This paper reviews the evolution of the Australian fashion and textile industry over the last 50 years as it confronts the challenges of climate change. Given Australia’s susceptibility to trade policies and shifting regulations, the industry needs to adapt to climate pressures, given its significant resource consumption and waste production. This analysis highlights key events that shaped the trading landscape, regulatory changes, and the need for stronger climate policies that bridge environmental responsibility between local and global actors, aiming to reduce the industry’s impact on climate change.

This review examines the Australian fashion and textile industry’s response to climate change from the 1970s to the 2020s, using a methodology adapted from Harvard University comparative review guidelines and incorporating PRISMA . With evolving trade policies and regulatory shifts, this paper highlights the industry’s environmental challenges. This analysis examines the influence of local and international trade regulations and the effectiveness of climate policies in fostering sustainability. Key policy insights include the integration of climate considerations into trade policies to address the environmental impacts of international transactions, aligning trade with global climate goals. Additionally, it advocates for mandatory climate disclosures encompassing onshore and offshore emissions to enhance transparency across the supply chain. This paper calls for stronger alignment between climate and trade policies and expanded producer responsibility, holding both domestic and international actors accountable for environmental impacts.

Reviewing 50 years of Australia’s fashion and textile industry as it adapts to climate pressures & policy shifts.

We provide numerical evidence for the significant regional impacts of national-scale wind farms in China on climate and the resultant air pollution redistribution using dynamic numerical weather predictions and a multiscale air quality model. Wind farms in China influence the mesoscale atmospheric circulation in summer with a strong unstable atmosphere, leading to significant regional air pollutant responses. Although they do not produce additional emissions, wind farms redistribute air pollutants due to the change in atmospheric processes. It is urgent for the government and wind power industry to establish better policies and effectiveness measurements for the sustainable development of wind power.

As wind farms have developed rapidly worldwide, the interactions between wind farms and the environment have attracted increasing attention. However, how wind farms influence the climate and the resultant air pollution responses remains unclear. Here, we first show that wind farms in China have significant impacts on both climate and air pollutants by using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) and Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system. In particular, wind farms influence the mesoscale circulation under unstable conditions in summer, leading to significant regional climatic impacts with a remarkable wind loss of 3.2 m · s−1 in northern China, while a wind gain of 4.24 m · s−1 in southeastern China. Although wind farms do not produce additional emissions, they redistribute air pollutants due to the change in atmospheric processes. As a result, PM2.5 increased in northeastern China with an average of 4.39 μg · m−3 but decreased in southeastern China with a mean of 3.27 μg · m−3 during 2015–2018. More significant impacts can be expected in the future, and urgent attention from the government and industry is required to establish better policies and effectiveness measurements for the sustainable development of wind power.

Wind farm clusters in China significantly affect the local and regional climate and then redistribute air pollution.

As glaciers shrink and disappear, the benefits they provide to people may also be fading. This makes it more important than ever to look closely at how melting glaciers affect both the environment and the communities that depend on them. To truly understand what is being lost- or even gained- we need to study glaciers from many angles. This includes looking at the science of ice and water, the plural value of nature, local politics, and possible future changes. We bring these different aspects under the framework called socio-glaciology. This method looks beyond just economic impacts and includes political ecology and plural valuations to cover knowledge about health, the ability to move or adapt, cultural traditions, local knowledge, and people’s connection to their land.

As ice retreat undermines glaciers’ contributions to people, there is a pressing need for in-depth analysis of the complex interactions between the glacier environments and the societies living in, and engaging with affected areas in the decades to come. In order to fully understand what is lost, damaged, and even gained, we advocate for a research design that combines glaciology, hydrology, ecosystems services, political ecology, and future scenarios studies. A socio-glaciology approach (SG) can uncover the nuances of non-economic losses, including, but not limited to loss of life, health, technology, human mobility, territory, cultural heritage, and local knowledge.

SG as an interdisciplinary framework proposes to study society–glacier interactions as well as values with a circular research design, by integrating local knowledge, experiences, and preferences with more instrumental tools of scientific observations and computer modeling. We argue for reflexivity, meaning that methodologies for understanding glacier change in relation to people should be grounded in local experiences and preferences, while also being relevant and useful for policy, decision-making, and the development of strategies to manage environments and societies of the cryosphere.

Most research on glaciers has focused on the physiological effects of glacial melt by quantifying the scale of change. We need to bring social science perspectives to identify what these changes actually mean for societies and ecosystem values.

Climate policy discussions often veer into questioning whether actions are worthwhile, if technological fixes are the solution, or if others should take responsibility instead. Interest groups can use these discussions – also known as ‘discourses of climate delay’ – to downplay the need for ambitious climate action. But in other contexts, such discussions can reflect the legitimate concerns of citizens. Here we examine possible ways to make such a distinction and judge when someone intends to delay climate policy.

We conduct a review of the climate policy discourse literature with a focus on how studies evaluate intent. We find that they usually refer to one of three actor-based categories: interest, behaviour, or track record. That is, actors are considered more likely to have intent when they have material or ideological connections to fossil interest groups, behave in ways that undermine climate policy (e.g. through voting or funding oppositional science), or have a track record of rhetorical opposition to climate policy (e.g. having previously articulated climate denial). We further suggest that argument density (e.g. the number of claims they make against climate policy), ambiguity (e.g. whether they leave room for an interpretation of delay), and professional context (e.g. whether they are professional communicators) matters. We summarise these categories to provide a companion to ‘discourses of climate delay’ that focuses on intent. We further consider how the evaluation of intent can support traditional fact and logic-based misinformation identification strategies.

Examine interests, behaviour and track record to evaluate intent in climate delay discourses.

To explore how city-level international partnerships can succeed, this study focuses on the sister-city relationship between Wuhan (China) and Manchester (UK), which has demonstrated strong outcomes in sustainability collaboration. Through a detailed analysis of this case, the study identifies three key factors for enduring international collaboration – sustained mutual benefit, broad partnership areas, and deep grassroots engagement – and reveals how they adapt and consolidate over time. These results suggest that international partnerships need to be designed not only to ensure mutual benefit but also to promote inclusiveness and multi-level participation.

The importance of global collaborations in achieving sustainable development is widely recognised. However, establishing and maintaining international partnerships remains a significant challenge. To understand how effective international partnerships can be developed to address sustainability challenges, this study conducts a case study of the Manchester–Wuhan sister-city relationship, a highly successful and representative example of international cooperation on sustainable development. Drawing on insights from 27 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders involved in organising and participating in the initiative, the study shows that the longevity of international partnerships is determined by three core factors: the preservation of mutual benefit, the breadth of cooperation, and profound grassroots involvement. These factors generate both economic and emotional capital, which incentivises governmental and non-governmental actors to deepen their engagement in sustainable urbanisation. This engagement also serves as a buffer against bilateral tensions between the UK and China. These results offer implications for how local initiatives can serve as effective mechanisms for fostering international cooperation in advancing sustainable development.

Building international partnerships for global sustainability requires mutual benefit, inclusiveness, and engagement at multiple levels.

The Earth is approaching irreversible tipping points. Markets, democracy, and technology alone cannot address these complex crises. Future Design (FD) tackles these challenges by activating human ability to prioritise future generations’ happiness over immediate gains. This research expands the FD framework and reviews a decade’s worth of studies, deepening our understanding of FD’s potential in creating mechanisms for long-term societal well-being and environmental sustainability.

The Earth is approaching irreversible tipping points across multiple domains. Despite advances in markets, democracy, and science, these systems systematically fail to prioritise future generations’ well-being – creating what we term ‘future failures’. New mechanisms are needed, such as FD. Originating in Japan in the early 2010s, FD aims to design, experiment with, and implement mechanisms that activate our futurability – the ability to prioritise the happiness of future generations over immediate gains – to tackle future failures. This paper introduces presentability and pastability alongside futurability, extending the FD framework. Placing various FD studies from the past decade within this framework, this study reviews mechanisms for activating these abilities and examines how activating one ability affects the others. These abilities are ‘leverage points’, as defined by Meadows. We explore the path to a paradigm shift by designing and using mechanisms that activate these points. This paper also highlights unknowns about FD and potential directions for its development, providing a comprehensive overview of its current state and future prospects in addressing global challenges.

Future Design: A new approach to global crises, prioritising future generations over immediate gains.

This study aimed to analyse the advantages and challenges of the energy transition in an emerging economy such as Colombia via quantitative spatial panel data models using Colombian regions, which included departments from 2015 to 2023, to determine the main relationships between the energy transition and other variables, such as housing features, energy consumption and costs, fossil fuel use, mining, transportation activities, deforestation and livestock activity.

Energy transition is closely related to climate change and is helpful for achieving the main initiative in a broader strategy adopted by governments to contain global warming to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels by the middle of the century. This study uses different empirical methods as quantitative spatial panel data models to determine variables that impact energy transition considering that the limitations of this study are related to the availability of data in every region and information on specific actions to promote energy transition in the regions. The results revealed that regions with higher levels of households, electricity coverage, energy, gasoline and diesel consumption, mining activities, transportation dynamics, deforestation rates and livestock activities generate higher carbon dioxide emissions, whereas regions with greater stable forest and electric vehicle growth rates present lower carbon dioxide emissions. The findings of this study could allow us to formulate suitable public policies to promote just energy transition that could be founded on different knowledge fields, including the industry and productive sector and its role in cleaner production, environmentally friendly infrastructure and technology, building capacities to adopt present and future technological change and create robust regulatory frameworks for their adequate operation, while considering the features and economic activities of territories and the diversification of energy sources as a strategy to promote sustainable energy transition and control climate change. Future research could concentrate on including new variables as renewable energy prices, comparative studies with other Latin American and models to promote knowledge of energy transition and clean technologies.

Energy transition in departments in Colombia: An analysis with spatial econometrics.

This paper examines the recent rejection of the ‘Anthropocene’ as a formal geological epoch to explore how climate anxiety shapes scientific research. While there is broad agreement among scientists about climate change, political and legal action lag behind. Scientists bridge this gap by communicating their findings in ways that influence policy. This effort reflects the broader condition of ‘polycrisis’: multiple overlapping global challenges. I argue that terms like ‘Anthropocene’ and ‘polycrisis’ are not fixed truths, but strategies for taming uncertainty. Scientists, accordingly, are increasingly coming to replace legislators by encouraging certain kinds of present-day action towards more desirable futures.

This paper examines the Anthropocene Working Group's (AWG) effort to formalise a new geological epoch and interprets its 2024 rejection as a case study in the politics of polycrisis. Drawing on ethnographic research with the AWG, it shows how scientific observation is increasingly driven by anticipatory anxiety and a performative impulse to orient action towards uncertain futures. Through the concepts of the technofossil and procedural precedent, the article illustrates how geoscientific methods both generate and respond to normative expectations. The paper argues that polycrisis is not merely descriptive, but constitutes a second-order mode of engaging with the future, wherein political urgency animates what and how scientists observe. In the context of climate change, scientific actors are not only producing knowledge but also seeking to shape policy and social response by innovating within disciplinary protocols. Terms like ‘Anthropocene’ and ‘polycrisis’ are powerful abstractions whose utility lies in their imaginative capacity to narrate contingency and complexity, and imagine solutions by orienting action in the present towards desirable outcomes in the future, rather than in any fixed claim to objectivity.

Anxiety about the future is reshaping science, law, and the way we understand today's overlapping global crises.

Recent geopolitical events remind us of the need for a resilient, global approach to sustainability science. This Commentary argues that a diverse, bottom-up approach is essential to ensure sustainability science progresses, even amid shifting political processes that threaten international collaboration and funding. Locally driven solutions that value diverse perspectives and knowledge systems are vital for resilience. By supporting community-led action, sharing ideas across regions, and recognising that sustainability means different things in different places, we can build a more flexible, inclusive, and resilient path toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in an uncertain world.

Recent geopolitical events provide a stark reminder of the need to build a resilient, global approach to sustainability science. Centralised, top-down models of sustainability science are likely to be vulnerable to disruptions, from pandemics to wars, that threaten progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals and jeopardise decades of collaborative advancement that are needed to support future progress. We argue that a decentralised, community-empowered model provides the foundation needed for a resilient sustainability scientific effort. By prioritising local solutions, embracing diverse knowledge systems, and fostering horizontal knowledge exchange, we can create a more resilient and adaptable framework. Sustainability science initiatives need to elevate successful local initiatives, adopt transdisciplinary approaches that include underrepresented knowledge holders, build decentralised knowledge-sharing networks, and recognise that sustainability has different meanings across cultural and geographical contexts.

Decentralised sustainability science: local, diverse, and resilient in a fractious and unpredictable world.