IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-7 - Revision history

Laura: /* 7.6.7 Inclusive governance for sustainable development */

2026-05-31T15:18:01Z

7.6.7 Inclusive governance for sustainable development

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:18, 31 May 2026
Line 2,313:		Line 2,313:
	Many sustainable development efforts fail because of lack of attention to societal issues, including inequality, discrimination, social exclusion and marginalisation (see Cross-Chapter Box 11 in this chapter) (Arts 2017a<sup>[[#fn:r1558\|1558]]</sup>). However, the human-rights-based approach of the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals commits to leaving no one behind (Arts 2017b). Inclusive governance focuses attention in issues of equity and the human-rights-based approach for development as it includes social, ecological and relational components used for assessing access to, as well as the allocations of rights, responsibilities and risks with respect to social and ecological resources (''medium agreement'') (Gupta and Pouw 2017<sup>[[#fn:r1559\|1559]]</sup>).		Many sustainable development efforts fail because of lack of attention to societal issues, including inequality, discrimination, social exclusion and marginalisation (see Cross-Chapter Box 11 in this chapter) (Arts 2017a<sup>[[#fn:r1558\|1558]]</sup>). However, the human-rights-based approach of the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals commits to leaving no one behind (Arts 2017b). Inclusive governance focuses attention in issues of equity and the human-rights-based approach for development as it includes social, ecological and relational components used for assessing access to, as well as the allocations of rights, responsibilities and risks with respect to social and ecological resources (''medium agreement'') (Gupta and Pouw 2017<sup>[[#fn:r1559\|1559]]</sup>).

	Governance processes that are inclusive of all people in decision-making and management of land, are better able to make decisions addressing trade-offs of sustainable development (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1560\|1560]]</sup>) and achieve SDGs focusing on social and ecological inclusiveness (Gupta and Vegelin 2016). Citizen engagement is important in enhancing natural resource service delivery by citizen inclusion in management and governance decisions (Section 7.5.5). In governing natural resources, focus is now not only on rights of citizens in relation to natural resources, but also on citizen obligations, responsibilities (Karar and Jacobs-Mata 2016<sup>[[#fn:r1561\|1561]]</sup>; Chaney and Fevre 2001<sup>[[#fn:r1562\|1562]]</sup>), feedback and learning processes (Tàbara et al. 2010<sup>[[#fn:r1563\|1563]]</sup>). In this respect, citizen engagement is also an imperative, particularly for		Governance processes that are inclusive of all people in decision-making and management of land, are better able to make decisions addressing trade-offs of sustainable development (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1560\|1560]]</sup>) and achieve SDGs focusing on social and ecological inclusiveness (Gupta and Vegelin 2016). Citizen engagement is important in enhancing natural resource service delivery by citizen inclusion in management and governance decisions (Section 7.5.5). In governing natural resources, focus is now not only on rights of citizens in relation to natural resources, but also on citizen obligations, responsibilities (Karar and Jacobs-Mata 2016<sup>[[#fn:r1561\|1561]]</sup>; Chaney and Fevre 2001<sup>[[#fn:r1562\|1562]]</sup>), feedback and learning processes (Tàbara et al. 2010<sup>[[#fn:r1563\|1563]]</sup>). In this respect, citizen engagement is also an imperative, particularly for analysing and addressing aggregated informal coping strategies of local residents in developing countries, which are important drivers of natural resource depletions (but often overlooked in conventional policy development processes in natural resource management) (Ehara et al. 2018<sup>[[#fn:r1564\|1564]]</sup>).

	analysing and addressing aggregated informal coping strategies of local residents in developing countries, which are important drivers of natural resource depletions (but often overlooked in conventional policy development processes in natural resource management) (Ehara et al. 2018<sup>[[#fn:r1564\|1564]]</sup>).

	Inclusive adaptive governance makes important contributions to the management of risk. Inclusive governance concerning risk integrates people’s knowledge and values by involving them in decision-making processes where they are able to contribute their respective knowledge and values to make effective, efficient, fair, and morally acceptable decisions (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1565\|1565]]</sup>). Representation in decision-making would include major actors – government, economic sectors, the scientific community and representatives of civil society (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1566\|1566]]</sup>). Inclusive governance focuses attention on the well-being and meaningful participation in decision-making of the poorest (in income), vulnerable (in terms of age, gender, and location), and the most marginalised, and is inclusive of all knowledges (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1567\|1567]]</sup>).		Inclusive adaptive governance makes important contributions to the management of risk. Inclusive governance concerning risk integrates people’s knowledge and values by involving them in decision-making processes where they are able to contribute their respective knowledge and values to make effective, efficient, fair, and morally acceptable decisions (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1565\|1565]]</sup>). Representation in decision-making would include major actors – government, economic sectors, the scientific community and representatives of civil society (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1566\|1566]]</sup>). Inclusive governance focuses attention on the well-being and meaningful participation in decision-making of the poorest (in income), vulnerable (in terms of age, gender, and location), and the most marginalised, and is inclusive of all knowledges (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1567\|1567]]</sup>).

Laura: /* CCB 13 Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) */

2026-05-31T15:17:39Z

CCB 13 Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:17, 31 May 2026
Line 2,233:		Line 2,233:

	ILK can be deployed in the practice of climate governance, especially at the local level where actions are informed by the principles of decentralisation and autonomy (Chanza and de Wit 2016; Harmsworth and Awatere 2013). International environmental agreements are also increasingly including attention to ILK and diverse cultural perspectives, for reasons of social justice and inclusive decision- making (Brondizio and Tourneau 2016). However, the context-specific, and dynamic nature of ILK and its embeddedness in local institutions and power relations needs consideration (Naess 2013). It is also important to take a gendered approach so as not to further marginalise certain knowledge, as men and women hold different knowledge, expertise and transmission patterns (Díaz- Reviriego et al. 2017).		ILK can be deployed in the practice of climate governance, especially at the local level where actions are informed by the principles of decentralisation and autonomy (Chanza and de Wit 2016; Harmsworth and Awatere 2013). International environmental agreements are also increasingly including attention to ILK and diverse cultural perspectives, for reasons of social justice and inclusive decision- making (Brondizio and Tourneau 2016). However, the context-specific, and dynamic nature of ILK and its embeddedness in local institutions and power relations needs consideration (Naess 2013). It is also important to take a gendered approach so as not to further marginalise certain knowledge, as men and women hold different knowledge, expertise and transmission patterns (Díaz- Reviriego et al. 2017).
			</div>
	<span id="land-tenure"></span>		<span id="land-tenure"></span>
	=== 7.6.5 Land tenure ===		=== 7.6.5 Land tenure ===
Line 2,320:		Line 2,320:

	<span id="key-uncertainties-and-knowledge-gaps"></span>		<span id="key-uncertainties-and-knowledge-gaps"></span>

	== 7.7 Key uncertainties and knowledge gaps ==		== 7.7 Key uncertainties and knowledge gaps ==

Laura: /* 7.6.4 Participation */

2026-05-31T15:17:22Z

7.6.4 Participation

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:17, 31 May 2026
Line 2,200:		Line 2,200:

	<span id="ccb-13-indigenous-and-local-knowledge-ilk"></span>		<span id="ccb-13-indigenous-and-local-knowledge-ilk"></span>
			<div class="container-box col-cross">

	== CCB 13 Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) ==		== CCB 13 Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) ==

Laura: /* B7.2 Adaptive governance and interlinkages of food, fibre, water, energy and land */

2026-05-31T15:17:05Z

B7.2 Adaptive governance and interlinkages of food, fibre, water, energy and land

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:17, 31 May 2026
Line 2,163:		Line 2,163:

	Adaptive management identifies and responds to exposure and vulnerability to land and climate change impacts by identifying problems and objectives, making decisions in relation to response options, and instruments advancing response options in the context of uncertainty. These decisions are continuously monitored, evaluated and adjusted to changing conditions. Similarly disaster risk management responds to hazards through preparation, prevention, response, analysis, and reconstruction in an iterative process.		Adaptive management identifies and responds to exposure and vulnerability to land and climate change impacts by identifying problems and objectives, making decisions in relation to response options, and instruments advancing response options in the context of uncertainty. These decisions are continuously monitored, evaluated and adjusted to changing conditions. Similarly disaster risk management responds to hazards through preparation, prevention, response, analysis, and reconstruction in an iterative process.
			</div>
	<span id="participation"></span>		<span id="participation"></span>
	=== 7.6.4 Participation ===		=== 7.6.4 Participation ===
Line 2,200:		Line 2,200:

	<span id="ccb-13-indigenous-and-local-knowledge-ilk"></span>		<span id="ccb-13-indigenous-and-local-knowledge-ilk"></span>

	== CCB 13 Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) ==		== CCB 13 Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) ==

Laura: /* 7.6.3 Adaptive climate governance responding to uncertainty */

2026-05-31T15:16:49Z

7.6.3 Adaptive climate governance responding to uncertainty

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 31 May 2026
Line 2,120:		Line 2,120:

	<span id="b7.2-adaptive-governance-and-interlinkages-of-food-fibre-water-energy-and-land"></span>		<span id="b7.2-adaptive-governance-and-interlinkages-of-food-fibre-water-energy-and-land"></span>
			<div class="container-box col-regular">

	== B7.2 Adaptive governance and interlinkages of food, fibre, water, energy and land ==		== B7.2 Adaptive governance and interlinkages of food, fibre, water, energy and land ==

Laura: /* CCB12 Traditional biomass use: Land, climate and development implications */

2026-05-31T15:16:11Z

CCB12 Traditional biomass use: Land, climate and development implications

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 31 May 2026
Line 2,088:		Line 2,088:

	Unlike analyses on modern energy sources, scientific assessments on traditional biomass use are complicated by its informal nature and the difficulty of tracing data and impacts; more systematic analytical efforts are needed to address this research gap Cerutti et al. 2015). In general, traditional biomass use is associated with poverty. Therefore, efforts to reduce the dependence on fuelwood use are to be conducted in coherence with poverty alleviation (McCollum et al. 2018; Joana Specht et al. 2015b; Zulu and Richardson 2013b). The substantial potential co-benefits suggest that the traditional biomass sector remains under- researched and under-exploited in terms of cost-effective emissions reductions, as well as for synergies between climate stabilisation goals and other SDGs.		Unlike analyses on modern energy sources, scientific assessments on traditional biomass use are complicated by its informal nature and the difficulty of tracing data and impacts; more systematic analytical efforts are needed to address this research gap Cerutti et al. 2015). In general, traditional biomass use is associated with poverty. Therefore, efforts to reduce the dependence on fuelwood use are to be conducted in coherence with poverty alleviation (McCollum et al. 2018; Joana Specht et al. 2015b; Zulu and Richardson 2013b). The substantial potential co-benefits suggest that the traditional biomass sector remains under- researched and under-exploited in terms of cost-effective emissions reductions, as well as for synergies between climate stabilisation goals and other SDGs.
			</div>
	<span id="adaptive-climate-governance-responding-to-uncertainty"></span>		<span id="adaptive-climate-governance-responding-to-uncertainty"></span>
	=== 7.6.3 Adaptive climate governance responding to uncertainty ===		=== 7.6.3 Adaptive climate governance responding to uncertainty ===
Line 2,120:		Line 2,120:

	<span id="b7.2-adaptive-governance-and-interlinkages-of-food-fibre-water-energy-and-land"></span>		<span id="b7.2-adaptive-governance-and-interlinkages-of-food-fibre-water-energy-and-land"></span>

	== B7.2 Adaptive governance and interlinkages of food, fibre, water, energy and land ==		== B7.2 Adaptive governance and interlinkages of food, fibre, water, energy and land ==

Laura: /* 7.6.2 Integration – Levels, modes and scale of governance for sustainable development */

2026-05-31T15:15:52Z

7.6.2 Integration – Levels, modes and scale of governance for sustainable development

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:15, 31 May 2026
Line 2,041:		Line 2,041:

	<span id="ccb12-traditional-biomass-use-land-climate-and-development-implications"></span>		<span id="ccb12-traditional-biomass-use-land-climate-and-development-implications"></span>
			<div class="container-box col-cross">

	== CCB12 Traditional biomass use: Land, climate and development implications ==		== CCB12 Traditional biomass use: Land, climate and development implications ==

Laura: /* CCB9 Climate and land pathways */

2026-05-31T15:15:14Z

CCB9 Climate and land pathways

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:15, 31 May 2026
Line 1,830:		Line 1,830:

	Future pathways for climate and land use include portfolios of response and policy options. Depending on the response options included, policy portfolios implemented, and other underlying socio-economic drivers, these pathways result in different land-use consequences and their contribution to climate change mitigation. Agricultural area declines by more than 5 Mkm <sup>2</sup> in one SSP but increases by as much as 5 Mkm <sup>2</sup> in another. The amount of energy cropland ranges from nearly zero to 11 Mkm <sup>2</sup>, depending on the SSP and the warming target. Forest area declines in SSP3 but increases substantially in SSP1. Subsequently, these pathways have different implications for risks related to desertification, land degradation, food insecurity, and terrestrial GHG fluxes, as well as ecosystem services, biodiversity, and other aspects of sustainable development.		Future pathways for climate and land use include portfolios of response and policy options. Depending on the response options included, policy portfolios implemented, and other underlying socio-economic drivers, these pathways result in different land-use consequences and their contribution to climate change mitigation. Agricultural area declines by more than 5 Mkm <sup>2</sup> in one SSP but increases by as much as 5 Mkm <sup>2</sup> in another. The amount of energy cropland ranges from nearly zero to 11 Mkm <sup>2</sup>, depending on the SSP and the warming target. Forest area declines in SSP3 but increases substantially in SSP1. Subsequently, these pathways have different implications for risks related to desertification, land degradation, food insecurity, and terrestrial GHG fluxes, as well as ecosystem services, biodiversity, and other aspects of sustainable development.
			</div>
	<div id="section-7-5-6-1-trade-offs-and-synergies-between-ecosystem-services-es"></div>		<div id="section-7-5-6-1-trade-offs-and-synergies-between-ecosystem-services-es"></div>

Line 1,966:		Line 1,966:

	<span id="governance-governing-the-landclimate-interface"></span>		<span id="governance-governing-the-landclimate-interface"></span>

	== 7.6 Governance: Governing the land–climate interface ==		== 7.6 Governance: Governing the land–climate interface ==

Laura: /* 7.5.6 Maximising synergies and minimising trade-offs */

2026-05-31T15:14:48Z

7.5.6 Maximising synergies and minimising trade-offs

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:14, 31 May 2026
Line 1,753:		Line 1,753:

	<span id="ccb9-climate-and-land-pathways"></span>		<span id="ccb9-climate-and-land-pathways"></span>
			<div class="container-box col-cross">

	== CCB9 Climate and land pathways ==		== CCB9 Climate and land pathways ==

Laura: /* 7.5.6 Maximising synergies and minimising trade-offs */

2026-05-31T15:14:19Z

7.5.6 Maximising synergies and minimising trade-offs

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:18, 31 May 2026
Line 2,313:		Line 2,313:
	Many sustainable development efforts fail because of lack of attention to societal issues, including inequality, discrimination, social exclusion and marginalisation (see Cross-Chapter Box 11 in this chapter) (Arts 2017a<sup>[[#fn:r1558\|1558]]</sup>). However, the human-rights-based approach of the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals commits to leaving no one behind (Arts 2017b). Inclusive governance focuses attention in issues of equity and the human-rights-based approach for development as it includes social, ecological and relational components used for assessing access to, as well as the allocations of rights, responsibilities and risks with respect to social and ecological resources (''medium agreement'') (Gupta and Pouw 2017<sup>[[#fn:r1559\|1559]]</sup>).		Many sustainable development efforts fail because of lack of attention to societal issues, including inequality, discrimination, social exclusion and marginalisation (see Cross-Chapter Box 11 in this chapter) (Arts 2017a<sup>[[#fn:r1558\|1558]]</sup>). However, the human-rights-based approach of the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals commits to leaving no one behind (Arts 2017b). Inclusive governance focuses attention in issues of equity and the human-rights-based approach for development as it includes social, ecological and relational components used for assessing access to, as well as the allocations of rights, responsibilities and risks with respect to social and ecological resources (''medium agreement'') (Gupta and Pouw 2017<sup>[[#fn:r1559\|1559]]</sup>).

	Governance processes that are inclusive of all people in decision-making and management of land, are better able to make decisions addressing trade-offs of sustainable development (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1560\|1560]]</sup>) and achieve SDGs focusing on social and ecological inclusiveness (Gupta and Vegelin 2016). Citizen engagement is important in enhancing natural resource service delivery by citizen inclusion in management and governance decisions (Section 7.5.5). In governing natural resources, focus is now not only on rights of citizens in relation to natural resources, but also on citizen obligations, responsibilities (Karar and Jacobs-Mata 2016<sup>[[#fn:r1561\|1561]]</sup>; Chaney and Fevre 2001<sup>[[#fn:r1562\|1562]]</sup>), feedback and learning processes (Tàbara et al. 2010<sup>[[#fn:r1563\|1563]]</sup>). In this respect, citizen engagement is also an imperative, particularly for		Governance processes that are inclusive of all people in decision-making and management of land, are better able to make decisions addressing trade-offs of sustainable development (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1560\|1560]]</sup>) and achieve SDGs focusing on social and ecological inclusiveness (Gupta and Vegelin 2016). Citizen engagement is important in enhancing natural resource service delivery by citizen inclusion in management and governance decisions (Section 7.5.5). In governing natural resources, focus is now not only on rights of citizens in relation to natural resources, but also on citizen obligations, responsibilities (Karar and Jacobs-Mata 2016<sup>[[#fn:r1561\|1561]]</sup>; Chaney and Fevre 2001<sup>[[#fn:r1562\|1562]]</sup>), feedback and learning processes (Tàbara et al. 2010<sup>[[#fn:r1563\|1563]]</sup>). In this respect, citizen engagement is also an imperative, particularly for analysing and addressing aggregated informal coping strategies of local residents in developing countries, which are important drivers of natural resource depletions (but often overlooked in conventional policy development processes in natural resource management) (Ehara et al. 2018<sup>[[#fn:r1564\|1564]]</sup>).

	analysing and addressing aggregated informal coping strategies of local residents in developing countries, which are important drivers of natural resource depletions (but often overlooked in conventional policy development processes in natural resource management) (Ehara et al. 2018<sup>[[#fn:r1564\|1564]]</sup>).

	Inclusive adaptive governance makes important contributions to the management of risk. Inclusive governance concerning risk integrates people’s knowledge and values by involving them in decision-making processes where they are able to contribute their respective knowledge and values to make effective, efficient, fair, and morally acceptable decisions (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1565\|1565]]</sup>). Representation in decision-making would include major actors – government, economic sectors, the scientific community and representatives of civil society (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1566\|1566]]</sup>). Inclusive governance focuses attention on the well-being and meaningful participation in decision-making of the poorest (in income), vulnerable (in terms of age, gender, and location), and the most marginalised, and is inclusive of all knowledges (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1567\|1567]]</sup>).		Inclusive adaptive governance makes important contributions to the management of risk. Inclusive governance concerning risk integrates people’s knowledge and values by involving them in decision-making processes where they are able to contribute their respective knowledge and values to make effective, efficient, fair, and morally acceptable decisions (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1565\|1565]]</sup>). Representation in decision-making would include major actors – government, economic sectors, the scientific community and representatives of civil society (Renn and Schweizer 2009<sup>[[#fn:r1566\|1566]]</sup>). Inclusive governance focuses attention on the well-being and meaningful participation in decision-making of the poorest (in income), vulnerable (in terms of age, gender, and location), and the most marginalised, and is inclusive of all knowledges (Gupta et al. 2015<sup>[[#fn:r1567\|1567]]</sup>).