support the integration of food, water and energy goals). Such effects may still happen when there are significant information asymmetries and high-cost barriers to action, as can occur when working across multiple climate and development-related sectors (Kemp and Never 2017).

However, the same conditions that may serve to impede a transition (i.e., organisational structure, behaviour, technological lock-in) can also be ‘flipped’ to enable it (Burch 2010; Lee et al. 2017), while the framing of policies that are relevant to the sustainable development agenda can also create a stronger basis and stronger policy support. The technological developments and broader cultural changes that may generate new social demands on infrastructure to contribute to sustainable development will involve a process of social learning and awareness building (Naber et al. 2017; Sengers et al. 2019). However, it is also important to note that strong shocks to these systems, including accelerated climate change impacts, economic crises and political changes, may provide crucial openings for accelerated transitions to sustainable systems through fundamental institutional changes (Broto et al. 2014). The global COVID-19 pandemic is one such shock that has sparked widespread conversations about recovery that is fundamentally more sustainable, equitable and resilient (McNeely and Munasinghe 2021). Key enabling conditions appear to be individual and collective actions, including leadership and education; financial, material, social and technical drivers that foster innovation; robust national and regional innovation systems that enhance technological diffusion (Wieczorek 2018); supportive policy and governance dynamics at multiple levels that permit both agility and coherence (Göpel et al. 2016); measures to recognise and address the challenges to equality inherent in the transition; and long-range, holistic planning that explicitly seeks synergies between climate change and sustainable development while avoiding trade-offs. The sections that follow seek to assess and integrate these key categories of the barriers to and enablers of an accelerated transition to sustainable development pathways.

This chapter has been concerned to assess the opportunities and challenges for acceleration in the context of sustainable development . As such, many of the claims reviewed involve not only increasing the speed of the transition but also ensuring that it is just, equitable and delivers a wider range of environmental and social benefits. A sustainability transition requires removing the underlying drivers of vulnerability and high emissions (quality and depth) while aligning the interests of different communities, regions, sectors, stakeholders and cultures (scale and breadth).

Interest in a sustainability transition has grown steadily over the history of the IPCC and of climate and related policy processes. That interest hit a high point in 2015 with the Paris Agreement and the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 SDGs. It has continued to remain high as countries have issued NDCs on climate change, VNRs on the SDGs and, in some instances, integrated climate and SDG plans (or similarly themed integrated actions, e.g., circular economy plans). Interest has also gained momentum as local governments, businesses and other stakeholders have followed suit with climate change- or SDG-related plans.

Implementing many of the recent pledges, however, has proved challenging. Part of the challenge is a need to address everything from public policies and prevailing technologies to individual lifestyles and social norms, to governance arrangements and institutions with associated political economy implications. These factors can lock-in development pathways and prevent transitions from gathering the momentum needed for large-scale transformations of socio-economic systems. Another consideration is that transition pathways are likely to vary across and within countries due to different development levels, starting points, differential vulnerabilities, capacities, agencies, geographies, power dynamics, political economies, ecosystems and other contextual factors.

Even with this diversity, prominent lines of economic, institutional, psychological and systems thinking have reflected on interventions that can enable transitions. Because these disciplines often focus on different levels of analysis and draw upon diverse analytical methods and empirical evidence, the recommended interventions also tend to vary. For instance, economic arguments often point to the need for targeted regulation or investments, institutional claims centre on multi-level governance reforms, and psychology encourages participation to change mindsets and social norms. Systems-level perspectives offer a useful frame for bringing together these views, but may not capture the richness and details of them treated separately. Greater inter- and transdisciplinary research is needed to integrate the more focused interventions and show how they work together in a system. Such research will be particularly important for working on the concern running through these studies: strengthening synergies between climate and the broader sustainable development agenda.

National and sub-national, sectoral and cross-sectoral, short- and long-term transition studies have assessed the links between sustainable development and mitigation policies and synergies and the trade-offs between the different policy domains. Some general conclusions can be drawn on synergies and trade-offs, despite the actual impacts of policy implementation depending on scale, context and the development starting point.

From a cross-sectoral perspective, it can be concluded that the AFOLU sector offers many low-cost mitigation options with synergetic SDG impacts, which, however, can also create trade-offs between land use for food, energy, forest and biodiversity. Some options can help to mitigate such trade-offs, like agricultural practices, forest conservation and soil carbon sequestration. Lifestyle changes, including dietary changes and reduced food waste, could jointly support the SDGs and mitigation. Industry also offers several mitigation options with SDG synergies, for example, related to energy efficiency and the circular economy. Some of the renewable-energy options in industry could indicate some trade-offs in relation to land use, with implications for food- and water security and costs. Cities provide a promising basis for implementing mitigation with SDG synergies, particularly if urban planning, transportation, infrastructure and settlements are coordinated jointly. Similarly, studies of the building sector have identified many synergies between the SDGs and mitigation, but there are issues related to the costs of new technologies. Also, in relation to households and buildings, important equity issues emerge due to the ability of low-income groups to afford the introduction of new technologies. Altogether these cross-sectoral conclusions create a need for policies to address both synergies and trade-offs, as well as for coordination between different sectoral domains. Context-specific assessments of synergies and trade-offs are here important, as is sharing the benefits and costs associated with mitigation policies.

Several opportunities for creating SDG synergies and avoiding trade-offs have also been identified in relation to integrated adaptation and mitigation policies. The AFOLU sector has a large potential for integrating adaptation and mitigation policies related to agriculture, bioenergy crops, forestry and water use. As was concluded for mitigation options, integrated adaptation and mitigation policies also entail the risks of creating trade-offs in relation to food, water, energy access and biodiversity. There are several potentially strong links between climate change adaptation in industry and climate change adaptation more generally. Various supply chains can be affected by climate change, and mitigation options related to energy and water supply can be disrupted by climate events, implying that great benefits may come from integrating adaptation in industrial planning efforts. Adaptation options in industry can imply increasing the demand for packaging materials such as plastics and for access to refrigeration, which are also major sources of GHG emissions, which then would require further mitigation options. Mitigation and the co-benefits of adaptation in urban areas in relation to air quality, health, green jobs and equality issues can in most cases be synergetic and can also support the SDGs. One exception are compact cities, with their trade-offs between mitigation and adaptation because decreasing urban sprawl can increase the risks of flooding and heat stress. Detailed mapping of mitigation and adaptation in urban areas shows that there are many, very close interactions between the two policy domains and that coordinated governance across sectors is therefore called for.

Meeting the ambitions of the Paris Agreement will require phasing out fossil fuels from energy systems, which is technically possible and is estimated to be relatively low in cost. However, studies also show that replacing fossil fuels with renewables can have major synergies and trade-offs with a broader agenda of sustainable development if a balance is established in relation to land use, food security and job creation (McCollum et al. 2018). Furthermore, the transition to low-emission pathways will require policy efforts that also address the emissions locked-in to existing infrastructure, like power plants, factories, cargo ships and other infrastructure already in use: for example, today coal-fired power plants account for 30% of all energy-related emissions. Thus, even though the transition away from fossil fuels is desirable and technically feasible, it is still largely constrained by existing fossil fuel-based infrastructure and the existence of stranded investments. The ‘committed’ emissions from existing fossil fuel infrastructure may consume all the remaining carbon budget in the 1.5°C scenario or two thirds of the carbon budget in the 2°C scenario.

Stranded hydrocarbon assets, including hydrocarbon resources and the infrastructure from which they are produced, and investments made in exploration and production activities, are likely to become unusable, lose value or may end up as liabilities before the end of the anticipated economic lifetime. This phenomenon is rapidly becoming a global reality as social norms change and the pressure to reduce emissions mounts. Energy and other forms of structural inequities are likely to make the transition planning more challenging, especially given stranded assets.

Countries dependent on fossil fuel income will need to forego these revenues to keep well within the Paris Agreement requirements and align with the rapidly growing divestment movement. Climate injustice, energy poverty and COVID-19 have reduced the space and manoeuverability for developing countries to innovate and use surplus funds to procure new and clean technologies. A rising debt burden already hamstrings many. Decisions on how to spend the remaining carbon budget and who has the right to decide on what to do with existing fossil fuels reflect the complexity of the transition and its non-linear character. Given the asymmetrical dimension of energy production, distribution and use, it is likely that stranded assets will have implications for oil-producing countries, especially for early producers who perceive that new-found oil and gas will open doors to new forms of prosperity.

While the transitional drivers are not in place in some developing countries, that is, technology, infrastructure, knowledge, and finance, among others, investing in new forms of renewable energy for the land, energy, or water sectors will see the emergence of a more diversified economy and one less vulnerable to carbon and other exogenous risks. The transition away from fossil fuels will come with hard choices. Still, these choices can enable a sustainable development world and reduce the many asymmetries and injustices inherent in the current system, not least the gaping energy disparities that divide the developed and the developing world.

Equality and justice are central dimensions of transitions in the context of sustainable development. Viewing climate change through the lens of justice requires a focus on the protection of vulnerable populations from the impacts of climate change, addressing the unequal distribution of the costs and consequences of the transitions themselves, including for those whose livelihoods are rooted in fossil fuel-based sectors, and developing more creative and participatory processes for envisioning an equitable decarbonised world. Neglecting issues of justice will have implications for the pace, scale and quality of the transition.

Ultimately, the evidence demonstrates that there is rarely any one single factor promoting or preventing transitions. A constellation of elements come into play, including technological innovations, shifts in markets, social and behavioural dynamics, and governance arrangements. Indeed, transitions require an examination of the role of values, attitudes, beliefs and the structures that shape behaviour, as well as the dynamics of social movements and education at multiple levels. Likewise, technological and social innovation both play an important role in enabling transitions, highlighting the importance of multi-institutional and multi-stakeholder actors building institutional support networks, facilitating collaboration between sectors and actors, and promoting learning and social change. Financial tools and economic instruments are crucial enablers, since many forms of transformational change to energy systems are not possible when financial systems still privilege investing in unsustainable, carbon-intensive sectors. These instruments are deployed within the context of the multi-level governance of climate change, which suggests the importance of complementary policies and institutions that simultaneously integrate across multiple sectors and scales to address the multiple sources of lock-in that are shaping the current carbon-intensive energy system. Systems-oriented approaches, which holistically address the intersections among climate, water and energy (for instance), have significant potential to reveal and help avoid trade-offs, foster experimentation, and deliver a range of co-benefits on the path towards sustainable development.

Abson, D.J. et al., 2017: Leverage points for sustainability transformation. Ambio, 46(1) , 30–39, doi:10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y.

Addison, T. and A.R. Roe, 2018: Extractive Industries. 1st ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 766 pp.

Adger, W.N., J. Barnett, K. Brown, N. Marshall, and K. O’Brien, 2013: Cultural dimensions of climate change impacts and adaptation. Nat. Clim. Change, 3(2) , doi:10.1038/nclimate1666.

Ahamer, G., 2013: Game, Not Fight: Change Climate Change!Simul. Gaming, 44(2–3) , 272–301, doi:10.1177/1046878112470541.

Ahlborg, H., 2017: Towards a conceptualization of power in energy transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. TRANSITIONS, 25, 122–141, doi:10.1016/j.eist.2017.01.004.

Ahlström, H., 2019: Policy hotspots for sustainability: Changes in the EU regulation of sustainable business and finance. Sustainability, 11(2) , 499, doi:10.3390/su11020499.

Akimoto, K. et al., 2012: Consistent assessments of pathways toward sustainable development and climate stabilization. Nat. Resour. Forum, 36(4) , doi:10.1111/j.1477-8947.2012.01460.x.

Alarcón, D. and R. Vos, 2015: Introduction: The Imperative of Sustainable Development. In: Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Development [Vos, R. and D. Alarcón, (eds.)]. The United Nations Series on Development , Bloomsbury Academic, London, UK, pp. 1–14.

Alexandratos, N. and J. Bruinsma, 2012: World Agriculture towards 2030/2050.,FAO, Rome, Italy, 154 pp.

Altieri, K.E. et al., 2016: Achieving development and mitigation objectives through a decarbonization development pathway in South Africa. Clim. Policy, 16(1) , 78–91, doi:10.1080/14693062.2016.1150250.

Amanuma, N. et al., 2018: Governance for Integrated Solutions to Sustainable Development and Climate Change: From Linking Issues to Aligning Interests. [Zusman, E. and N. Amanuma, (eds.)]. IGES, Hayama, Japan, 140 pp.

Andrianto, A., H. Komarudin, and P. Pacheco, 2019: Expansion of oil palm plantations in Indonesia’s frontier: Problems of Externalities and the Future of Local and Indigenous Communities. Land, 8(4) , 16, doi:10.3390/land8040056.

Andrić, I., M. Koc, and S.G. Al-Ghamdi, 2019: A review of climate change implications for built environment: Impacts, mitigation measures and associated challenges in developed and developing countries. J. Clean. Prod. , 211, 83–102, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.128.

Andries, H.F. et al., 2017: Global and regional abatement costs of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and of enhanced action to levels well below 2°C and 1.5°C. Environ. Sci. Policy, 71, 30–40, doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.02.008.

Ansari, D. and F. Holz, 2020: Between stranded assets and green transformation: Fossil-fuel-producing developing countries towards 2055. World Dev. , 130, 18, doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.104947.

Antwi-Agyei, P., A.J. Dougill, T.P. Agyekum, and L.C. Stringer, 2018a: Alignment between nationally determined contributions and the sustainable development goals for West Africa. Clim. Policy, 18(10) , 1296–1312, doi:10.1080/14693062.2018.1431199.

Antwi-Agyei, P., A.J. Dougill, L.C. Stringer, and S.N.A. Codjoe, 2018b: Adaptation opportunities and maladaptive outcomes in climate vulnerability hotspots of northern Ghana. Clim. Risk Manag. , 19, 83–93, doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2017.11.003.

Arnell, N.W. and B. Lloyd-Hughes, 2014: The global-scale impacts of climate change on water resources and flooding under new climate and socio-economic scenarios. Clim. Change, 122(1–2) , 127–140, doi:10.1007/s10584-013-0948-4.

Arranz, A.M., 2017: Lessons from the past for sustainability transitions? A meta-analysis of socio-technical studies. Glob. Environ. Change Policy Dimens. , 44, 125–143, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.03.007.

Arrow, K. et al., 2004: Are we consuming too much?J. Econ. Perspect. , 18(3) , 147–172, doi:10.1257/0895330042162377.

Asara, V., I. Otero, F. Demaria, and E. Corbera, 2015: Socially sustainable degrowth as a social–ecological transformation: repoliticizing sustainability. Sustain. Sci. , 10(3) , 375–384, doi:10.1007/s11625-015-0321-9.

Austin, K.G., A. Schwantes, Y. Gu, and P.S. Kasibhatla, 2019: What causes deforestation in Indonesia?Environ. Res. Lett. , 14, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aaf6db.

Avelino, F., J. Grin, B. Pel, and S. Jhagroe, 2016: The politics of sustainability transitions. J. Environ. Policy Plan. , 18(5) , 557–567, doi:10.1080/1523908X.2016.1216782.

Bachus, K. and F. Vanswijgenhoven, 2018: The use of regulatory taxation as a policy instrument for sustainability transitions: old wine in new bottles or unexplored potential?J. Environ. Plan. Manag. , 61(9) , 1469–1486, doi:10.1080/09640568.2017.1358155.

Baghestani, A., M. Tayarani, M. Allahviranloo, and H.O. Gao, 2020: Evaluating the Traffic and Emissions Impacts of Congestion Pricing in New York City. Sustainability, 12(9) , 3655, doi:10.3390/su12093655.

Bai, C. et al., 2020: Will income inequality influence the abatement effect of renewable energy technological innovation on carbon dioxide emissions?J. Environ. Manage. , 264(15) , 110482, doi:10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2020.110482.

Banks, S., 2007: The Heart and Soul of Transition—Creating a Low Carbon Future with Psychological and Spiritual Awareness. Self Soc. , 35(2) , 5–14, doi:10.1080/03060497.2007.11083972.

Banuri, T., J. Weyant, G. Akumu, A. Najam, L.P. Rosa, S. Rayner, W. Sachs, R. Sharma, and G. Yohe, 2001: Setting the Stage: Climate Change and Sustainable Development. In: Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[Banuri, T., T. Barker, I. Bashmakov, K. Blok, D. Bouille, R. Christ, O. Davidson, J. Edmonds, K. Gregory, M. Grubb, K. Halsnaes, T. Heller, J.-C. Hourcade, C. Jepma, P. Kauppi, A. Markandya, B. Metz, W. Moomaw, J.R. Moreira, T. Morita, N. Nakicenovic, L. Price, R. Richels, J. Robinson, H.H. Rogner, J. Sathaye, R. Sedjo, P. Shukla, L. Srivastava, R. Swart, R. Toth, and J. Weyant (eds.)] Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 47–114.

Barani, S., A.H. Alibeygi, and A. Papzan, 2018: A framework to identify and develop potential ecovillages: Meta-analysis from the studies of world’s ecovillages. Sustain. Cities Soc. , 43, 275–289, doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.08.036.

Barker, T., E. Alexandri, J.F. Mercure, Y. Ogawa, and H. Pollitt, 2016: GDP and employment effects of policies to close the 2020 emissions gap. Clim. Policy, 16(4) , 393–414, doi:10.1080/14693062.2014.1003774.

Baron, R. and F. David, 2015: Divestment and Stranded Assets in the Low-carbon Transition. OECD, Paris, France, 26 pp. https://www.oecd.org/sd-roundtable/papersandpublications/Divestment and Stranded Assets in the Low-carbon Economy 32nd OECD RTSD.pdf (Accessed July 10, 2021).

Bataille, C. et al., 2016: The need for national deep decarbonization pathways for effective climate policy. Clim. Policy, 16(No. S1) , S7–S26, doi:10.1080/14693062.2016.1173005.

Bateman, I.J. and G.M. Mace, 2020: The natural capital framework for sustainably efficient and equitable decision making. Nat. Sustain. , 3(10) , 776–783, doi:10.1038/s41893-020-0552-3.

Bauer, N., C. McGlade, J. Hilaire, and P. Ekins, 2018: Divestment prevails over the green paradox when anticipating strong future climate policies. Nat. Clim. Change, 8(2) , 130–134, doi:10.1038/s41558-017-0053-1.

Beg, N., 2002: Linkages between climate change and sustainable development. Clim. Policy, 2(2–3) , 129–144, doi:10.1016/s1469-3062(02)00028-1.

Behuria, P., 2020: The politics of late late development in renewable energy sectors: Dependency and contradictory tensions in India’s National Solar Mission. World Dev. , 126, 104726, doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104726.

Bellinson, R. and E. Chu, 2019: Learning pathways and the governance of innovations in urban climate change resilience and adaptation. Environ. Policy Plan, 21(1) , 76–89, doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2018.1493916.

Bergman, N., 2018: Impacts of the Fossil Fuel Divestment Movement: Effects on Finance, Policy and Public Discourse. Sustainability, 10(7) , 2529, doi:10.3390/su10072529.

Berkhout, F. et al., 2010: Sustainability experiments in Asia: Innovations shaping alternative development pathways?Environ. Sci. Policy, 13(4) , 261–271, doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.03.010.

Bernstein, S. and M. Hoffmann, 2018: The politics of decarbonization and the catalytic impact of subnational climate experiments. Policy Sci. , 51(2) , 189–211, doi:10.1007/s11077-018-9314-8.

Berry, P et al., 2015: Cross-sectoral interactions of adaptation and mitigation measures. Clim. Change, 128, 381–393, doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1214-0.

Bertram, C. et al., 2018: Targeted policies can compensate most of the increased sustainability risks in 1.5°C mitigation scenarios. 13(6) , 64038, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aac3ec.

Betsill, M.M. and H. Bulkeley, 2006: Cities and the multilevel governance of global climate change. Glob. Gov. , 12(2) , 141–159, doi:10.1163/19426720-01202004.

Biermann, F. et al., 2012: Transforming governance and institutions for global sustainability: Key insights from the Earth System Governance Project. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 4(1) , 51–60, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2012.01.014.

Biermann, F., N. Kanie, and R.E. Kim, 2017: Global governance by goal-setting: the novel approach of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 26–27, 26–31, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2017.01.010.

Biggs, E.M. et al., 2015: Sustainable development and the water-energy-food nexus: A perspective on livelihoods. Environ. Sci. Policy, 54, 389–397, doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2015.08.002.

Birch, K., 2016: Materiality and sustainability transitions: integrating climate change in transport infrastructure in Ontario, Canada. Prometheus, 34(3–4) , 191–206, doi:10.1080/08109028.2017.1331612.

Bleischwitz, R. et al., 2018: Resource nexus perspectives towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Sustain. , 1, 737–743, doi:10.1038/s41893-018-0173-2.

Bloomfield, H.C., D.J. Brayshaw, L.C. Shaffrey, P.J. Coker, and H.E. Thornton, 2016: Quantifying the increasing sensitivity of power systems to climate variability. Environ. Res. Lett. , 11(124025) , 1–12, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124025.

BMU, 2018: Conclusions of the Petersberg Climate Dialogue IX – BMU. Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Berlin, Germany, 5 pp. https://www.bmu.de/en/topics-1/climate-energy/climate/international-climate-policy/12th-petersberg-climate-dialogue-pcd-xii/petersberg-climate-dialogue-ix (Accessed May 14, 2020).

Bos, K. and J. Gupta, 2019: Stranded assets and stranded resources: Implications for climate change mitigation and global sustainable development. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 56, 101215, doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.05.025.

Bolton, R., T.J. Foxon, and S. Hall, 2016: Energy transitions and uncertainty: Creating low carbon investment opportunities in the UK electricity sector. Environ. Plan. C-Government Policy, 34(8) , 1387–1403, doi:10.1177/0263774X15619628.

Bowman, A., O. Portney, and J. Berry, 2017: Multilevel Governance and City Sustainability Policies: Does It Exist? Does it Matter? Paper delivered at the Local Governance and Sustainability Conference, New Orleans, USA. Southern Political Science Association, 118 pp. https://localgov.fsu.edu/sites/g/files/upcbnu1196/files/Bowman Portney and Berry SPSA 2017.final.pdf (Accessed October 15, 2021).

Bradbury, D., 2015: Internet of things: How can privacy survive in the era of the internet of things?Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/07/how-can-privacy-survive-the-internet-of-things (Accessed August 10, 2021).

Bradbury, H. et al., 2019: A call to Action Research for Transformations: The times demand it. Action Res. , 17(1) , 8, doi:10.1177/1476750319829633.

Bradley, H., 2005: Class, Self and Culture. Br. J. Sociol. , 56(4) , 677–678, doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2005.00088_13.x.

Breukers, S., R.M. Mourik, L.F.M. van Summeren, and G.P.J. Verbong, 2017: Institutional ‘lock-out’ towards local self-governance? Environmental justice and sustainable transformations in Dutch social housing neighbourhoods. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 23, 148–158, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2016.10.007.

Brodnik, C. and R. Brown, 2018: Strategies for developing transformative capacity in urban water management sectors: The case of Melbourne, Australia. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 137, 147–159, doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.037.

Broto, V.C., S. Glendinning, E. Dewberry, C. Walsh, and M. Powell, 2014: What can we learn about transitions for sustainability from infrastructure shocks?Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 84, 186–196, doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.002.

Brouwer, F. et al., 2018: Energy modelling and the Nexus concept. Energy Strateg. Rev. , 19, 1–6, doi:10.1016/j.esr.2017.10.005.

Brown, O., A. Hammill, and R. McLeman, 2007: Climate change as the ‘new’ security threat: Implications for Africa. Int. Aff. , 83(6) , 1141–1154, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2007.00678.x.

Brundiers, K., A. Wiek, and C.L. Redman, 2010: Real-world learning opportunities in sustainability: from classroom into the real world. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. , 11(4) , 308–324, doi:10.1108/14676371011077540.

Bryan, E. et al., 2013: Can agriculture support climate change adaptation, greenhouse gas mitigation and rural livelihoods? insights from Kenya. Clim. Change, 118, 151–165, doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0640-0.

Buijs, A., A. Fishcher, and A. Muhar, 2018: From urban gardening to planetary stewardship: human–nature relationships and their implications for environmental management. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. , 61(5–6) , 10, doi.org/ 10.1080/09640568.2018.1429255.

Bulkeley, H., V. Castán Broto, and G.A.S. Edwards, 2015: An Urban Politics of Climate Change: Experimentation and the Governing of Socio-Technical Transitions. Routledge, London, UK and New York, USA, 282 pp.

Burch, S., 2010: Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: Insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia, Canada. Glob. Environ. Change, 20(2) , 287–297, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.11.009.

Burch, S., 2017: The governance of transformative change: Tracing the pathway of the sustainability transition in Vancouver, Canada. Urban Sustain. Transitions, 50–64, doi:10.4324/9781315228389.

Burch, S. and J. Di Bella, 2021: Business models for the Anthropocene: accelerating sustainability transformations in the private sector. Sustain. Sci. , 16(6) , 1963–1976, doi:10.1007/s11625-021-01037-3.

Burch, S., A. Shaw, A. Dale, and J. Robinson, 2014: Triggering transformative change: A development path approach to climate change response in communities. Clim. Policy, 14(4) , 467–487, doi:10.1080/14693062.2014.876342.

Burch, S. et al., 2016: Governing and accelerating transformative entrepreneurship: exploring the potential for small business innovation on urban sustainability transitions. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 22, 26–32, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2017.04.002.

Buzananakova, A., 2015: Democratic Republic of the Congo Coal Reserves. Government of Democratic Republic of the Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, 3 pp. https://drcongo.opendataforafrica.org/gkocbhe/democratic-republic-of-the-congo-coal-reserves?lang=en (Accessed October 18, 2021).

Byers, E. et al., 2018: Global exposure and vulnerability to multi-sector development and climate change hotspots. Environ. Res. Lett. , 13(5) , 55012, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aabf45.

Byers, E.A. et al., 2015: Cooling water for Britain’s future electricity supply. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Energy, 168(3) , 188–204, doi:10.1680/ener.14.00028.

C40 Cities, 2019: Around the world, C40 cities are taking bold climate action, leading the way towards a healthier and more sustainable future. C40 Cities, London, UK. https://www.c40.org/ (Accessed August 16, 2021).

Caldecott, B., N. Howarth, and P. McSharry, 2013: Stranded Assets in Agriculture: Protecting Value from Environment-Related Risks. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, 109 pp. https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/publications/reports/stranded-assets-agriculture-report-final.pdf (Accessed June 3, 2021).

Caldera, U. and C. Breyer, 2020: Strengthening the global water supply through a decarbonised global desalination sector and improved irrigation systems. Energy, 200, 117507, doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117507.

Cameron, C. et al., 2016: Policy trade-offs between climate mitigation and clean cook-stove access in South Asia. Nat. Energy, 1(1) , 15010, doi:10.1038/nenergy.2015.10.

Campagnolo, L. and M. Davide, 2019: Can the Paris deal boost SDGs achievement? An assessment of climate mitigation co-benefits or side-effects on poverty and inequality. World Dev. , 122, 96–109, doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.05.015.

Campiglio, E., 2016: Beyond carbon pricing: The role of banking and monetary policy in financing the transition to a low-carbon economy. Ecol. Econ. , 121, 220–230, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.020.

Campos, I. and E. Marín-González, 2020: People in transitions: Energy citizenship, prosumerism and social movements in Europe. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 69, 101718, doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101718.

Campbell, B.M., P. Thornton, R. Zougmoré, P. van Asten, and L. Lipper, 2014: Sustainable intensification: What is its role in climate smart agriculture?Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 8, 5, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2014.07.002.

Canitez, F., 2019: Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 141, 319–329, doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.008.

Capellán-Pérez, I., C. de Castro, and I. Arto, 2017: Assessing vulnerabilities and limits in the transition to renewable energies: Land requirements under 100% solar energy scenarios. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 77, 760–782, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.137.

Carney, M., 2016: Resolving the climate paradox, 13pp. BIS Central Bankers speeches, Berlin, Germany. https://www.bis.org/review/r160926h.pdf (Accessed August 9, 2021).

Carraz, R. and H. Yuko, 2019: Japan’s Innovation Systems at the Crossroads: Society 5.0. Panor. Insights into Asian Eur. Aff. , 3, 33–45.

Carvalho Resende, T. et al., 2019: Assessment of the impacts of climate variability on total water storage across Africa: implications for groundwater resources management. Hydrogeol. J. , 27(2) , 493–512, doi:10.1007/s10040-018-1864-5.

Castellanos-Navarrete, A., W.V. Tobar-Tomás, and C.E. López-Monzón, 2019: Development without change: Oil palm labour regimes, development narratives, and disputed moral economies in Mesoamerica. J. Rural Stud. , 71, 169–180, doi:10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2018.08.011.

Castellanos-Navarrete, A., F. de Castro, and P. Pacheco, 2021: The impact of oil palm on rural livelihoods and tropical forest landscapes in Latin America. J. Rural Stud. , 81, 294–304, doi:10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2020.10.047.

Castro, M.C. et al., 2016: Examples of coupled human and environmental systems from the extractive industry and hydropower sector interfaces. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. , 113(51) , 14528–14535, doi:10.1073/pnas.1605678113.

Cebrian, M., 2021: The past, present and future of digital contact tracing. Nat. Electron. , 4(1) , 2–4, doi:10.1038/s41928-020-00535-z.

Cervero, R., 2009: Public transport and sustainable urbanism: Global lessons. Transit Oriented Dev. Mak. it Happen, pp. 43–56.

Chan, S. and P. Pauw, 2014: A global framework for climate action: orchestrating non-state and subnational initiatives for more effective global climate governance. Discussion Paper. German Development Institute, Discussion Paper 34/2014, (34) , 54.

Chatalova, L. and A. Balmann, 2017: The hidden costs of renewables promotion: The case of crop-based biogas. J. Clean. Prod. , 168, 893–903, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.031.

Chen, H., J. Sun, and X. Chen, 2014: Projection and uncertainty analysis of global precipitation-related extremes using CMIP5 models. Int. J. Climatol. , 34, 2730–2748, doi:10.1002/joc.3871.

Chichilnisky, G. and G. Heal, 1998: Economic returns from the biosphere. Nature, 391, 629–630, doi:10.1038/35481.

Chiengkul, P., 2017: The Political Economy of the Agri-food system in Thailand: Hegemony, Counter-hegemony, and Co-optation of oppositions. 8th ed. Routledge, London, UK, 228 pp.

Chimhowu, A.O., D. Hulme, and L.T. Munro, 2019: The ‘New’ national development planning and global development goals: Processes and partnerships. World Dev. , 120, 76–89, doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.03.013.

Chirambo, D., 2018: Towards the achievement of SDG 7 in Sub-Saharan Africa: Creating synergies between Power Africa, Sustainable Energy for All and climate finance in-order to achieve universal energy access before 2030. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 94, 600–608, doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.06.025.

Chu, E., 2016: The political economy of urban climate adaptation and development planning in Surat, India. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy, 34(2) , 281–298, doi:10.1177/0263774X15614174.

Chu, E.K., 2018: Urban climate adaptation and the reshaping of state–society relations: The politics of community knowledge and mobilisation in Indore, India. Urban Stud. , 55(8) , 1766–1782, doi:10.1177/0042098016686509.

Clark, K. et al., 2019: Advancing the ethical use of digital data in human research: challenges and strategies to promote ethical practice. Ethics Inf. Technol. , 21(1) , 59–73, doi:10.1007/s10676-018-9490-4.

Clark, R., J. Reed, and T. Sunderland, 2018: Bridging funding gaps for climate and sustainable development: Pitfalls, progress and potential of private finance. Land Use Policy, 71, 335–346, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.12.013.

Clarke, L., K. Jiang, K. Akimoto, M. Babiker, G. Blanford, K. Fisher-Vanden, J.-C. Hourcade, V. Krey, E. Kriegler, A. Löschel, D. McCollum, S. Paltsev, S. Rose, P.R. Shukla, M. Tavoni, B.C.C. van der Zwaan, and D.P. van Vuuren, 2014: Assessing Transformation Pathways. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 413–510.

Clarke, L. et al., 2018: Effects of long-term climate change on global building energy expenditures. Energy Econ. , 72, 667–677, doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.01.003.

Clayton, T. and N. Radcliffe, 2018: Sustainability: A Systems Approach. 1st ed. Routledge, Edinburgh, UK, 253 pp.

Climate-ADAPT, 2019: Cities and towns. The European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark, https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/countries-regions/cities (Accessed August 2, 2021).

Cobbing, J., 2020: Groundwater and the discourse of shortage in Sub-Saharan Africa. Hydrogeol. J. , 28(4) , 1143–1154, doi:10.1007/s10040-020-02147-5.

Cobbing, J. and B. Hiller, 2019: Waking a sleeping giant: Realizing the potential of groundwater in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Dev. , 122, 597–613, doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.06.024.

Coenen, L., P. Benneworth, and B. Truffer, 2012: Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions. Res. Policy, 41(6) , 968–979, doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.014.

Congedo, L. and M. Munafò, 2014: Urban Sprawl as a Factor of Vulnerability to Climate Change: Monitoring Land Cover Change in Dar es Salaam. In: Climate Change Vulnerability in Southern African Cities[Macchi, S. and M. Tiepolo, (eds.)]. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 73–88.

Cook, M. and E. Chu, 2018: Between Policies, Programs, and Projects: How Local Actors Steer Domestic Urban Climate Adaptation Finance in India. In: Climate Change in Cities. The Urban Book Series[Hughes, S. and M. Chu, (eds.)]. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 255–277.

Córdova, R., N.J. Hogarth, and M. Kanninen, 2019: Mountain Farming Systems’ Exposure and Sensitivity to Climate Change and Variability: Agroforestry and Conventional Agriculture Systems Compared in Ecuador’s Indigenous Territory of Kayambi People. Sustainability, 11(9) , doi:10.3390/su11092623.

Corfee-Morlot, J. et al., 2009: Cities, Climate Change and Multilevel Governance. OECD, Paris, France, 125 pp. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/1/44242293.pdf (Accessed May 4, 2020).

Covenant of Mayors, 2019: Covenant of Mayors for Climate Energy. Bonn, Germay. https://iclei.org/en/GCoM.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwx8iIBhBwEiwA2quaqy1lUqrcbjvH4tTdiFiUM7W-bOsP77Tbn2KyicroS-uOaaeMLzJHRBoCmqwQAvD_BwE (Accessed August 15, 2021).

Craig, M.T. et al., 2018: A review of the potential impacts of climate change on bulk power system planning and operations in the United States. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 98, 255–267, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.09.022.

Cremades, R. et al., 2016: Co-benefits and trade-offs in the water–energy nexus of irrigation modernization in China. Enviromental Res. Lett. , 11(2) , 054007, doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054007.

Creutzig, F. et al., 2019: Upscaling urban data science for global climate solutions. Glob. Sustain. , 2(2) , 1–25, doi:10.1017/sus.2018.16.

Cronin, J. et al., 2021: Embedding justice in the 1.5°C transition: A transdisciplinary research agenda. Renew. Sustain. Energy Transit. , 1, 100001, doi.org/10.1016/j.rset.2021.100001.

Cross, A.T., P.G. Nevill, K.W. Dixon, and J. Aronson, 2019: Time for a paradigm shift toward a restorative culture. Restor. Ecol. , 27(5) , 924–928, doi:10.1111/rec.12984.

Cruz-Cárdenas, J., E. Zabelina, J. Guadalupe-Lanas, A. Palacio-Fierro, and C. Ramos-Galarza, 2021: COVID-19, consumer behavior, technology, and society: A literature review and bibliometric analysis. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 173, 121179, doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121179.

Cui, R.Y. et al., 2019: Quantifying operational lifetimes for coal power plants under the Paris goals. Nat. Commun. , 10(1) , 9, doi:10.1038/s41467-019-12618-3.

D’Alisa, G., Demaria, F. and Kallis. G., 2014: Degrowth: A Vocabulary for a New Era 2014 Routledge 248 pp.

D’Odorico, P. et al., 2018: The Global Food-Energy-Water Nexus. Rev. Geophys. , 56, 456–531, doi:10.1029/2017RG000591.

Dai, J. et al., 2018: Water-energy nexus: A review of methods and tools for macro-assessment. Appl. Energy, 210, 393–408, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.08.243.

Dale, A., S. Burch, and J. Robinson, 2017: Multilevel Governance of Sustainability Transitions in Canada: Policy Alignment, Innovation, and Evaluation. In: Climate Change and Cities[Chu, E., S. Manson, and S. Higues, (eds.)]. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 343–358.

Dale, A. et al., 2020: Meeting the climate change challenge: local government climate action in British Columbia, Canada. Clim. Policy, 20(7) , 866–880, doi:10.1080/14693062.2019.1651244.

Dalkmann, H. and C. Brannigan, 2007: Urban Transport and Climate Change: Module 5e Sustainable Transport . First Edition. GIZ, Eschborn, Germany, 87 pp.

Dangelico, R.M., D. Pujari, and P. Pontrandolfo, 2016: Green product innovation in manufacturing firms: A sustainability-oriented dynamic capability perspective. Bus. Strateg. Environ. , 26(4) , 490–506.

Daum, T., 2018: We need more than apps. 1. The International Journal of Rural Development, Bonn, Germany. https://www.rural21.com/english/home.html?no_cache=1 (Accessed October 5, 2020).

David, D. and A. Venkatachalam, 2019: A Comparative Study on the Role of Public-Private Partnerships and Green Investment Banks in Boosting Low-Carbon Investments. In: Handbook of Green Finance: Energy Security and Sustainable Development [Sachs, J.D., W.T. Woo, N. Yoshino, and F. Taghizadeh-Hesary, (eds.)]. Springer Singapore, Singapore, pp. 261–287.

Davidson, K. et al., 2020: The making of a climate emergency response: Examining the attributes of climate emergency plans. Urban Clim. , 33, 100666, doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2020.100666.

Day, D.V., J.W. Fleenor, L.E. Atwater, R.E. Sturm, and R.A. McKee, 2014: Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. Leadersh. Q. , 25, 1–182, doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004.

De Barbosa, L.S.N.S., D. Bogdanov, P. Vainikka, and C. Breyer, 2017: Hydro, wind and solar power as a base for a 100% renewable energy supply for South and Central America. PLoS One, 12(3) , 1–28, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0173820.

de Gooyert, V., E. Rouwette, H. van Kranenburg, E. Freeman, and H. van Breen, 2016: Sustainability transition dynamics: Towards overcoming policy resistance. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 111, 135–145, doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.019.

De la Sota, C., V.J. Ruffato-Ferreira, L. Ruiz-García, and S. Alvarez, 2019: Urban green infrastructure as a strategy of climate change mitigation. A case study in northern Spain. Urban For. Urban Green. , 40, 145–151, doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2018.09.004.

de Strasser, L., A. Lipponen, M. Howells, S. Stec, and C. Bréthaut, 2016: A Methodology to Assess the Water Energy Food Ecosystems Nexus in Transboundary River Basins. Water, 8(2) , 59, doi.org/10.3390/w8020059.

de Wilde, P. and D. Coley, 2012: The implications of a changing climate for buildings. Build. Environ. , 55, 1–7, doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.03.014.

Delina, L.L. and B.K. Sovacool, 2018: Of temporality and plurality: an epistemic and governance agenda for accelerating just transitions for energy access and sustainable development. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 34, 1–6, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.05.016.

den Elzen, M. et al., 2019: Are the G20 economies making enough progress to meet their NDC targets?Energy Policy, 126 (November 2018), 238–250, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.027.

Denton, F., T.J.Wilbanks, A.C. Abeysinghe, I. Burton, Q. Gao, M.C. Lemos, T. Masui, K.L. O’Brien, and K.Warner, 2014: Climate-resilient pathways: adaptation, mitigation, and sustainable development. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1101–1131.

Destouni, G., F. Jaramillo, and C. Prieto, 2013: Hydroclimatic shifts driven by human water use for food and energy production. Nat. Clim. Change, (3) , 213–217, doi:10.1038/nclimate1719.

Di Gregorio, M. et al., 2017: Climate policy integration in the land use sector: Mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development linkages. Environ. Sci. Policy, 67, 35–43, doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2016.11.004.

Diallo, I. et al., 2016: Projected changes of summer monsoon extremes and hydroclimatic regimes over West Africa for the twenty-first century. Clim. Dyn. , 47 (12) , 3931–3954, doi:10.1007/s00382-016-3052-4.

Díaz, S. et al., 2019: Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science, 366(6471) , eaax3100, doi:10.1126/science.aax3100.

Dick, B., 2007: Action Research as an Enhancement of Natural Problem Solving. Int. J. Action Res. , 3(1/2) , 149–167, doi:10.1177/1541344613490997.

Doll, C.N.H. and J.A. Puppim De Oliveira, 2017: Urbanization and climateco-benefits: Implementation of win-win interventions in cities. Taylor and Francis, London, UK, 324 pp.

Dovie, D.B.K., 2019: Case for equity between Paris Climate agreement’s co-benefits and adaptation. Sci. Total Environ. , 656, 732–739, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.333.

Dowling, R., P. McGuirk, and S. Maalsen, 2018: Multiscalar governance of urban energy transitions in Australia: The cases of Sydney and Melbourne. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 44, 260–267, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2018.05.027.

Dugarova, E. and N. Gülasan, 2017: Global Trends: Challenges and Opportunities in the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals., United Nations Development Programme and United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, New York, USA, 101 pp.https://www.undp.org/publications/global-trends-challenges-and-opportunities-implementation-sdgs#modal-publication-download.

Dugast, J., S. Uslu, and P.-O. Weill, 2019: A Theory of Participation in OTC and Centralized Markets. National Bureau of Economic Research, Massachusetts, USA, 45 pp.

Duguma, L.A., P.A. Minang, and M. van Noordwijk, 2014: Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation in the Land Use Sector: From Complementarity to Synergy. Environ. Manage. , 54(3) , 420–432, doi:10.1007/s00267-014-0331-x.

E3G Annual Review, 2018: E3G Annual Review 2018. https://www.e3g.org/library_asset/e3g-annual-review-2018/ (Accessed August 26, 2021).

Easterlin, R.A., L.A. McVey, M. Switek, O. Sawangfa, and J.S. Zweig, 2010: The happiness - Income paradox revisited. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. , 107(52) , 1–6, doi:10.1073/pnas.1015962107.

ECLAC, 2017: Annual report on regional progress and challenges in relation to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in Latin America and the Caribbean, CEPAL 114 pp. https://repositorio.cepal.org/handle/11362/41189.

ECLEI, 2019: Cities and towns gathered around one shared ambition. ECLEI, Bonn, Germany. https://iclei.org/en/GCoM.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwx8iIBh BwEiwA2quaqy1lUqrcbjvH4tTdiFiUM7W-bOsP77Tbn2KyicroS-uOaaeM LzJHRBoCmqwQAvD_BwE (Accessed August 15 2021).

Edmondson, D.L., F. Kern, and K.S. Rogge, 2019: The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions. Res. Policy, 48(10) , 14, doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.010.

EESC, 2015: Building the Europe We Want: Models for civil society involvement in the implementation of the Post-2015 agenda at the EU level. 54 pp. European Economical Social Committee. https://www.eesc.europa.eu/ru/our-work/publications-other-work/publications/building-europe-we-want-models-civil-society-involvement-implementation-post-2015-agenda-eu-level.

Ehnert, F. et al., 2018a: The Acceleration of Urban Sustainability Transitions: A Comparison of Brighton, Budapest, Dresden, Genk, and Stockholm. Sustainability, 10(3) , 612, doi:10.3390/su10030612.

Ehnert, F. et al., 2018b: Urban sustainability transitions in a context of multi-level governance: A comparison of four European states. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 26, 101–116, doi:10.1016/j.eist.2017.05.002.

Eisenack, K. and D. Reckien, 2013: Climate Change and Simulation/Gaming. Simul. Gaming, 44(2–3) , 245–252, doi:10.1177/1046878113490568.

Elder, M. and P. King, 2018: Realising the Transformative Potential of the SDGs. IGES, Hayama, Japan, 188 pp. https://www.iges.or.jp/jp/pub/re alising-transformative-pot ential-sdgs/en.

Elder, M. and A. Bartalini, 2019: Assessment of the G20 Countries’ Concrete SDG Implementation Efforts: Policies and Budgets Reported in Their2016-2018 Voluntary National Reviews. IGES, Hayama, Japan, 92 pp.

Erb, K.-H. et al., 2016: Exploring the biophysical option space for feeding the world without deforestation. Nat. Commun. , 7(1) , 11382, doi:10.1038/ncomms11382.

Escobar, A., 2015: Degrowth, postdevelopment, and transitions: a preliminary conversation. Sustain. Sci. , 10(3) , 451–462, doi:10.1007/s11625-015-0297-5.

Fader, M., C. Cranmer, R. Lawford, and J. Engel-Cox, 2018: Toward an understanding of synergies and trade-offs between water, energy, and food SDG targets. Front. Environ. Sci. , 6, 112, doi:10.3389/fenvs.2018.00112.

Falcone, P.M. and E. Sica, 2015: How much does economic crisis affect sustainability transitions? A social network analysis of the italian biofuel sector. Econ. Reg. , 1(1) , 10, doi:10.17059/2015-1-23.

Fan, J.L., L.S. Kong, X. Zhang, and J.-D. Wang, 2019a: Energy-water nexus embodied in the supply chain of China: Direct and indirect perspectives. Energy Convers. Manag. , 183, 126–136, doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.12.095.

Fan, J.L., L.S. Kong, H. Wang, and X. Zhang, 2019b: A water-energy nexus review from the perspective of urban metabolism. Ecol. Modell. , 392, 128–136, doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.11.019.

FAO, 2019: The State of Food and Agriculture: Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, 182 pp.

Farzaneh, H., E. Zusman, and Y. Chae, 2021: Aligning Climate Change and Sustainable Development Policies in Asia. 1st ed. [Farzaneh, H., E. Zusman, and Y. Chae, (eds.)]. Springer, Singapore, 185 pp.

Fastenrath, S. and B. Braun, 2018: Sustainability transition pathways in the building sector: Energy-efficient building in Freiburg (Germany). Appl. Geogr. , 90, 339–349, doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2016.09.004.

Favretto, N., A.J. Dougill, L.C. Stringer, S. Afionis, and C.H. Quinn, 2018: Links between climate change mitigation, adaptation and development in land policy and ecosystem restoration projects: lessons from South Africa. Sustainability, 10(3) , 19. doi:10.3390/su10030779.

Fazey, I. et al., 2018: Community resilience for a 1.5°C world. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 31, 30–40, doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.12.006.

Feng, K., K. Hubacek, and K. Song, 2021: Household carbon inequality in the U.S. J. Clean. Prod. , 278, 123994, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123994.

Ferguson, R.S. and S. T. Lovell, 2014: Permaculture for agroecology: Design, movement, practice, and worldview. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. , 34, 251–274, doi:10.1007/s13593-013-0181-6.

Fishman, R., N. Devineni, and S. Raman, 2015: Can improved agricultural water use efficiency save India’s groundwater?Environ. Res. Lett. , 10(080422) , doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/8/084022.

Fleurbaey, M., S. Kartha, S. Bolwig, Y.L. Chee, Y. Chen, E. Corbera, F. Lecocq, W. Lutz, M.S. Muylaert, R.B. Norgaard, C. Okereke, and A.D. Sagar, 2014: Sustainable Development and Equity. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 283–350.

Folke, C., 2006: Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Glob. Environ. Chang. , 16(3) , 253–267, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002.

Fontana, G. and M. Sawyer, 2016: Towards post-Keynesian ecological macroeconomics. Ecol. Econ. , 121, 186–195, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.017.

Formentini, M. and P. Taticchi, 2016: Corporate sustainability approaches and governance mechanisms in sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. , 112, 1920–1933.

Forsyth, T., 2014: Climate justice is not justice. Geoforum, 54, 230–232, doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.12.008.

Forzieri, G. et al., 2018: Escalating impacts of climate extremes on critical infrastructures in Europe. Glob. Environ. Change, 48, 97–107, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.007.

Frantzeskaki, N., D. Loorbach, and J. Meadowcroft, 2012: Governing societal transitions to sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. , 15(1) , doi:10.1504/IJSD.2012.044032.

Fricko, O. et al., 2016: Energy sector water use implications of a 2°C climate policy. Environ. Res. Lett. , 11(034011) , 1–11, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034011.

Froese, R. and J. Schilling, 2019: The Nexus of Climate Change, Land Use, and Conflicts. Curr. Clim. Change Reports, 5(1) , 24–35, doi:10.1007/s40641-019-00122-1.

Fuhr, H., T. Hickmann, and K. Kern, 2018: The role of cities in multi-level climate governance: local climate policies and the 1.5°C target. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 30, p.1-6, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2017.10.006.

Fujimori, S. et al., 2019: A multi-model assessment of food security implications of climate change mitigation. Nat. Sustain. , 2(5) , 386–396, doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0286-2.

Fuseini, I. and J. Kemp, 2015: A review of spatial planning in Ghana’s socio-economic development trajectory: A sustainable development perspective. Land Use Policy, 47, 309–320, doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.04.020.

Fuso Nerini, F. et al., 2019: Connecting climate action with other Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Sustain. , 2(8) , 674–680, doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0334-y.

Galli, A., G. Đurović, L. Hanscom, and J. Knežević, 2018: Think globally, act locally: Implementing the sustainable development goals in Montenegro. Environ. Sci. Policy, 84, 159–169, doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.03.012.

Gao, J. et al., 2019: Insights into water-energy cobenefits and trade-offs in water resource management. J. Clean. Prod. , 213, 1–22, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.126.

García-Olivares, A., J. Solé, and O. Osychenko, 2018: Transportation in a 100% renewable energy system. Energy Convers. Manag. , 158, 266–285, doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.12.053.

Gasbarro, F., F. Iraldo, and T. Daddi, 2017: The drivers of multinational enterprises’ climate change strategies: A quantitative study on climate-related risks and opportunities. J. Clean. Prod. , 160, 8–26, doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.018.

Gaveau, D.L.A. et al., 2016: Rapid conversions and avoided deforestation: Examining four decades of industrial plantation expansion in Borneo. Sci. Rep. , 6, 32017, doi:10.1038/srep32017.

Geels, F.W., 2011: The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 1(1) , 24–40, doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002.

Geels, F.W., 2014: Regime Resistance against Low-Carbon Transitions: Introducing Politics and Power into the Multi-Level Perspective. Theory, Cult. Soc. , 31(5) , doi:10.1177/0263276414531627.

Geneletti, D. and L. Zardo, 2016: Ecosystem-based adaptation in cities: An analysis of European urban climate adaptation plans. Land Use Policy, 50, 38–47, doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.09.003.

Geng, Y. and Z. Hengxin, 2009: Industrial park management in the Chinese environment. J. Clean. Prod. , 17(14) , 1289–1294, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.03.009.

Geng, Y., J. Sarkis, and R. Bleischwitz, 2019: How to globalize the circular economy. Nature, 565(7738) , 153–155, doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00017-z.

Germer, J. et al., 2011: Skyfarming an ecological innovation to enhance global food security. J. fur Verbraucherschutz und Leb. , 6(2) , doi:10.1007/s00003-011-0691-6.

Gi, K., F. Sano, A. Hayashi, and K. Akimoto, 2019: A model-based analysis on energy systems transition for climate change mitigation and ambient particulate matter 2.5 concentration reduction. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change, 24(2) , 181–204, doi:10.1007/s11027-018-9806-z.

Giannaris, S., C. Bruce, B. Jacobs, W. Srisang, and Janowczyk, 2020: Implementing a second generation CCS facility on a coal fired power station – results of a feasibility study to retrofit SaskPower’s Shand power station with CCS. Green Gases Sci. and Technol. , 10, 506–518, doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1989.

Gillard, R., A. Gouldson, J. Paavola, and J. Van Alstine, 2016: Transformational responses to climate change: Beyond a systems perspective of social change in mitigation and adaptation. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change, 7(2) , 251–265, doi:10.1002/wcc.384.

Gioacchino, G., 2019: You defend what you feel: ‘Presencing’ nature as ‘experiential knowing.’Action Res. , 1(1) , 108–129, doi:10.1177/1476750319829208.

Giorgi, F., F. Raffaele, and E. Coppola, 2019: The response of precipitation characteristics to global warming from climate projections. Earth Syst. Dyn. , 10(1) , 73–89, doi:10.5194/esd-10-73-2019.

Girardin, C.A.J. et al., 2021: Nature-based solutions can help cool the planet – if we act now. Nature, 593(7858) , 191–194, doi:10.1038/d41586-021-01241-2.

Gjorgiev, B. and G. Sansavini, 2018: Electrical power generation under policy constrained water-energy nexus. Appl. Energy, 210, 568–579, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.09.011.

Glaas, E. et al., 2019: Developing transformative capacity through systematic assessments and visualization of urban climate transitions. Ambio, 48(5) , 515–528, doi:10.1007/s13280-018-1109-9.

Global Opportunity Explorer, 2019: Quito: Planning For Smaller CO2And Water Footprints. Global Opportunity Explorer. https://goexplorer.org/quito-planning-for-smaller-co2-and-water-footprints/ (Accessed August 20, 2021).

Golberg, S., 2021: Lithium Mining: Dirty Investment or Sustainable Business?Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/investing/lithium-mining-dirty-investment-or-sustainable-business/ (Accessed June 8, 2021).

Goldman-Schuyler, K., S. Skjei, J. Sanzgiri, and V. Koskela, 2017: ‘Moments of Waking Up: A Doorway to Mindfulness and Presence. J. Manag. Inq. , 26(1) , 86–100, doi:10.1177/1056492616665171.

Göpel, M., V. Hermelingmeier, K. Kehl, D. Vallentin, and T. Wehnert, 2016: System Innovation Lab. Wuppertal Institut and the Centre for Social Investment, Berlin, Germany, pp. 1–41. https://epub.wupperinst.org/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/6538/file/6538_System_Innovation_Lab.pdf (Accessed June 20, 2021).

Gordon, D.J., 2015: An uneasy equilibrium: The coordination of climate governance in federated systems. Glob. Environ. Polit. , 15(2) , 121–141, doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00301.

Gorissen, L., F. Spira, E. Meynaerts, P. Valkering, and N. Frantzeskaki, 2018: Moving towards systemic change? Investigating acceleration dynamics of urban sustainability transitions in the Belgian City of Genk. J. Clean. Prod. , 173, 171–185, doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.052.

Gossart, C., 2015: ICT Innovations for Sustainability. In: ICT Innovations for Sustainability[Hilty, L. and B. Aebischer, (eds.)]. Springer Link, Zurich, Switzerland, pp. 435–448.

Grady-Benson, J. and B. Sarathy, 2016: Fossil fuel divestment in US higher education: student-led organising for climate justice. Local Environ. , 21(6) , 661–681, doi:10.1080/13549839.2015.1009825.

Grafakos, S., K. Trigg, M. Landauer, L. Chelleri, and S. Dhakal, 2019: Analytical framework to evaluate the level of integration of climate adaptation and mitigation in cities. Clim. Change, 154(1–2) , 87–106, doi:10.1007/s10584-019-02394-w.

Gramkow, C. and A. Anger-Kraavi, 2018: Could fiscal policies induce green innovation in developing countries? The case of Brazilian manufacturing sectors. Clim. Policy, 18(2) , 246–257, doi:10.1080/14693062.2016.1277683.

Gray, L., A. Boyle, E. Francks, and V. Yu, 2019: The power of small-scale solar: gender, energy poverty, and entrepreneurship in Tanzania. Dev. Pract. , 29 (1), 26–39, doi:10.1080/09614524.2018.1526257.

Green, F. and A. Gambhir, 2020: Transitional assistance policies for just, equitable and smooth low-carbon transitions: who, what and how?Clim. Policy, 20(8) , 902–921, doi:10.1080/14693062.2019.1657379.

Greenberg, D.A. and J.M. Rogerson, 2014: The greening of industrial property developments in South Africa. Urbani Izziv, 25 (special issue), 122–133, doi:10.5379/urbani-izziv-en-2014-25-supplement-009.

Griggs, D. and Stafford-Smith, 2013: Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature, 495 (21 March), 305–307, doi:10.1038/495305a.

Grinde, B., R.B. Nes, I.F. MacDonald, and D.S. Wilson, 2018: Quality of Life in Intentional Communities. Soc. Indic. Res. , 137, 625–640, doi:10.1007/s11205-017-1615-3.

Grubler, A. et al., 2018: A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 1.5°C target and sustainable development goals without negative emission technologies. Nat. Energy, 3, 515–527, doi:10.1038/s41560-018-0172-6.

Gu, Y., Y. Wu, J. Liu, M. Xu, and T. Zuo, 2020: Ecological civilization and government administrative system reform in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. , 155, 104654, doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104654.

Guillaume, T., M. Kotowska, and D. Hertel, 2018: Carbon costs and benefits of Indonesian rainforest conversion to plantations. Nat Commun, 9, 2388, doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04755-y.

Gupta, J., A. Rempel, and H. Verrest, 2020: Access and allocation: the role of large shareholders and investors in leaving fossil fuels underground. Int. Environ. Agreements Polit. Law Econ. , 20(2) , 303–322, doi:10.1007/s10784-020-09478-4.

Guenther, E., T. Guenther, F. Schiemann, and G. Weber, 2016: Stakeholder Relevance for Reporting: Explanatory Factors of Carbon Disclosure. Bus. Soc. , 5 (3), 361–397, doi:10.1177/0007650315575119.

Haas, T., 2021: From Green Energy to the Green Car State? The Political Economy of Ecological Modernisation in Germany. New Polit. Econ. , 26(4) , 660–673, doi:10.1080/13563467.2020.1816949.

Haddeland, I. et al., 2014: Global water resources affected by human interventions and climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. , 111(9) , 3251–3256, doi:10.1073/pnas.1222475110.

Hakansson, I., 2018: The socio-spatial politics of urban sustainability transitions: Grassroots initiatives in gentrifying Peckham. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 29, 34–46, doi:10.1016/j.eist.2017.10.003.

Halbe, J., C. Pahl-Wostl, M.A. Lange, and C. Velonis, 2015: Governance of transitions towards sustainable development – the water-energy-food nexus in Cyprus. Water Int. , 40(5–6) , doi:10.1080/02508060.2015.1070328.

Hall, J.W. et al., 2014: Coping with the curse of freshwater variability: Institutions, infrastructure, and information for adaptation. Science, 346(6208) , 429–430, doi:10.1126/science.1257890.

Hallegatte, S., 2009: Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change. Glob. Environ. Change, 19(2) , 240–247, doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.12.003.

Hallinger, P., R. Wang, C. Chatpinyakoop, V.T. Nguyen, and U.P. Nguyen, 2020: A bibliometric review of research on simulations and serious games used in educating for sustainability, 1997–2019. J. Clean. Prod. , 256, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120358.

Hamiche, A.M., A.B. Stambouli, and S. Flazi, 2016: A review of the water-energy nexus. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 65, 319–331, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.020.

Hamman, P., 2019: Local governance of energy transition: sustainability, transactions and social ties. A case study in Northeast France. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. , 26(1) , 1–10, doi:10.1080/13504509.2018.1471012.

Hanasaki, N. et al., 2013: A global water scarcity assessment under Shared Socio-economic Pathways – Part 2: Water availability and scarcity. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. , 17(7) , 2393–2413, doi:10.5194/hess-17-2393-2013.

Hansen, T. and L. Coenen, 2015: The geography of sustainability transitions: Review, synthesis and reflections on an emergent research field. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 17, 92–109, doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2014.11.001.

Hansen, U.E. and I. Nygaard, 2014: Sustainable energy transitions in emerging economies: The formation of a palm oil biomass waste-to-energy niche in Malaysia 1990–2011. Energy Policy, 66, 666–676, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.028.

Hanson, K.T. and T.M.S. Korbla P. Puplampu, 2018: From Millennium Development Goals to Sustainable Development Goals Rethinking African Development . Routledge, Oxford, UK, 180 pp.

Harvey, C.A. et al., 2014: Climate-Smart Landscapes: Opportunities and Challenges for Integrating Adaptation and Mitigation in Tropical Agriculture. Conserv. Lett. , 7(2) , 14, doi:10.1111/conl.12066.

Hasegawa, T. et al., 2018: Risk of increased food insecurity under stringent global climate change mitigation policy. Nat. Clim. Change, 8(8) , 699–703, doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0230-x.

Hasegawa, T., P. Havlík, S. Frank, A. Palazzo, and H. Valin, 2019: Tackling food consumption inequality to fight hunger without pressuring the environment. Nat. Sustain. , 2(12) , 826–833, doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0439-3.

Hayashi, A., F. Sano, Y. Nakagami, and K. Akimoto, 2018: Changes in terrestrial water stress and contributions of major factors under temperature rise constraint scenarios. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change, 23(8) , 1179–1205, doi:10.1007/s11027-018-9780-5.

Haywood, L.K., N. Funke, M. Audouin, C. Musvoto, and A. Nahman, 2019: The Sustainable Development Goals in South Africa: Investigating the need for multi-stakeholder partnerships. Dev. South. Afr. , 36(5) , 555–569, doi:10.1080/0376835X.2018.1461611.

Heal, G., 2020: Economic aspects of the energy transitions, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, NY, USA, 22 pp. https://www.nber.org/papers/w27766.

Healy, N., J.C. Stephens, and S.A. Malin, 2019: Embodied energy injustices: Unveiling and politicizing the transboundary harms of fossil fuel extractivism and fossil fuel supply chains. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 48, 219–234, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2018.09.016.

Hedlund-de Witt, A., J. de Boer, and J.J. Boersema, 2014: Exploring inner and outer worlds: A quantitative study of worldviews, environmental attitudes, and sustainable lifestyles. J. Environ. Psychol. , 37, 40–54, doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.005.

Heikkinen, M., T. Ylä-Anttila, and S. Juhola, 2019: Incremental, reformistic or transformational: what kind of change do C40 cities advocate to deal with climate change?J. Environ. Policy & Plan. , 21(1) , 90–103, doi:10.1080/1523908X.2018.1473151.

Hess, D.J., 2014: Sustainability transitions: A political coalition perspective. Res. Policy, 43(2) , 278–283, doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.008.

Hinkel, J., 2011: Indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity: towards a clarification of the science-policy interface. Glob. Environ. Change, 21(1) , 198–208, doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.08.002.

Hodson, G., C. MacInnis, and M. Busseri, 2017: Bowing and kicking: Rediscovering the fundamental link between generalized authoritarianism and generalized prejudice. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 104–243, doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.08.018.

Hoek, A., M. Shirin, Rob Raven, Eli Court, and Emily Byrne, 2021: Towards environmentally sustainable food systems: decision-making factors in sustainable food production and consumption. Sci. Direct , 610–626.

Hoffmann, I., 2010: Climate Change in Context: Implications for Livestock Production and Diversity. In: Sustainable improvement of animal production and health[Odongo, N.E., M. Garcia, and G.J. Viljoen, (eds.)]. FAO-IAEA, Rome, Italy, pp. 33–44.

Hoffmann, M.J., 2011: Climate Governance at the Crossroads: Experimenting with a Global Response after Kyoto. Oxford University Press, New York, USA, 240 pp.

Höhne, N. et al., 2017: The Paris Agreement: resolving the inconsistency between global goals and national contributions. Clim. Policy, 17(1) , 16–32, doi:10.1080/14693062.2016.1218320.

Holling, C.S., 2001: Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological and social systems. Ecosystems, 4(5) , 390–405, doi.org/10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5.

Holscher, K., N. Frantzeskaki, T. McPhearson, and D. Loorbach, 2019: Tales of transforming cities: Transformative climate governance capacities in New York City, US and Rotterdam, Netherlands. J. Environ. Manage. , 231(1) , 843–857, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.10.043.

Hölscher, K., J.M. Wittmayer, and D. Loorbach, 2018: Transition versus transformation: What’s the difference?Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 27, 1–3, doi:10.1016/j.eist.2017.10.007.

Hopkins, R., 2010: What can communities do? In: ThePost Carbon Reader: Managing the 21st Century’s Sustainability Crisis, Richard Heinberg and Daniel Lerch Healdsburg, California, USA, pp. 442–454.

Horcea-Milcu, A.I., B. Martín-López, D.P.M. Lam, and D.J. Lang, 2020: Research pathways to foster transformation: Linking sustainability science and social-ecological systems research. Ecol. Soc. , 25(1) , 13, doi:10.5751/ES-11332-250113.

Howells, M. et al., 2013: Integrated analysis of climate change, land-use, energy and water strategies. Nat. Clim. Change, 3, 621–626, doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1789.

Hoyer, C., 2020: Accelerating Climate Action Beyond Company Gates. In: Handbook of Climate Change Management: Research, Leadership, Transformation[Leal Filho, W., J. Luetz, and D. Ayal, (eds.)]. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 1–22.

Hulme, M., 2009: Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 436 pp.

Hume, T. and J. Barry, 2015: Environmental Education and Education for Sustainable Development. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier, Sligo, pp. 733–739.

Hutchison, S. and J. Walton, 2015: An inquiry into the significance of first-person research for the creation of knowledge to reduce suffering and enhance human flourishing. In: Action Learning and Action Research Association (ALARA) World Congress. University of Cumbria, Pretoria, p.1–9.

Hüther, G., 2018: Co-creativity and Community. 1st ed. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 184 pp.

Huxham, M., M. Anwar, and D. Nelson, 2019: Understanding the impact of a low carbon transition on South Africa. Climate Policy Initiative, South Africa, 114 pp.

Iacopini, I., G. Petri, A. Barrat, and V. Latora, 2019: Simplicial models of social contagion. Nat. Commun. , 10(1) , 2485, doi:10.1038/s41467-019-10431-6.

ICLEI, 2019: Local Governments for Sustainability. https://www.iclei.org/ (Accessed September 20, 2021).

IEA, 2017: World Energy Outlook 2017. IEA, Paris, France, 782 pp. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2017 (Accessed July 13, 2021).

IEA, 2019: World Energy Outlook 2020. IEA, Paris, France, 810 pp. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2019 (Accessed July 13, 2021).

IEA, 2020: World Energy Outlook 2020, Executive Summary. IEA, Paris, France, 12 pp. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/80d64d90-dc17-4a52-b41f-b14c9be1b995/WEO2020_ES.PDF.

IEAGHG, 2020: CCS and the Sustainable Development Goals. Technical Reports, no.14. https://ieaghg.org/ (Accessed November 10, 2021).

IIASA, 2018: Transformations to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Report prepared by The World in 2050 initiative, Laxenburg, Austria, 157 pp.

IIASA, 2019: The Digital Revolution and Sustainable Development: Opportunities and Challenges. Report prepared by the World in 2050 initiative, Laxenburg, Austria, 100 pp.

IIASA, 2020: Innovations for Sustainability: Pathways to an Efficient and Sufficient Post-pandemic Future. IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria, 118 pp.http://ww w.twi2050.org/.

IPBES, 2019: Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES, Bonn, Germany,1148 pp.

IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri, and L.A. Meyers, (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.

IPCC, 2018: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change. [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, 630 pp.

IPCC, 2019: Climate Change and Land: An IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems[P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, P. Zhai, R. Slade, S. Connors, R. van Diemen, M. Ferrat, E. Haughey, S. Luz, S. Neogi, M. Pathak, J. Petzold, J. Portugal Pereira, P. Vyas, E. Huntley, K. Kissick, M. Belkacemi, J. Malley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, 874 pp.

Ives, C.D., R. Freeth, and J. Fischer, 2019: Inside-out sustainability: The neglect of inner worlds. Ambio, (49) , 208–2017, doi:10.1007/s13280-019-01187-w.

Iyer, G. et al., 2018: Implications of sustainable development considerations for comparability across nationally determined contributions. Nat. Clim. Change, 8, 124–129, doi:10.1038/s41558-017-0039-z.

Jaccard, I.S., P.P. Pichler, J. Többen, and H. Weisz, 2021: The energy and carbon inequality corridor for a 1.5 C compatible and just Europe. Environ. Res. Lett. , 16(6) , 064082, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abfb2f.

Jacobson, M.Z. et al., 2018: 100% clean and renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for 53 towns and cities in North America. Sustain. Cities Soc. , 42, 22–37, doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.06.031.

Jakob, M. et al., 2014: Feasible mitigation actions in developing countries. Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 961–698, doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2370.

Jaumotte, F., W. Liu, and W. McKibbin, 2021: Mitigating Climate Change: Growth-Friendly Policies to Achieve Net Zero Emissions by 2050. The Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis (CAMA), Australia, 46 pp. https://cama.crawford.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/publication/cama_crawford_anu_edu_au/2021-09/75_2021_jaumotte_liu_mckibbin00.pdf (Accessed July 17, 2021).

Jones, C.A. and Levy, D.L., 2009: Business strategies and climate change. Changing climates in North American politics. In: Business strategies and climate change. Changing climates in North American politics[Pulver, S., B.G. Rabe, and P.J. Stoett, (eds.)]. University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA, pp. 219–240.

Jones, G.A. and K.J. Warner, 2016: The 21st century population-energy-climate nexus. Energy Policy, 93, 206–212, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2016.02.044.

Jones, L. et al., 2013: The political economy of local adaptation planning: Exploring barriers to flexible and forward-looking decision making in three districtis in Ethiopia, Uganda and Mozambique. 1st ed. Overseas Development Institute, Africa Climate Change Resilience Alliance, Accra, Ghana, 29 pp.

Jupesta, J., T. Wakiyama, and A. Abdullah, 2016: Introduction. In: Low Carbon Urban Infrastructure Investment in Asian Cities. Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK, pp. 1–6.

Jupesta, J. et al., 2020: Establishing Multi-Partnerships Environmental Governance in Indonesia: Case of Desa Makmur Perduli Api (Fire Free Village) Program. In: Food security and land use change under conditions of climatic variability: A multidimensional perspective[Squire, V. and M.K. Gaur, (eds.)]. Springer Nature Publisher, pp. 181–196.

Kainuma, M., P.R. Shukla, and K. Jiang, 2012: Framing and modeling of a low carbon society: An overview. Energy Econ. , 34, 316–324, doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2012.07.015.

Kallis, G., 2017: Socialism Without Growth. Capital. Nat. Social. , 30(2) , 189–206, doi:10.1080/10455752.2017.1386695.

Kalvelage, T. et al., 2013: Nitrogen cycling driven by organic matter export in the South Pacific oxygen minimum zone. Nat. Geosci. , 6(3) , 228–234, doi:10.1038/ngeo1739.

Kanie, N. and F. Biermann, 2017: Governing through Goals: Sustainable Development Goals as Governance Innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 352 pp.

Kates, R., W. Travis, and T. Wilbanks, 2012: Transformational adaptation when incremental adaptations to climate change are insufficient. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. , 109, 7156–7161, doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1115521109.

Keck, M.E. and K. Sikkink, 1999: Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics. Int. Soc. Sci. J. , 51(159) , 89–101, doi:10.1111/1468-2451.00179.

Kedia, S., 2016: Approaches to low carbon development in China and India. Adv. Clim. Chang. Res. , 4, 213–221, doi:10.1016/j.accre.2016.11.001.

Kefford, B.M., B. Ballinger, D.R. Schmeda-Lopez, C. Greig, and S. Smart, 2018: The early retirement challenge for fossil fuel power plants in deep decarbonisation scenarios. Energy Policy, 119, 294–306, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.018.

Kemp, R. and B. Never, 2017: Green transition, industrial policy, and economic development. Oxford Rev. Econ. Policy, 33(1) , 66–84, doi:10.1093/oxrep/grw037.

Keohane, R.O. and D.G. Victor, 2016: Cooperation and discord in global climate policy. Nat. Clim. Change, 6(6) , doi:10.1038/nclimate2937.

Keramidas, K. et al., 2018: Global Energy and Climate Outlook 2018: Sectoral mitigation options towards a low-emissions economy – Global context to the EU strategy for long-term greenhouse gas emissions reduction. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 200 pp.

Kern, F., 2011: Ideas, institutions, and interests: Explaining policy divergence in fostering ‘system innovations’ towards sustainability. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy, 29(6) , 1116–1134, doi:10.1068/c1142.

Kern, F. and A. Smith, 2008: Restructuring energy systems for sustainability? Energy transition policy in the Netherlands. Energy Policy, 36(11) , doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.06.018.

Kern, F. and K.S. Rogge, 2016: The pace of governed energy transitions: Agency, international dynamics and the global Paris Agreement accelerating decarbonisation processes?Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 22, 13–17, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2016.08.016.

Kikstra, J.S. et al., 2021: Climate mitigation scenarios with persistent COVID-19-related energy demand changes. Nat. Energy, 6, 1–10, doi:10.1038/s41560-021-00904-8.

Kim, G., and P. Coseo, 2019: Urban Park Systems to Support Sustainability: The Role of Urban Park Systems in Hot Arid Urban Climates. In: Growth and Ecosystem Services of Urban Trees[Rotzer, T., (ed.)]. MDPI, Basel, Switzerland, pp. 142–163.

Kim, H. and S. Grafakos, 2019: Which are the factors influencing the integration of mitigation and adaptation in climate change plans in Latin American cities?Environ. Res. Lett. , 14(105008) , doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab2f4c.

Kjellén, M., 2006: From Public Pipes to Private Hands: Water Access and Distribution in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. https://finna.fi/Record/fikka.2007220 (Accessed February 22, 2021).

Koasidis, K. et al., 2020: Many Miles to Paris: A Sectoral Innovation System Analysis of the Transport Sector in Norway and Canada in Light of the Paris Agreement. Sustainability, 12(14) , 5832, doi:10.3390/su12145832.

Koch, M., 2020: The state in the transformation to a sustainable postgrowth economy. Env. Polit. , 29(1) , 115–133, doi:10.1080/09644016.2019.1684738.

Koehn, P.H., 2008: Underneath Kyoto: Emerging subnational government initiatives and incipient issue-bundling opportunities in China and the United States. Glob. Environ. Polit. , 8(1) , 53–77, doi:10.1162/glep.2008.8.1.53.

Köhler, J. et al., 2019: An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 31, 1–32, doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.01.004.

Kojola, E., 2019: Indigeneity, gender and class in decision-making about risks from resource extraction. Environ. Sociol. , 5(2) , 130–148, doi:10.1080/23251042.2018.1426090.

Kolstad, C., K. Urama, J. Broome, A. Bruvoll, M. Cariño Olvera, D. Fullerton, C. Gollier, W.M. Hanemann, R. Hassan, F. Jotzo, M.R. Khan, L. Meyer, and L. Mundaca, 2014: Social, Economic, and Ethical Concepts and Methods. In: Cimate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, New York, NY, USA, pp. 207–282.

Kolk, A., D. Levy, and J. Pinkse, 2008: Corporate responses in an emerging climate regime: the institutionalization and commensuration of carbon disclosure. Eur. Account. Rev. , 17(4) , 719–745. doi:10.1080/09638180802489121.

Kongsager, R., B. Locatelli, and F. Chazarin, 2016: Addressing Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Together: A Global Assessment of Agriculture and Forestry Projects. Environ. Manage. , 57(2) , 271–282, doi:10.1007/s00267-015-0605-y.

Kothari, C., 2019: Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. 4th ed. New Age International, New Delhi, India, 240 pp.

Kousksou, T. et al., 2015: Renewable energy potential and national policy directions for sustainable development in Morocco. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 47, 46–57, doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.056.

Koutroulis, A.G. et al., 2019: Global water availability under high-end climate change: A vulnerability based assessment. Glob. Planet. Change, 175, 52–63, doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2019.01.013.

Krey, V. et al., 2019: Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models. Elsevier, 172, 1254–1267, doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.131.

Krishnan, B., S. Arumugam, and K. Maddulety, 2020: Critical success factors for the digitalization of smart cities. Int. J. Technol. Manag. Sustain. Dev. , 19, 69–86.

Kruger, W., S. Stritzke, and P.A. Trotter, 2019: De-risking solar auctions in sub-Saharan Africa – A comparison of site selection strategies in South Africa and Zambia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 104, 429–438, doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.01.041.

Kummu, M., D. Gerten, J. Heinke, M. Konzmann, and O. Varis, 2014: Climate-driven interannual variability of water scarcity in food production potential: A global analysis. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. , 18, 447–461, doi:10.5194/hess-18-447-2014.

Kuramochi, T. et al., 2018: Ten key short-term sectoral benchmarks to limit warming to 1.5°C. Clim. Policy, 18(3) , 287–305, doi:10.1080/14693062.2017.1397495.

Kurian, M., 2017: The water-energy-food nexus: Trade-offs, thresholds and transdisciplinary approaches to sustainable development. Environ. Sci. Policy, 68, 97–106, doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2016.11.006.

Laeremans, M. et al., 2018: Short-term effects of physical activity, air pollution and their interaction on the cardiovascular and respiratory system. Environ. Int. , 117, 82–90, doi:10.1016/j.envint.2018.04.040.

Lam, D. et al., 2020: Scaling the impact of sustainability initiatives: a typology of amplification processes. Urban Transform. , 2(3) , doi:10.1186/s42854-020-00007-9.

Lamb, S., J. Jennings, and P. Calain, 2017: The evolving role of CSR in international development: Evidence from Canadian extractive companies’ involvement in community health initiatives in low-income countries. Extr. Ind. Soc. , 4(3) , 614–621, doi:10.1016/j.exis.2017.05.011.

Landauer, M., S. Juhola, and M. Söderholm, 2015: Inter-relationships between adaptation and mitigation: a systematic literature review. Clim. Change, 131(4) , 505–517, doi:10.1007/s10584-015-1395-1.

Landauer, M., S. Juhola, and J. Klein, 2019: The role of scale in integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation in cities. Cities. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. , 5, 741–765. doi: 10.1080/09640568.2018.1430022.

Lange, E.A., 2018: Transforming Transformative Education Through Ontologies of Relationality. J. Transform. Educ. , 16(4) , 280–301, doi:10.1177/1541344618786452.

Larsen, M., S. Petrović, A.M. Radoszynski, R. Mckenna, and O. Balyk, 2020: Climate change impacts on trends and extremes in future heating and cooling demands over Europe. Energy Build. , 226, 110397, doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110397.

Larsen, M.A.D. and M. Drews, 2019: Water use in electricity generation for water-energy nexus analyses: The European case. Sci. Total Environ. , 651, 2044–2058, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.045.

Larsen, M.A.D. et al., 2019: Challenges of data availability: Analysing the water-energy nexus in electricity generation. Energy Strateg. Rev. , 26, 100426, doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.100426.

Latouche, S., 2018: The Path to Degrowth for a Sustainable Society. In: Actor X. Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science[Lehmann, H., (ed.)]. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 277–284.

Lazarus, M. and H. van Asselt, 2018: Fossil fuel supply and climate policy: exploring the road less taken. Clim. Change, 150(1) , 1–13, doi:10.1007/s10584-018-2266-3.

Le Bec, C., 2020: Pandemic puts strain 30 major African oil and gas projects. The Africa Report, https://www.theafricareport.com/27566/coronavirus-pandemic-puts-strain-30-major-african-oil-and-gas-projects/ (Accessed September 22, 2021).

Leclère, D. et al., 2020: Bending the curve of terrestrial biodiversity needs an integrated strategy. Nature, 585(7826) , 551–556, doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2705-y.

Lee, H., E.Y. Jung, and J.D. Lee, 2019: Public–private co-evolution and niche development by technology transfer: A case study of state-led electricity system transition in South Korea. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 49, 103–113, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.001.

Lee, S.-Y., E. Zusman, and S. Lee, 2017: Tracing Sustainability Transitions in Seoul Governance: Enabling and Scaling Grassroots Innovations. Urban Transitions Conference, [Seto, K., D. Robinson, H. and Virji, Z. Kovacs, J. Zhai, N. Sami, C. Pettit, and K. Sridhar, (eds.)]. Vol. 198 of Procedia Engineering, pp. 293–304. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.162.

Lemos, M. et al., 2013: Building Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change in Less Developed Countries. In: Climate Science for Serving Society[Asrar, G. and J. Hurrell, (eds.)]. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 437–457.

Leombruni, L. V, 2015: How you talk about climate change matters: A communication network perspective on epistemic skepticism and belief strength. Glob. Environ. Change, 35, 148–161, doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.08.006.

Lessem, R., 2018: Community Activation for Integral Development . 1st ed. Routledge, 156 pp.

Leventon, J., J.C. Dyer, and J.D. Van Alstine, 2015: The private sector in climate governance: Opportunities for climate compatible development through multilevel industry-government engagement. J. Clean. Prod. , 102, 316–323, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.125.

Leventon, J., D.J. Abson, and D.J. Lang, 2021: Leverage points for sustainability transformations: nine guiding questions for sustainability science and practice. Sustain. Sci. , 16(3) , 721–726, doi:10.1007/s11625-021-00961-8.

Lewis, S., 2016: Positive Psychology and Change: How Leadership, Collaboration and Appreciative Inquiry Drive Transformational Results, Wiley-Blackwell, 272 pp.

Li, B. and R. Yao, 2012: Building energy efficiency for sustainable development in China: challenges and opportunities. Build. Res. & Inf. , 40(4) , 417–431, doi:10.1080/09613218.2012.682419.

Lipper, L. and D. Zilberman, 2018: A Short History of the Evolution of the Climate Smart Agriculture Approach and Its Links to Climate Change and Sustainable Agriculture Debates. In: Climate Smart Agriculture: Building Resilience to Climate Change[Lipper, L., N. McCarthy, D. Zilberman, S. Asfaw, and G. Branca, (eds.)]. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 13–30.

Lipper, L. et al., 2014: Climate-smart agriculture for food security. Nat. Clim. Change, 4(12) , 1068–1072, doi:10.1038/nclimate2437.

Liu, J. et al., 2018: Nexus approaches to global sustainable development.Nat. Sustain. , 1, 466–476, doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0135-8.

Liu, J. et al., 2019: On knowledge generation and use for sustainability.Nat. Sustain. , 2(2) , 80–82, doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0229-y.

Lo, K. and V. Castán Broto, 2019: Co-benefits, contradictions, and multi-level governance of low-carbon experimentation: Leveraging solar energy for sustainable development in China. Glob. Environ. Change, 59, 18, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101993.

Locatelli, B., C. Pavageau, E. Pramova, and M. Di Gregorio, 2015: Integrating climate change mitigation and adaptation in agriculture and forestry: Opportunities and trade-offs. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change, 6(6) , 585–598, doi:10.1002/wcc.357.

Locatelli, B., G. Fedele, V. Fayolle, and A. Baglee, 2016: Synergies between adaptation and mitigation in climate change finance. Clim. Change Strateg. Manag, 8, 112–128, doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-07-2014-0088.

Lockhart, H., 2011: Spirituality & Nature in the Transformation to a More Sustainable World: Perspectives of South African Change Agents. Stellenbosch University, South Africa, 502 pp. https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/18075.

Lohrmann, A., J. Farfan, U. Caldera, C. Lohrmann, and C. Breyer, 2019: Global scenarios for significant water use reduction in thermal power plants based on cooling water demand estimation using satellite imagery. Nat. Energy, 4(12) , 1040–1048, doi:10.1038/s41560-019-0501-4.

Loorbach, D., 2010: Transition management for sustainable development: A prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework. Governance, 23(1) , 161–183, doi:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x.

Loorbach, D. and J. Rotmans, 2010: The practice of transition management: Examples and lessons from four distinct cases. Futures, 42(3) , 237–246, doi:10.1016/j.futures.2009.11.009.

Loorbach, D., H. Shiroyama, J.M. Wittmayer, J. Fujino, and S. Mizuguchi, 2016: Governance of Urban Sustainability Transitions – European and Asian Experiences. 202 pp. Springer Nature.

Loorbach, D., N. Frantzeskaki, and F. Avelino, 2017: Sustainability Transitions Research: Transforming Science and Practice for Societal Change. In: Annual Review Of Environment And Resources, Vol 42[Gadgil, A and T. Tomich (eds.)]. Dutch Research, Institute for Transitions, Erasmus University, Rotterdam. pp. 599–626.

Lucas, P., K. Ludwig, M. Kok, and S. Kruitwagen, 2016: Sustainable Development Goals in the Netherlands: Building blocks for environmental policy for 2030. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Hague, The Netherlands, 56 pp.

Luken, T., 2019: Easy does it: an innovative view on developing career identity and self-direction. Career Dev. Int. , 25(2) , 120–145, doi:10.1108/CDI-05-2019-0110.

Lwasa, S. et al., 2015: A meta-analysis of urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry in mediating climate change. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 13, 68–73, doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.02.003.

Madden, N.J., 2014: Green means stop: Veto players and their impact on climate-change policy outputs. Env. Polit. , 23(4) , doi:10.1080/09644016.2014.884301.

Magneschi, G., T. Zhang, and R. Munson, 2017: The Impact of CO2Capture on Water Requirements of Power Plants. Energy Procedia, 114, 6337–6347, doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1770.

Månberger, A. and B. Stenqvist, 2018: Global metal flows in the renewable energy transition: Exploring the effects of substitutes, technological mix and development. Energy Policy, 119, 226–241, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.056.

Mangnus, A.C. et al., 2019: New pathways for governing food system transformations: A pluralistic practice-based futures approach using visioning, back-casting, and serious gaming. Ecol. Soc. , 24(4) , 2, doi:10.5751/ES-11014-240402.

Marchese, D. et al., 2018: Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications. Sci. Total Environ. , 613–614, 1275–1283, doi:10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2017.09.086.

Marcotullio, P. et al., 2018: Energy transformation in cities. In: Climate Change and Cities: Second Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network. [Rosenzweig, C., W. Solecki, P. Romero-Lankao, S. Mehrotra, S. Dhakal, and A. Ibrahim, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA, pp. 443–490.

Markandya, A. et al., 2018: Health co-benefits from air pollution and mitigation costs of the Paris Agreement: a modelling study. Lancet Planet. Heal. , 2(3) , 126–133, doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30029-9.

Markard, J., F.W. Geels, and R. Raven, 2020: Challenges in the acceleration of sustainability transitions. 15 (8), 81001, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab9468.

Martinez-Juarez, P., A. Chiabai, T. Taylor, and S. Quiroga Gómez, 2015: The impact of ecosystems on human health and well-being: A critical review. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour. , 10, 63–69, doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2015.06.008.

Mattioli, G., C. Roberts, J.K. Steinberger, and A. Brown, 2020: The political economy of car dependence: A systems of provision approach. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 66, 101486, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2020.101486.

McCauley, S.M. and J.C. Stephens, 2012: Green energy clusters and socio-technical transitions: Analysis of a sustainable energy cluster for regional economic development in Central Massachusetts, USA. Sustain. Sci. , 7(2) , 213–225, doi:10.1007/s11625-012-0164-6.

McCollum, D.L. et al., 2018: Energy investment needs for fulfilling the Paris Agreement and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Energy, 3(7) , 589–599, doi:10.1038/s41560-018-0179-z.

McElwee, P. et al., 2020: The impact of interventions in the global land and agri-food sectors on Nature’s Contributions to People and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Glob. Chang. Biol. , 26(9) , 4691–4721, doi:10.1111/gcb.15219.

McGlade, C. and P. Ekins, 2015: The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2°C. Nature, 517, 187–190, doi:10.1038/nature14016.

McKenzie, S. and A. Abdulkadri, 2018: Mechanisms to accelerate the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in the Caribbean. ECLAC, Santiago, Chile, 32 pp. https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/43362/1/S1701302_en.pdf (Accessed July 1, 2021).

Mckibben, B., 2012: Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math. Rolling Stone. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-188550/ (Accessed August 15, 2021).

McNeely, J.A. and M. Munasinghe, 2021: Early lessons from COVID-19: An overview. Ambio, 50(4) , 764–766, doi:10.1007/s13280-021-01541-x.

Meadowcroft, J., 2011: Engaging with the politics of sustainability transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 1(1) , 70–75, doi:10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.003.

Meadows, D., 2008: Thinking in Systems. [Wright, D., (ed.)]. Chelsea Green Publishing, USA, 240 pp.

Meckling, J. and J. Nahm, 2018: The power of process: State capacity and climate policy. Governance, 31(4) , 741–757, doi:10.1111/gove.12338.

Meckling, J., N. Kelsey, E. Biber, and J. Zysman, 2015: Winning coalitions for climate policy. Science, doi:10.1126/science.aab1336.

Mendizabal, M., O. Heidrich, E. Feliu, G. García-Blanco, and A. Mendizabal, 2018: Stimulating urban transition and transformation to achieve sustainable and resilient cities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 94, 410–418, doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.06.003.

Mensah, C.N., L. Dauda, K.B. Boamah, and M. Salman, 2021: One district one factory policy of Ghana, a transition to a low-carbon habitable economy?Environ. Dev. Sustain. , 23, 703–721, doi:10.1007/s10668-020-00604-5.

Meyer, M., M. Hirschnitz-Garbers, and M. Distelkamp, 2018: Contemporary resource policy and decoupling trends-lessons learnt from integrated model-based assessments. Sustainability, 10(6) , doi:10.3390/su10061858.

Michaelowa, K. and A. Michaelowa, 2017: Transnational Climate Governance Initiatives: Designed for Effective Climate Change Mitigation?Int. Interact. , 43(1) , 129–155, doi:10.1080/03050629.2017.1256110.

Mikunda, T. et al., 2021: Carbon capture and storage and the sustainable development goals. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control, 108, 103318, doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103318.

Miller, T. et al., 2014: The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research agenda. Sustain. Sci. , 9(2) , 239–246, doi.org/10.1007/s11625-013-0224-6.

Millward-Hopkins, J., J.K. Steinberger, N.D. Rao, and Y. Oswald, 2020: Providing decent living with minimum energy: A global scenario. IIASA, Laxemburg, 10 pp.

Ministry of Environment of Jordan, 2016: National Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Consumption and Production in Jordan (2016–2025). Ministry of Environment of Jordan, Jordan, 86 pp. https://www.greengrowthknowledge.org/sites/default/files/downloads/resource/National Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Consumption and Production in Jordan %282016-2025%29.pdf (Accessed June 17, 2021)

Moe, E., 2014: Vested Interests, Energy Policy and Renewables in Japan, China, Norway and Denmark. In: The Political Economy of Renewable Energy and Energy Security, [Moe, E. and P. Midford (eds.)], Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK, pp. 276–317.

Monforti-Ferrario, F., C. Astorga-Llorens, and E. Pisoni, 2019: Policy Pressures on Air – Anticipating Unforeseen Effects of EU Policies on Air Quality. European Commission, Ispra, Italy, 50 pp. https://op.europa.eu/es/publication-detail/-/publication/de7643dd-0f34-11ea-8c1f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF (Accessed September 5, 2021)

Montuori, A. and G. Donnelly, 2018: Transformative leadership. In: Handbook of Personal and Organizational Transformation[Neal, J., (ed.)]. Springer International Publishing, 319–350 pp.

Munasinghe, M., 2007: The importance of social capital: Comparing the impacts of the 2004 Asian Tsunami on Sri Lanka, and Hurricane Katrina 2005 on New Orleans. Ecol. Econ. , 64(1) , 9–11, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.05.003.

Munger, F. and M. Riemer, 2012: A process model for research collaborations in environmental and sustainability fields. Umweltpsychologie, 1, 112–142.

Naber, R., R. Raven, M. Kouw, and T. Dassen, 2017: Scaling up sustainable energy innovations. Energy Policy, 110, 342–354, doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.07.056.

Nachmany, M. and J. Setzer, 2018: Global trends in climate change legislation and litigation: 2018 snapshot. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London, UK, 8 pp.

Nachmany, M. et al., 2015: The 2015 Global Climate Legislation Study: a review of climate change legislation in 99 countries: summary for policy-makers. Globe International, London, 1–45 pp. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/65347/ (Accessed July 11, 2021).

Næss, J.S., O. Cavalett, and F. Cherubini, 2021: The land–energy–water nexus of global bioenergy potentials from abandoned cropland. Nat. Sustain. , 4(6) , 525–536, doi:10.1038/s41893-020-00680-5.

Nair, S., B. George, H.M. Malano, M. Arora, and B. Nawarathna, 2014: Water-energy-greenhouse gas nexus of urban water systems: Review of concepts, state-of-art and methods. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. , 89, 1–10, doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.05.007.

Nakano, K., 2017: Screening of climatic impacts on a country’s international supply chains: Japan as a case study. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change, 22(4) , 651–667, doi:10.1007/s11027-015-9692-6.

Narvaez Rojas, C., G.A. Alomia Peñafiel, D.F. Loaiza Buitrago, and C.A. Tavera Romero, 2021: Society 5.0: A Japanese Concept for a Superintelligent Society. Sustainability, 13(12) , 6566, doi:10.3390/su13126567.

Nasiritousi, N. and K. Bäckstrand, 2019: International Climate Politics in the Post-Paris Era. Stockholm University, Stockholm, pp. 1–19.https://nordregio.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/International-Climate-Politics-in-the-post-Paris-era_Nasiritousi.pdf (Accessed May 14, 2021).

Nefzaoui, A., H. Ketata, and M. El Mourid, 2012: Agricultural Technological and Institutional Innovations for Enhanced Adaptation to Environmental Change in North Africa. In: International Perspectives on Global Environmental Change[Young, S. and S. Silvern (eds.)]. IntechOpen. doi:10.5772/27175.

Neofytou, H., A. Nikas, and H. Doukas, 2020: Sustainable energy transition readiness: A multicriteria assessment index. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 131, 109988, doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109988.

Neuteleers, S. and B. Engelen, 2015: Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection. Ecol. Econ. , 117, 253–260, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.06.022.

Newell, P. and M. Paterson, 2010: Climate capitalism: Global warming and the transformation of the global economy. 1st ed. Cambridge University Press, London, UK, 223 pp.

Newell, P. and D. Mulvaney, 2013: The political economy of the ‘just transition.’Geogr. J. , 179(2) , 132–140, doi:10.1111/geoj.12008.

Newell, R., A. Dale, and M. Roseland, 2018: Climate Action Co-benefits and Integrated Community Planning: Uncovering the Synergies and Trade-Offs. Clim. Change Impacts Responses, 10, 1–23, doi.org/10.18848/1835-7156/CGP/v10i04/1-23.

Newman, P., T. Beatley, and H. Boyer, 2017: Create Sustainable Mobility Systems. In: Resilient Cities, Island Press, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 53–87.

Nikas, A. et al., 2020: The desirability of transitions in demand: Incorporating behavioural and societal transformations into energy modelling. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 70, 101780, doi:10.1016/J.ERSS.2020.101780.

Nilsson, M., D. Griggs, and M. Visbeck, 2016: Policy: Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals. Nature, 534(7607) , 320–322, doi:10.1038/534320a.

Noura, M. et al., 2020: A carbon management system of innovation: towards a circular carbon economy. Saudi Arabia Think, Saudi Arabia, 26 pp. https://t20saudiarabia.org.sa/en/briefs/Documents/T20_TF2_PB4.pdf (Accessed July 30, 2021).

Novita, N. et al., 2020: Carbon Stocks from Peat Swamp Forest and Oil Palm Plantation in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. In: Climate Change Research, Policy and Actions in Indonesia: Science, Adaptation and Mitigation[Djalante, R., J. Jupesta, and E. Aldrian, (eds.)]. Springer Nature Publisher, 203–227 pp.

Novita, N. et al., 2021: Geographic Setting and Groundwater Table Control Carbon Emission from Indonesian Peatland: A Meta-Analysis. Forests, 12(7) , 832, doi:10.3390/f12070832.

O’Brien, K., 2018: Is the 1.5°C target possible? Exploring the three spheres of transformation. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 31, 153–160, doi:10.1016/J.COSUST.2018.04.010.

O’Neil, K. and B.A. Boyce, 2018: Improving Teacher Effectiveness in Physical Education Teacher Education Through Field-Based Supervision. Phys. Educ. , 75(5) , 835–849, doi:10.18666/tpe-2018-v75-i5-7739.

Obersteiner, M. et al., 2016: Assessing the land resource food price nexus of the Sustainable Development Goals. Sci. Adv. , 2(9) , doi:10.1126/sciadv.1501499.

OECD, 2015: Pathway to a low-carbon economy: Remarks at OECD-University of Cambridge COP21 side event. https://www.oecd.org/environment/pathway-to-a-low-carbon-economy-remarks-at-oecd-university-of-cambridge-cop21-side-event.htm (Accessed September 17, 2021).

OECD, 2016: Better Policies for Sustainable Development 2016: A New Framework for Policy Coherence. OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 295 pp.

OECD, 2018: Development Co-operation Report 2018. 472 pp. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/publicat ion/dcr-2018-en.

OECD, 2019: Development Co-operation Report 2019. 156 pp. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/publicat ion/9a58c83f-en.

OECD, 2020: Editorial: Turning hope into reality. OECD, 2(2) , 3, doi.org/10.1787/fb94a4fb-en.

Okereke, C. et al., 2019: Governing green industrialisation in Africa: Assessing key parameters for a sustainable socio-technical transition in the context of Ethiopia. World Dev. , 115, 279–290, doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.11.019.

Olivier, D.W. and Y. Xu, 2019: Making effective use of groundwater to avoid another water supply crisis in Cape Town, South Africa. Hydrogeol. J. , 27(3) , 823–826, doi:10.1007/s10040-018-1893-0.

Ordoñez, E., D. Mora, and K. Gaudry, 2019: Roadmap Toward NZEBs in Quito. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. , 609, 072040, doi:10.1088/1757-899X/609/7/072040.

Ornetzeder, M. and H. Rohracher, 2013: Of solar collectors, wind power, and car sharing: Comparing and understanding successful cases of grassroots innovations. Glob. Environ. Change, 23 (5), 856–867, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.12.007.

Oqubay, A. and J. Yifu Lin, 2020: The Oxford Handbook of Industrial Hubs and Economic Development . 1st ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 800 pp.

Ortíz-Moya, F., E. Saraff, Y. Kataoka, and J. Fujino, 2021: State of the Voluntary Local Reviews 2021: From Reporting to Action. 1st ed. IGES, Kamiyamaguchi, 66 pp.

Oshiro, K., M. Kainuma, and T. Masui, 2016: Assessing decarbonization pathways and their implications for energy security policies in Japan. Clim. Policy, 16(1) , 63–77, doi:10.1080/14693062.2016.1155042.

Ostrom, E., 2008:. Clim. Change and Sustainable Development: New Challenges Poverty Reduction, 22pp, doi:10.2139/ssrn.1304697.

Oswald, Y., A. Owen, and J.K. Steinberger, 2020: Publisher Correction: Large inequality in international and intranational energy footprints between income groups and across consumption categories. Nat. Energy, 5, 231–239, doi:10.1038/s41560-020-0606-9.

Owen, R., G. Brennan, and F. Lyon, 2018: Enabling investment for the transition to a low carbon economy: government policy to finance early stage green innovation. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 31, 137–145, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.03.004.

P. Puplampu, K., K. Hanson, and T. Shaw, 2017: ‘From MDGs to SDGs: African Development Challenges and Prospects.’ Kobena Hanson, Korbla Puplampu, Timothy Shaw (eds.), Routledge, pp. 1–10, United Nations University.

Paech, N., 2017: Woher kommt der Wachstumszwang?GAIA – Ecol. Perspect. Sci. Soc. , 16(4) , doi:10.14512/gaia.16.4.13.

Pan, S.-Y., S.W. Snyder, A.I. Packman, Y. J. Lin, and P.-C. Chiang, 2018: Cooling water use in thermoelectric power generation and its associated challenges for addressing water-energy nexus. Water-Energy Nexus, 1(1) , 26–41, doi:10.1016/j.wen.2018.04.002.

Parodi, O. and K. Tamm, 2018: Personal Sustainability Exploring the Far Side of Sustainable Development . 1st ed. [Parodi, O. and K. Tamm, (eds.)]. Routledge, London, UK, 224 pp.

Parra, D., L. Valverde, F.J. Pino, and M.K. Patel, 2019: A review on the role, cost and value of hydrogen energy systems for deep decarbonisation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 101, 279–294, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.11.010.

Pathak, M. and P.R. Shukla, 2016: Co-benefits of low carbon passenger transport actions in Indian cities: Case study of Ahmedabad. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. , 44, 303–316, doi:10.1016/J.TRD.2015.07.013.

Patterson, J.J. et al., 2018: Political feasibility of 1.5°C societal transformations: the role of social justice. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 31, 1–9, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2017.11.002.

Pellegrini-Masini, G., A. Pirni, and S. Maran, 2020: Energy justice revisited: A critical review on the philosophical and political origins of equality. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 59, 101310, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2019.101310.

Pelling, B. et al., 2015: From research design to meta analysis guidelines. Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium, 39 pp.

Pelling, M., 2010: Adaptation to climate change: From resilience to transformation. 1st ed. Taylor & Francis e-Library, London, UK, 274 pp. http://www.transitsocialinnovation.eu/content/original/Book covers/Local PDFs/ 163 TRANSIT D5.1 From research design to meta analysisguidelines.pdf .

Pencheon, D., 2018: Developing a sustainable health care system: the United Kingdom experience. Med. J. Aust. , 208(7) , 284–285, doi:10.5694/mja17.01134.

Peszko, G., D. Mensbrugghe van der, and A. Golub, 2020: Diversification and Cooperation Strategies in a Decarbonizing World. World Bank, Washington, DC, pp. 1–36. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ bitstream/handle/10986/34056/Diversification-and-Cooperation-Strategies-in-a-Decarbonizing-World.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y (Accessed 30 October 2021).

Peterson, M.N., K.T. Stevenson, and D.F. Lawson, 2019: Reviewing how intergenerational learning can help conservation biology face its greatest challenge. Biol. Conserv. , 235 (2019), 290–294, doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2019.05.013.

Piggot, G., 2018: The influence of social movements on policies that constrain fossil fuel supply. Clim. Policy, 18(7) , 942–954, doi:10.1080/14693062.2017.1394255.

Piggot, G., M. Boyland, A. Down, and A.R. Torre, 2019: Realizing a just and equitable transition away from fossil fuels. Stock. Environ. Inst. , (January), pp. 1–12. https://cdn.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/realizing-a-just-and-equitable-transition-away-from-fossil-fuels.pdf (Accessed September 22, 2021).

Poblete-Cazenave, M., S. Pachauri, E. Byers, A. Mastrucci, and B. van Ruijven, 2021: Global scenarios of household access to modern energy services under climate mitigation policy. Nat. Energy, 6(8) , 824–833, doi:10.1038/s41560-021-00871-0.

Pomeroy, E. and K. Oliver, 2018: Pushing the boundaries of self-directed learning: research findings from a study of u.lab participants in Scotland. Int. J. Lifelong Educ. , 37(6) , 719–733, doi:10.1080/02601370.2018.1550447.

Pörtner, H. et al., 2021: Launch of IPBES-IPCC Co-Sponsored Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Climate Change. IPBES-IPCC, Bonn, Bremen- Geneva, 256 pp.

Poudel, S., 2014: Climate Smart Agriculture: A Development Alternative. https://sanjokpoudel.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/climate-smart-agriculture-a-development-alternative/ (Accessed September 2, 2021).

Power, C., 2016: The Integrity of Process: Is Inner Transition Sufficient?J. Soc. Polit. Psychol. , 4(1) , 347–363, doi:10.5964/jspp.v4i1.538.

Pradhan, B.B., R.M. Shrestha, A. Pandey, and B. Limmeechokchai, 2018: Strategies to Achieve Net Zero Emissions in Nepal. Carbon Manag. , 9(5) , 533–548, doi:10.1080/17583004.2018.1536168.

Pradhan, P., L. Costa, D. Rybski, W. Lucht, and J.P. Kropp, 2017: A Systematic Study of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interactions. Earth’s Future, 5(11) , 1169–1179, doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000632.

Pretty, J.N. et al., 2006: Resource-conserving agriculture increases yields in developing countries. Environ. Sci. Technol. , 40(4) , 1114–1119, doi:10.1021/es051670d.

Privitera, R. and D. La Rosa, 2017: Enhancing carbon sequestration potential of urban green spaces through transfer of development rights strategy. Acta Geobalcanica, 4(1) , 17–23, doi:10.18509/agb.2018.02.

Prudhomme, R. et al., 2020: Combining mitigation strategies to increase co-benefits for biodiversity and food security. Environ. Res. Lett. , 15(11) , 114005, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abb10a.

Pyke, C.R., S. McMahon, L. Larsen, N.B. Rajkovich, and A. Rohloff, 2012: Development and analysis of Climate Sensitivity and Climate Adaptation opportunities indices for buildings. Build. Environ. , 55, 141–149, doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.02.020.

Quarton, C.J. and S. Samsatli, 2020: The value of hydrogen and carbon capture, storage and utilisation in decarbonising energy: Insights from integrated value chain optimisation. Appl. Energy, 257, 113936, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113936.

Rabe, B.G., 2007: Beyond Kyoto: Climate change policy in multilevel governance systems. Governance, 20(3) , 423–444, doi:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00365.x.

Rao, S. et al., 2017: Future air pollution in the Shared Socio-economic Pathways. Glob. Environ. Change, 42, 346–358, doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.012.

Rasul, G., 2016: Managing the food, water, and energy nexus for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in South Asia. Environ. Dev. , 18, 14–25, doi:10.1016/j.envdev.2015.12.001.

Reckien, D. et al., 2018: How are cities planning to respond to climate change? Assessment of local climate plans from 885 cities in the EU-28. J. Clean. Prod. , 191, 207–219, doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.220.

Rickards, L., J. Wiseman, and Y. Kashima, 2014: Barriers to effective climate change mitigation: The case of senior government and business decision makers. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change, 5(6) , 753–773, doi:10.1002/wcc.305.

Rempel, A. and J. Gupta, 2021: Fossil fuels, stranded assets and COVID-19: Imagining an inclusive and transformative recovery. World Dev. , 146, 105608, doi:10.1016/J.WORLDDEV.2021.105608.

Richardson, B., 2017: Divesting from climate change: the road to influence. Law Policy, 39(4) , 325–348, doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12081.

Ringler, C., A. Bhaduri, and R. Lawford, 2013: The nexus across water, energy, land and food (WELF): Potential for improved resource use efficiency?Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 6, 617–624, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.002.

Roberts, C. et al., 2018: The politics of accelerating low-carbon transitions: Towards a new research agenda. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 44, 304–311, doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.06.001.

Robinson, J. and R.J. Cole, 2015: Theoretical underpinnings of regenerative sustainability. Build. Res. Inf. , 43(2) , 133–143, doi:10.1080/09613218.2014.979082.

Rockström, J. et al., 2009: A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461(7263) , 472, doi:10.1038/461472a.

Rogelj, J. et al., 2016: Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2°C. Nature, 534(7609) , 631–639, doi:10.1038/nature18307.

Rogelj, J., D. Shindell, K. Jiang, S. Fifita, P. Forster, V. Ginzburg, C. Handa, H. Kheshgi, S. Kobayashi, E. Kriegler, L. Mundaca, R. Séférian, and M.V.Vilariño, 2018: Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty[Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 93–174.

Rogge, K.S. and P. Johnstone, 2017: Exploring the role of phase-out policies for low-carbon energy transitions: The case of the German Energiewende. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 33, 128–137, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.004.

Rogge, K.S., F. Kern, and M. Howlett, 2017: Conceptual and empirical advances in analysing policy mixes for energy transitions. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 33, 1–10, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.025.

Roker, S., 2018: Democratic Republic of Congo home to largest hard rock lithium resource. Global Mining Review, https://www.globalminingreview.com/exploration-development/02082018/democratic-republic-of-congo-home-to-largest-hard-rock-lit hium-resource/.

Romero-Lankao, P., D.M. Gnatz, O. Wilhelmi, and M. Hayden, 2016: Urban sustainability and resilience: From theory to practice. Sustainability, 8(12) , 1224, doi:10.3390/su8121224.

Rooney-Varga, J.N. et al., 2020: The Climate Action Simulation. Simul. Gaming, 51(2) , doi:10.1177/1046878119890643.

Roschnik, S. et al., 2017: Transitioning to environmentally sustainable health systems: the example of the NHS in England. Public Heal. Panor. , 3(02) , 229–236. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/325309.

Rosenberg, L., J.D. Ouelette, and D.J. Dowgiallo, 2019: Analysis of S-band Passive Bistatic Sea Clutter. 2019 IEEE Radar Conf. , 1–6, doi:10.1109/RADAR.2019.8835730.

Rosenbloom, D., H. Berton, and J. Meadowcroft, 2016: Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada. Res. Policy, 45(6) , 1275–1290, doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.012.

Rosenbloom, D., J. Meadowcroft, S. Sheppard, S. Burch, and S. Williams, 2018: Transition experiments: Opening up low-carbon transition pathways for Canada through innovation and learning. Can. Public Policy, 44(4) , 368–383, doi:10.3138/cpp.2018-020.

Rosenbloom, D., J. Meadowcroft, and B. Cashore, 2019: Stability and climate policy? Harnessing insights on path dependence, policy feedback, and transition pathways. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 50, 168–178, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2018.12.009.

Rosendahl, K.E. and D.R. Rubiano, 2019: How Effective is Lithium Recycling as a Remedy for Resource Scarcity?Environ. Resour. Econ. , 74(3) , doi:10.1007/s10640-019-00356-5.

Rothausen, S.G.S.A. and D. Conway, 2011: Greenhouse-gas emissions from energy use in the water sector. Nat. Clim. Change, 1, 210–219, doi:10.1038/nclimate1147.

Roy, J., P. Tschakert, H. Waisman, S. Abdul Halim, P. Antwi-Agyei, P. Dasgupta, B. Hayward, M. Kanninen, D. Liverman, C. Okereke, P.F. Pinho, K. Riahi, and A.G. Suarez Rodriguez, 2018: Sustainable Development, Poverty Eradication and Reducing Inequalities. In: Global Warming of 1.5ºC: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty[MassonDelmotte, P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 445–538.

Roy, J. et al., 2018b: Where is the hope? Blending modern urban lifestyle with cultural practices in India. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 31, 96–103, doi:10.1016/J.COSUST.2018.01.010.

Roy, J., N. Das, S. Some, and H. Mahmud, 2021: Fast-Growing Developing Countries: Dilemma and Way Forward in a Carbon-Constrained World. In: Sustainable Development Insights from India, Springer, Kolkata, India, pp. 23–41.

Ruiz-Garcia, L., L. Lunadei, P. Barreiro, and I. Robla, 2009: A Review of Wireless Sensor Technologies and Applications in Agriculture and Food Industry: State of the Art and Current Trends. Sensors, 9(6) , 4728–4750, doi:10.3390/s90604728.

Rydge, J., M. Jacobs, and I. Granoff, 2015: Ensuring New Infrastructure is Climate-Smart. Contributing paper for Seizing the Global Opportunity: Partnerships for Better Growth and a Better Climate. The New Climate Economy, London, UK and Washington, USA, 1–20 pp.https://newclimateeconomy.report/2015/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/ 2014/08/Ensuring-infrastructure-is-climate-smart.pdf .

Sachs, J., G. Schmidt-Traub, C. Kroll, G. Lafortune, and G. Fuller, 2019: Sustainable Development Report 2019. Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network, New York, USA. 478 pp.

Samantray, A. and P. Pin, 2019: Credibility of climate change denial in social media. Palgrave Commun. , 5(1) , 127, doi:10.1057/s41599-019-0344-4.

Sanchez Rodriguez, R., D. Ürge-Vorsatz, and A. Barau, 2018: Sustainable Development Goals and climate change adaptation in cities. Nat. Clim. Change, 8, 181–183, doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0098-9.

Sandfort, J. and K. Quick, 2015: Building deliberative capacity to create public value: the practices and artifacts of the Art of Hosting. In: Public Administration and Public Value[Bryson, J.M., L. Bloomberg, and B.C. Crosby (eds.)]. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 39–52.

Sathaye, J., A. Najam, C. Cocklin, T. Heller, F. Lecocq, J. Llanes-Regueiro, J. Pan, G. Petschel-Held, S. Rayner, J. Robinson,R. Schaeffer, Y. Sokona, R. Swart, H. Winkler, 2007: Sustainable Development and Mitigation. In: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change[Metz, B., O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, and L.A. Meyer, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1–54.

Sator, O., 2018: Insights from case studies of major coal-consuming economies. IDDRI and Climate Strategies, France, 42 pp.https://coaltransitions.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/coal_synthesis_final.pdf (Accessed October 31, 2021).

Satterthwaite, D., 2017: Successful, safe and sustainable cities: towards a New Urban Agenda. Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, 3–18, doi:10.5130/cjlg.v0i19.5446.

Schäpke, N., M. Bergmann, F. Stelzer, and D. Lang, 2018: Labs in the Real World: Advancing Transdisciplinary Research and Sustainability Transformation: Mapping the Field and Emerging Lines of Inquiry. GAIA – Ecological Perspect. Sci. Soc. , 27(1) , 8–11, doi.org/10.14512/gaia.27.S1.4.

Scharmer, C. and Kaufer, K., 2015: Awareness-Based Action Research: Catching Social Reality Creation in Flight. In: The SAGE Handbook of Action Research[Bradbury, H., (ed.)]. SAGE Publications Ltd, London, UK, pp. 199–210.

Scharmer, O., 2018: The Essentials of Theory U: Core Principles and Applications. 2nd ed. Berret-Koehler, Oakland, USA, 248 pp.

Schaube, P., W. Ortiz, and M. Recalde, 2018: Status and future dynamics of decentralised renewable energy niche building processes in Argentina. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 35, 57–67, doi:10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.037.

Schlott, M., A. Kies, T. Brown, S. Schramm, and M. Greiner, 2018: The impact of climate change on a cost-optimal highly renewable European electricity network. Appl. Energy, 230, 1645–1649, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.09.084.

Schneidewind, U., M. Singer-Brodowski, K. Augenstein, and F. Stelzer, 2016: Pledge for a transformative science: A conceptual framework. Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie, Wuppertal, 30 pp. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/144815 (Accessed October 24, 2021).

Scholz, L., A. Ortiz Perez, B. Bierer, J. Wöllenstein, and S. Palzer, 2018: Gas sensors for climate research. J. Sensors Sens. Syst. , 7(2) , 535–541, doi:10.5194/jsss-7-535-2018.

Schoneveld, G.C., D. Ekowati, A. Andrianto, and S. Van Der Haar, 2019: Modeling peat- and forestland conversion by oil palm smallholders in Indonesian Borneo. Environ. Res. Lett. , 14(1) , 15, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aaf044.

Schramade, W., 2017: Investing in the UN Sustainable Development Goals: Opportunities for Companies and Investors. J. Appl. Corp. Financ. , 29(2) , 87–99, doi:10.1111/jacf.12236.

Schrobback, P., D. Adamson, and J. Quiggin, 2011: Turning Water into Carbon: Carbon Sequestration and Water Flow in the Murray-Darling Basin. Environ. Resour. Econ. , 49(1) , 23–45, doi:10.1007/s10640-010-9422-1.

Schweizer-Ries, P., 2018: Sustainability Science and its contribution to IAPS: seeking for integrated sustainability. IAPS Bull. , 40, 9–12. https://cupdf.com/document/iaps-bulletin-no40.html (Accessed August 13, 2021).

Scobie, M., 2016: Policy coherence in climate governance in Caribbean Small Island Developing States. Environ. Sci. Policy, 58, 16–28, doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.12.008.

Scott, J., 2011: Social network analysis: developments, advances, and prospects. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. , 1(1) , 21–26, doi:10.1007/s13278-010-0012-6.

Seddon, N. et al., 2021: Getting the message right on nature-based solutions to climate change. Glob. Chang. Biol. , 27(8) , 1518–1546, doi:10.1111/gcb.15513.

Seligman, M. and M. Csikszentmihalyi, 2014: Positive Psychology: An Introduction. In: Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology[Csikszentmihalyi, M., (ed.)]. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 279–298.

Sengers, F., A.J. Wieczorek, and R. Raven, 2019: Experimenting for sustainability transitions: A systematic literature review. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 145, 153–164, doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.031.

Sethi, M. and J. Puppum De Oliveria, 2018: Mainstreaming Climate Co-Benefits in Indian Cities. 1st ed. [Sethi, M. and J. Puppum De Oliveria, (eds.)]. Springer, Singapore, 373 pp.

Seto, K.C. et al., 2016: Carbon Lock-In: Types, Causes, and Policy Implications. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. , 41, 425–452, doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085934.

Setyowati, A.B., 2021: Mitigating inequality with emissions? Exploring energy justice and financing transitions to low carbon energy in Indonesia. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 71, 101817, doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101817.

Seyfang, G. and A. Smith, 2007: Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: Towards a new research and policy agenda. Env. Polit. , 16(4) , 584–603, doi:10.1080/09644010701419121.

Seyfang, G. and A. Haxeltine, 2012: Growing grassroots innovations: Exploring the role of community-based initiatives in governing sustainable energy transitions. Environ. Plan. C Gov. Policy, 30(3) , 381–400, doi:10.1068/c10222.

Sgouridis, S., M. Carbajales-Dale, D. Csala, M. Chiesa, and U. Bardi, 2019: Comparative net energy analysis of renewable electricity and carbon capture and storage. Nat. Energy, 4(6) , 456–465, doi:10.1038/s41560-019-0365-7.

Shah, N., M. Wei, V.E. Letschert, and A.A. Phadke, 2015: Benefits of Leapfrogging to Superefficiency and Low Global Warming Potential Refrigerants in Room Air Conditioning. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, California, USA, 57 pp. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1235571 (Accessed 24 January 2020).

Sharifi, A., 2020: Co-benefits and synergies between urban climate change mitigation and adaptation measures: A literature review. Sci. Total Environ. , 750, 141642, doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141642.

Shaw, A., S. Burch, F. Kristensen, J. Robinson, and A. Dale, 2014: Accelerating the sustainability transition: Exploring synergies between adaptation and mitigation in British Columbian communities. Glob. Environ. Change, 25(1) , 41–51, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.01.002.

Shaw, D. and P. Roberts, 2017: Regional Planning and Development in Europe. 1st ed. Routledge, London, UK, 314 pp.

Shen, W. et al., 2020: A comprehensive review of variable renewable energy levelized cost of electricity. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. , 133, 110301, doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110301.

Sheppard, S.R.J. et al., 2011: Future visioning of local climate change: A framework for community engagement and planning with scenarios and visualisation. Futures, 43(4) , 400–412, doi:10.1016/j.futures.2011.01.009.

Shrivastava, P., M. Stafford Smith, K. O’Brien, and L. Zsolnai, 2020: Transforming Sustainability Science to Generate Positive Social and Environmental Change Globally. One Earth, 2(4) , 329–340, doi:10.1016/J.ONEEAR.2020.04.010.

Sindico, F., 2016: Paris, Climate Change, and Sustainable Developmen, Climate Law. Clim. Law, 6(1–2) , 130–141, doi.org/10.1163/18786561-00601009.

Singleton, J., 2015: Head, heart and hands model for transformative learning: place as context for changing sustainability values Transforming eco-paradigms for sustainable values. J. Sustain. Educ. , 9 (March), 1–16.

Smajgl, A., J. Ward, and L. Pluschke, 2016: The water-food-energy Nexus – Realising a new paradigm. J. Hydrol. , 533, 530–540, doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.12.033.

Smink, M.M., M.P. Hekkert, and S.O. Negro, 2015: Keeping sustainable innovation on a leash? Exploring incumbents’ institutional strategies. Bus. Strateg. Environ. , 24(2) , 86–101, doi:10.1002/bse.1808.

Smith, A., A. Stirling, and F. Berkhout, 2005: The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Res. Policy, 34(10) , 1491–1510, doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.07.005.

Smith, P. et al., 2019a: Land-Management Options for Greenhouse Gas Removal and Their Impacts on Ecosystem Services and the Sustainable Development Goals. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. , 44(1) , 255–286, doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033129.

Smith, P., J. Nkem, K. Calvin, D. Campbell, F. Cherubini, G. Grassi, V. Korotkov, A.L. Hoang, S. Lwasa, P. McElwee, E. Nkonya, N. Saigusa, J.-F. Soussana, M.A. Taboada, 2019: Interlinkages Between Desertification, Land Degradation, Food Security and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes: Synergies, Trade-offs and Integrated Response Options. In: Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems[P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.- O. Portner, D. C. Roberts, P. Zhai, R. Slade, S. Connors, R. van Diemen, M. Ferrat, E. Haughey, S. Luz, S. Neogi, M. Pathak, J. Petzold, J. Portugal Pereira, P. Vyas, E. Huntley, K. Kissick, M. Belkacemi, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 551–672.

Solarin, S.A., U. Al-Mulali, I. Musah, and I. Ozturk, 2017: Investigating the pollution haven hypothesis in Ghana: An empirical investigation. Energy, 124, 706–719, doi:10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.089.

Song, L. et al., 2020: Contested energy futures, conflicted rewards? Examining low-carbon transition risks and governance dynamics in China’s built environment. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 59, 101306, doi:10.1016/J.ERSS.2019.101306.

Sorman, A.H., E. Turhan, and M. Rosas-Casals, 2020: Democratizing Energy, Energizing Democracy: Central Dimensions Surfacing in the Debate. Front. Energy Res. , 8, 279, doi:10.3389/fenrg.2020.499888.

Soussana, J.F. et al., 2019: Matching policy and science: Rationale for the ‘4 per 1000 – soils for food security and climate’ initiative. Soil Tillage Res. , 188, 1–59, doi:10.1016/j.still.2017.12.002.

Sovacool, B.K., 2018: Bamboo Beating Bandits: Conflict, Inequality, and Vulnerability in the Political Ecology of Climate Change Adaptation in Bangladesh. World Dev. , 102, 183–194, doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.10.014.

Sovacool, B.K., 2021: Who are the victims of low-carbon transitions? Towards a political ecology of climate change mitigation. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 73, 101916, doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101916.

Sovacool, B.K. and J. Scarpaci, 2016: Energy justice and the contested petroleum politics of stranded assets: Policy insights from the Yasuní-ITT Initiative in Ecuador. Energy Policy, 95, 158–171, doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.04.045.

Sovacool, B.K., D.J. Hess, and R. Cantoni, 2021: Energy transitions from the cradle to the grave: A meta-theoretical framework integrating responsible innovation, social practices, and energy justice. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. , 75, 102027, doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102027.

Speldewinde, P.C., D. Slaney, and P. Weinstein, 2015: Is restoring an ecosystem good for your health?Sci. Total Environ. , 502, 276–279, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.09.028.

Spencer, T. et al., 2018: The 1.5°C target and coal sector transition: at the limits of societal feasibility. Clim. Policy, 18(3) , 335–351, doi:10.1080/14693062.2017.1386540.

Springmann, M. et al., 2018: Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature, 562, 519–525, doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0.

Srikanth, R., 2018: India’s sustainable development goals – Glide path for India’s power sector. Energy Policy, 123, 325–336, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.08.050.

Steen, M. and T. Weaver, 2017: Incumbents’ diversification and cross-sectorial energy industry dynamics. Res. Policy, 46(6) , 1071–1086, doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.04.001.

Steenkamp, L.A., 2017: A review of policy options for clean electricity supply in South Africa. 2017. 6th International Conference on Clean Electrical Power: Renewable Energy Resources Impact, ICCEP 2, Santa Marguerita, Italy, pp. 94–102.

Steffen, W. et al., 2015: Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223) , 736–745, doi:10.1126/science.1259855.

Streck, D., 2007: Research and Social Transformation -Notes about Method and Methodology in Participatory Research. Int. J. Action Res. , 3(1+2) , 112–130, doi:10.1688/1861-9916_ijar_2007_01_streck.

Sušnik, J. et al., 2018: Multi-stakeholder development of a serious game to explore the water-energy-food-land-climate nexus: The SIM4NEXUS approach. Water (Switzerland) , 2(10) , 139, doi:10.3390/w10020139.

Svobodova, K., J.R. Owen, J. Harris, and S. Worden, 2020: Complexities and contradictions in the global energy transition: A re-evaluation of country-level factors and dependencies. Appl. Energy, 265, 114778, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114778.

Swain, R.B. and A. Karimu, 2020: Renewable electricity and sustainable development goals in the EU. World Dev. , 125, 1046693, doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104693.

Swart, R. and F. Raes, 2007: Making integration of adaptation and mitigation work: Mainstreaming into sustainable development policies?Clim. Policy, 7(4) , 288–303, doi:10.1080/14693062.2007.9685657.

Sweeney, S. and J. Treat, 2018: Trade unions and just transitions. The Search for a Transformative Politics. Trade Unions for Energy Democracy, New York, USA, 52 pp. http://unionsforenergydemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/TUED-Working-Paper-11.pdf (Accessed September 15, 2021).

Swilling, M. Annecke, E., 2010: Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World. United Nations University Press, Tokyo, Japan, 448 pp.

Teng, F., X. Su, and X. Wang, 2019: Can China Peak Its Non-CO2GHG Emissions before 2030 by Implementing Its Nationally Determined Contribution?Environ. Sci. Technol. , 53(21) , 12168–12176, doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b04162.

The Energy and Resources Institute, 2017: Energy & Environment Data Diary and Yearbook (TEDDY). TERI, New Delhi, India, 350 pp.

The National BIM Report 2018, 2018: The National BIM Report 2018.https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/the-national-bim-report-2018 (Accessed September 21, 2021).

The National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China, 2016: The 13th Five-Year Plan for Economic and Social Development of the People’s Republic of China. The National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2019 pp.

Thornbush, M., O. Golubchikov, and S. Bouzarovski, 2013: Sustainable cities targeted by combined mitigation–adaptation efforts for future-proofing. Sustain. Cities Soc. , 9, 1–9, doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2013.01.003.

Thornton, T.F. and C. Comberti, 2017: Synergies and trade-offs between adaptation, mitigation and development. Clim. Change, 140(1), 5–18, doi:10.1007/s10584-013-0884-3.

Tong, D. et al., 2019: Committed emissions from existing energy infrastructure jeopardize 1.5°C climate target. Nature, 572(7769) , 373–377, doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1364-3.

Townshend, T. et al., 2013: How national legislation can help to solve climate change. Nat. Clim. Change, 3(5) , 430–432, doi:10.1038/nclimate1894.

Tozer, L., 2018: Urban climate change and sustainability planning: an analysis of sustainability and climate change discourses in local government plans in Canada. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. , 61(1) , 176–194, doi:10.1080/09640568.2017.1297699.

Trullen, J. and B. Torbert, 2004: First, Second and Third person research in practice. First, Second Third Pers. Res. Pract. , The Systems Thinker, 15(1) , 1–2.

Turnheim, B. and B. Nykvist, 2019: Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions. Res. Policy, 48(3) , 775–788, doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.002.

UN Women, 2017: Approaches by African Countries in the Implementation and Localization of SDGs. UN Women, Nairobi, Kenya, 60 pp. https://www2.unwomen.org/-/media/field office africa/attachments/publications/2017/11/approaches by african countries in the implementation and localization of sdgs- web.pdf?la=en&vs=5752 (Accessed April 3, 2021).

UNDRR, 2019: UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, Sendai Framework. 425 pp. https://www.undrr.org/publication/global-assessment-report-disaster-risk-reduction-2019 (Accessed August 14, 2021).

UNDESA, 2016: Voluntary National Reviews – Synthesis Report 2016. 71 pp. New York, USA, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/127761701030E_2016_VNR_Synthesis_Report_ver3.pdf (Accessed October 25, 2021).

UNDESA, 2017: Voluntary National Reviews – Synthesis Report 2017. 78 pp. New York, USA, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/17109Synthesis_Report_VNRs_2017.pdf (Accessed October 25, 2021).

UNDESA, 2018: Voluntary National Reviews – Synthesis Report 2018. 80 pp. New York, USA, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/210732018_VNRs_Synthesis_compilation_11118_FS_BB_Format_FINAL_cover.pdf (Accessed October 25, 2021).

UNEP/SEI, 2020: Production Gap Report 2020:The discrepancy between countries’ planned fossil fuel production and global production levels consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C or 2°C. 76 pp. New York, USA.

UNFCCC, 2015: Synthesis Report on the Aggregate Effect of the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. Report No. FCCC/CP/2015/7. The Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), New York, USA. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/07.pdf (Accessed November 2, 2021).

UNFCCC, 2016: Report of the Conference of the Parties on its twenty-first session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015. The Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Paris, France, https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/10.pdf (Accessed June 22, 2020).

UNFCCC, 2019: Communication of long-term strategies. The Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), New York, USA, https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/long-term-strategies (Accessed July 8, 2021).

UNFCCO, 2020: Petersberg Climate Dialogue Seeks Climate-Resilient Economic Recovery. The Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), New York, USA, https://unfccc.int/news/petersberg-climate-dialogue-seeks-climate-resilient-economic-recovery (Accessed August 11, 2021).

UNIDO, 2018: Industrial park development in Ethiopia case of study report . United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Vienna, Austria, pp. 2–85. https://www.unido.org/api/opentext/documents/download/10694802/unido-file-10694802.

United Nations, 2015a: Summit Charts New Era of Sustainable Development. United Nations Press release, New York, USA, 20 pp. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/summit (Accessed September 5, 2021).

United Nations, 2015b: Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction2015–2030. United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, 37 pp. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf (Accessed June 22, 2020).

United Nations, 2017: The Sustainable Development Goals Report . United Nations, New York, USA, 1–64, https://www.undp.org/publications/un-sustainable-development-goals-report-2017?utm_source=EN&utm_medium=GSR&utm_content=US_UNDP_PaidSearch_Brand_English&utm_campaign=CENTRAL&c_src=CENTRAL&c_src2=GSR&gclid =Cj0KCQjw5oiMBhDtARIsAJi0qk210sGqvjhlX1DwK1NNf4WGlk (Accessed October 13, 2021).

United Nations, 2018: Sustainable Development Goal 6: Synthesis Report on Water and Sanitation. New York, USA, https://www.unwater.org/publications/sdg-6-synthesis-report-2018-on-water-and-sanitation/ (Accessed June 22, 2020).

United Nations, 2019: Global Sustainable Development Report 2019: The Future is Now – Science for Achieving Sustainable Development . United Nations, New York, USA 252 pp. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/24797GSDR_report_2019.pdf (Accessed 14 January 2020).

United Nations Environment Programme, 2019: Emissions Gap Report 2019. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya, 108 pp. https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2019.

United Nations General Assembly, 2019: Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 15 October. New York, USA, 2pp, https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/RES/74/5 (Accessed September 5, 2021).

United Nations General Assembly, 2021: High-Level Meetings of the 76th Session. New York, USA, https://www.un.org/en/ga/76/meetings/ (Accessed September 28, 2021).

UNU-INRA, 2020: Accra, Ghana. UNU Institute for Natural Resources in Africa (UNU-INRA). https://unu.edu/about/unu-system/inra (Accessed August 25, 2020).

Ürge-Vorsatz, D., S.T. Herrero, N.K. Dubash, and F. Lecocq, 2014: Measuring the Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. , 39(1) , 549–582, doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-031312-125456.

UToronto, 2016: G20 Action Plan on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development . Toronto, Canada, pp. 3–48. https://www.b20germany.org/fileadmin/user_upload/G20_Action_Plan_on_the_2030_Agenda_for_Sustainable_Development.pdf (Accessed November 28, 2021).

van Asselt, H., 2014: The fragmentation of global climate governance: Consequences and management of regime interactions. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., Cheltenham, UK, 335 pp.

van den Berg, N.J. et al., 2020: Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways. Clim. Change, 162(4) , 1805–1822, doi:10.1007/s10584-019-02368-y.

van der Heijden, J., J. Patterson, S. Juhola, and M. Wolfram, 2019: Special section: advancing the role of cities in climate governance–promise, limits, politics. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. , 62(3) , 365–373, doi:10.1080/09640568.2018.1513832.

van der Heijden, J., 2018: The limits of voluntary programs for low-carbon buildings for staying under 1.5°C. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. , 30, 59–66, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.03.006.

van der Ploeg, F., 2011: Natural resources: Curse or blessing?J. Econ. Lit. , 49(2) , 366–420, doi:10.1257/jel.49.2.366.

van der Ploeg, F. and A. Rezai, 2020: Stranded assets in the transition to a carbon-free economy. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. , 12, 281–298, doi:10.1146/annurev-resource-110519-040938.

van Rooyen, J.D., A.P. Watson, and J.A. Miller, 2020: Combining quantity and quality controls to determine groundwater vulnerability to depletion and deterioration throughout South Africa. Environ. Earth Sci. , 79(11) , 255, doi:10.1007/s12665-020-08998-1.

van Soest, H.L. et al., 2019: Analysing interactions among Sustainable Development Goals with Integrated Assessment Models. Glob. Transitions, 1, 210–225, doi.org/10.1016/j.glt.2019.10.004.

van Vliet, M.T.H. et al., 2016a: Multi-model assessment of global hydropower and cooling water discharge potential under climate change. Glob. Environ. Change, 40, 156–170, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.07.007.

van Vliet, M.T.H., J. Sheffield, D. Wiberg, and E.F. Wood, 2016b: Impacts of recent drought and warm years on water resources and electricity supply worldwide. Environ. Res. Lett. , 1–11, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124021.

van Vliet, M.T.H., D. Wiberg, S. Leduc, and K. Riahi, 2016c: Power-generation system vulnerability and adaptation to changes in climate and water resources. Nat. Clim. Change, , 6, 375–380 pp. doi:10.1038/nclimate2903.

Vandyck, T., K. Keramidas, B. Saveyn, A. Kitous, and Z. Vrontisi, 2016: A global stocktake of the Paris pledges: Implications for energy systems and economy. Glob. Environ. Change, 41, 46–63, doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.08.006.

Vandyck, T. et al., 2018: Air quality co-benefits for human health and agriculture counterbalance costs to meet Paris Agreement pledges. Nat. Commun. , 9(1) , 4939, doi:10.1038/s41467-018-06885-9.

Veciana, S. and K. Ottmar, 2018: Inner conflict resolution and self-empowerment as contribution for personal sustainability on the case of intentional community practices. In: Personal Sustainability: Exploring the Far Side of Sustainable Development , Taylor & Francis Group, Routledge, 20 pp.

Veldkamp, T.I.E. et al., 2015: Changing mechanism of global water scarcity events: Impacts of socioeconomic changes and inter-annual hydro-climatic variability. Glob. Environ. Change, 32, 18–29, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.02.011.

Wada, Y. et al., 2016: Modeling global water use for the 21st century: The Water Futures and Solutions (WFaS) initiative and its approaches. Geosci. Model Dev. , 9, 175–222, doi:10.5194/gmd-9-175-2016.

Walsh, Z., J. Böhme, and C. Wamsler, 2020: Towards a relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice, and education. Ambio, 50, doi:10.1007/s13280-020-01322-y.

Wamsler, C. and E. Brink, 2018: Mindsets for Sustainability: Exploring the Link Between Mindfulness and Sustainable Climate Adaptation. Ecol. Econ. , 151, 55–61, doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.029.

Wamsler, C., G. Osberg, W. Osika, H. Herndersson, and L. Mundaca, 2021: Linking internal and external transformation for sustainability and climate action: Towards a new research and policy agenda. Glob. Environ. Change, 71, 102373, doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102373.

Wan, K.K.W., D.H.W. Li, W. Pan, and J.C. Lam, 2012: Impact of climate change on building energy use in different climate zones and mitigation and adaptation implications. Appl. Energy, 97, 274–282, doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.11.048.

Wang, H. and W. Chen, 2019: Gaps between pre-2020 climate policies with NDC goals and long-term mitigation targets: Analyses on major regions. Energy Procedia, 158, 22–25, doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2019.01.894.

Wang, Y. and Q. Zhi, 2016: The Role of Green Finance in Environmental Protection: Two Aspects of Market Mechanism and Policies. Energy Procedia, 104, 311–316, doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.12.053.

Warmenbol, C. and M. Smith, 2018: International union for conservation of nature (IUCN). In: The Wetland Book: I: Structure and Function, Management, and Methods, [C. Max Finlayson, Mark Everard, Kenneth Irvine, Robert J. McInnes, Beth A. Middleton, Anne A. van Dam, Nick C. Davidson (eds.)], Springer Netherlands, pp. 665–669.

Warren, B., P. Christoff, and D. Green, 2016: Australia’s sustainable energy transition: The disjointed politics of decarbonisation. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 21, 1–12, doi:10.1016/j.eist.2016.01.001.

WCED, 1987: World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. WCED, Geneva, Switzerland, 190 pp. https://idl-bnc-idrc.dspacedirect.org/bitstream/handle/10625/8942/WCED_79365.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (Accessed May 31, 2020).

Westman, L., E. Moores, and S.L. Burch, 2021: Bridging the governance divide: The role of SMEs in urban sustainability interventions. Cities, 108, 102944, doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102944.

Wieczorek, A.J., 2018: Sustainability transitions in developing countries: Major insights and their implications for research and policy. Environ. Sci. Policy, 84, 204–216, doi:10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2017.08.008.

Wiedmann, T., M. Lenzen, L.T. Keyßer, and J.K. Steinberger, 2020: Scientists’ warning on affluence. Nat. Commun. , 11(1) , 3107, doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y.

Wiek, A., F. Farioli, K. Fukushi, and M. Yarime, 2012: Sustainability science: Bridging the gap between science and society. Sustain. Sci. , 7(1) , 1–4, doi:10.1007/s11625-011-0154-0.

Wiktorowicz, J. et al., 2018: WGV: An Australian urban precinct case study to demonstrate the 1.5°C agenda including multiple SDGs. Urban Plan. , 3(2) , 64–81, doi:10.17645/up.v3i2.1245.

Williams, L., 2013: Deepening Ecological Relationality Through Critical Onto-Epistemological Inquiry: Where Transformative Learning Meets Sustainable Science. J. Transform. Educ. , 11(2) , 95–113, doi:10.1177/1541344613490997.

Williams, S. and A. Doyon, 2020: The Energy Futures Lab: A case study of justice in energy transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, 37, 29–301, doi:10.1016/j.eist.2020.10.001.

Willis, R., 2018: How Members of Parliament understand and respond to climate changett. Sociol. Rev. , 66(3) , doi:10.1177/0038026117731658.

Wilson, C., H. Pettifor, E. Cassar, L. Kerr, and M. Wilson, 2019: The potential contribution of disruptive low-carbon innovations to 1.5°C climate mitigation. Energy Effic. , 12(2) , 423–440, doi:10.1007/s12053-018-9679-8.

Winkler, H., 2020: Putting equity into practice in the global stocktake under the Paris Agreement. Clim. Policy, 20(1) , 124–132, doi:10.1080/14693062.2019.1680337.

Wittneben, B., D. Bongardt, H. Dalkmann, W. Sterk, and C. Baatz, 2009: Integrating Sustainable Transport Measures into the Clean Development Mechanism. Transp. Rev. , 29(1) , 91–113, doi:10.1080/01441640802133494.

Woiwode, C. et al., 2021: Inner transformation to sustainability as a deep leverage point: fostering new avenues for change through dialogue and reflection Leverage Points for Sustainability Transformations. Sustain. Sci. , 16, 841–858, doi:10.1007/s11625-020-00882-y.

Woiwode, D. and N. Woiwode, 2019: Off the beaten tracks: The neglected significance of interiority for sustainable urban development. In: Practical Spirituality and the Contemporary City: Awakening the Transformative Power for Sustainable Living[Giri, A., (ed.)]. Palgrave Mcmillan, Simgapore, pp. 129–151.

World Bank, 2019: Competitiveness, Report of the higth-level commission on carbon princing and competitiveness. World Bank, Washington D.C., 53 pp.https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/32419/141917.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y (Accessed March 5, 2020).

World Business Council for Sustainable Developmet, 2010: Vision 2050. 80 pp. https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/About-us/Vision_2050/Resources/Vision-2050-The-new-agenda-for-business (Accessed 20 January 2020).

WRI, 2016: The sustainable infrastructure imperative. London, UK, 152 pp. http://newclimateeconomy.report/2016/wp-content/uploads/sites/ 4/2014/08/NCE_2016Report.pdf (Accessed September 1, 2020).

WWAP-UNESCO, 2019: World Water Development Report. Leaving No One Behind. WWAP-UNESCO, Paris, France, 201 pp. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000367306 (Accessed November 1, 2020).

Yang, X. and F. Teng, 2018: The air quality co-benefit of coal control strategy in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. , 129, 373–382, doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.08.011.

Yarime, M., 2017: Facilitating data-intensive approaches to innovation for sustainability: opportunities and challenges in building smart cities. Sustain. Sci. , 12, 881–885, doi:10.1007/s11625-017-0498-1.

Yaw, N., 2018: One district, one factory. smartlinewestafrica, https://1d1f.gov.gh/ (Accessed August 20, 2020).

Zeng, D.Z., L. Cheng, L. Shi, and W. Luetkenhorst, 2020: China’s green transformation through eco-industrial parks. World Dev. , 140, 105249, doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105249.

Zenghelis, D., 2020: Can we be green and grow?https://www.lombardodier.com/contents/corporate-news/responsible-capital/2019/november/can-we-be-green-and-grow.html (Accessed October 5, 2021).

Zhang, C., X. Chen, Y. Li, W. Ding, and G. Fu, 2018a: Water-energy-food nexus: Concepts, questions and methodologies. J. Clean. Prod. , doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.194.

Zhang, J. et al., 2018b: The water-food-energy nexus optimization approach to combat agricultural drought: a case study in the United States. Appl. Energy, 227, 449–464, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.07.036.

Zhang, R. et al., 2019: A Review of the Role of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation in Atlantic Multidecadal Variability and Associated Climate Impacts. Rev. Geophys. , 57(2) , 316–375, doi:10.1029/2019RG000644.

Zhao, X., S. Zhang, Y. Zou, and J. Yao, 2013: To what extent does wind power deployment affect vested interests? A case study of the Northeast China Grid. Energy Policy, 63, doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.092.

Zhenmin, L. and P. Espinosa, 2019: Tackling climate change to accelerate sustainable development. Nat. Clim. Change, 9(7) , 494–496, doi:10.1038/s41558-019-0519-4.

Zusman, E., A. Srinivasan, and S. Dhakal, 2011: Low carbon transport in Asia: Strategies for optimizingco-benefits. 1st ed. [Zusman, E., A. Srinivasan, and S. Shobhakar, (eds.)]. Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan, 296 pp.