Informe El medio ambiente en Europa: Estado y perspectivas 2020

PART 3
TABLE 16.1
The ‘avoid-shift-improve’ framework applied to the food, energy and mobility systems
System Avoid Shift Improve
Mobility
Compact cities, integrated transport and
land use planning, teleworking, sharing
Shift from car to cycling, walking or
public transport
Eco-driving, smaller, lightweight
vehicles
Energy
Passive houses or retrofitted, long-lasting
devices, sharing machinery and appliances
Heat pumps, district heating and
cooling, combined heat and power,
recycled materials
Condensing boilers, insulation
options, energy-efficient appliances
Food
Intake of calories and nutrients according
to daily needs, reducing food waste
Shift to protein sources other than
meat where appropriate
Fresh instead of processed food,
product ecolabels
Source: Modified, based on Creutzig et al. (2018).
designed to handle this kind of
complexity. Policies and actions at
different levels of governance —
from communities to international
organisations — are often developed
in silos addressing specific sectors
or issues (Stirling, 2014; Wallis, 2015;
Venghaus and Hake, 2018). Research
is often similarly compartmentalised
within disciplinary boundaries,
while indicators and knowledge
infrastructures are seldom developed
and organised in ways that support a
systemic understanding of challenges
and responses. Collectively, these
factors make it hard to achieve
adaptive governance processes that
can respond rapidly to new information
about the barriers, opportunities,
trade-offs and co-benefits associated
with systemic change.
To achieve sustainable system
outcomes, there is a need for
policies that embrace the inherent
interconnectedness of system
components, interactions across
systems, and links between economic,
social and environmental goals. To
anticipate potential implications
and unintended consequences such
To achieve sustainable
outcomes, there is a need for
policies to embrace systems’
interconnectedness and links
between economic, social and
environmental goals.
interventions should be assessed
against multiple criteria. These include
feasibility against ecological and
biophysical constraints, their viability
for economy and society (e.g. effects
on jobs, structure of the economy,
import dependency), and their ability
to meet multiple sustainability goals
simultaneously, both inside and
outside Europe (Giampietro et al.,
2009; MAGIC‐NEXUS Project, 2018;
Ripa et al., 2018).
Looking ahead, the pressures on
existing systems are set to increase.
In addition to global demographic,
economic and environmental trends,
the emergence of a cluster of related
technologies — including artificial
intelligence, robotics, 3D printing, the
Internet of Things, nanotechnology
and biotechnology — threatens to
disrupt economic and social systems
in profound ways. According to
Klaus Schwab, founder of the World
Economic Forum, ‘We stand on the
brink of a technological revolution that
will fundamentally alter the way we
live, work, and relate to one another.
In its scale, scope, and complexity, the
transformation will be unlike anything
humankind has experienced before.’
(Schwab, 2015).
The coming transformations are
likely to be disruptive for industries,
investments and labour markets,
creating major challenges for
societies. Yet, they also present
opportunities to reshape societal
systems in ways that are urgently
needed. Chapter 17 explores these
themes in more detail, examining
how Europe’s governments and
societies can respond to sustainability
challenges by finding ways to change
production and consumption patterns
in ways that can create a resilient and
sustainable future.
SOER 2020/Understanding sustainability challenges
375