EDITORIAL
Tipping Points for a Seminal New Era of Climate
Resilience and Climate Justice
Gretel Follingstad1,2,3
1Managing Editor of the Journal of Climate Resilience & Climate Justice
2NOAA – National Integrated Drought Information System – Intermountain West
3CU Boulder – Center for Integrated Research in Environmental Studies (CIRES)
Globally, we are living in an era of unparalleled population growth, rapid loss of undeveloped
lands and forests, and tipping points of natural resource extractions serving 21st-century soci-
etal needs. Since the onset of industrialization in the 18th century, human actions have altered
the planet and its atmosphere on a staggeringly large scale. Over the past 150 years, green-
house gas (GHG) emissions from human actions have increased by 30% (UCAR et al., n.d.),
creating a greenhouse effect, which in turn causes global temperatures to rise. As noted in the
Sixth Assessment Report, AR6 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023, of the International
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) , human activities, principally through emissions of GHGs,
have unequivocally caused global warming, with global surface temperatures reaching 1.1°C
above 1850–1900 levels in 2011–2020 (IPCC, 2023). Increased temperatures influence global
weather patterns, creating climate nonstationarity, breaking down certainty of climate
“normal” and the ability to accurately predict impacts of extreme weather events and the asso-
ciated risks this poses to communities (Revi et al., 2014). Many theorize that our outsized
impact on the natural world has propelled us into an entirely new geological time interval,
dubbed the “Anthropocene.” The formal definition of the Anthropocene is an epoch in which
many of the Earth’s conditions and processes are profoundly altered by human influence
(Berkes, 2017; Steffen et al., 2007, 2011). In layperson’s terms, it describes the era when
the consequences of our actions catch up to us in a series of tipping points.
Inoltre, the Anthropocene is a period of immense social and environmental injustice.
While global GHG emissions continue to rise due to historical and ongoing contributions
arising from unsustainable energy production, past and present land uses, and development
patterns, the impacts of climate change are disproportionately impacting the livelihoods and
well-being of the most vulnerable and underserved populations (IPCC, 2023). Così, IL
Anthropocene is largely defined by these anthropogenic forces, which cause climate tipping
points around the world, triggering widespread adverse impacts and related losses and dam-
ages to nature and people (IPCC, 2023). These tipping points actuate more frequent and higher
magnitude extreme natural hazards including heat waves, prolonged periods of drought,
sea-level rise, and ecosystem disturbance. This era of severe global environmental and demo-
graphic change is felt differently in different regions of the world, and disproportionately across
societies, races, and cultures. Inoltre, vulnerable communities who have historically
contributed the least to current climate change––and therefore also experienced the least
benefit and wealth creation from industrialization––are disproportionately affected.
The remarkably disparate burden of climate impacts on underserved and marginalized
regions exacerbates other stresses, including food insecurity, reduced water security, E
exposure to poor air quality and extreme heat. In the United States, the roots of these inequities
a n o p e n a c c e s s
j o u r n a l
Citation: Follingstad, G. (2023). Tipping
Points for a Seminal New Era of Climate
Resilience and Climate Justice. Journal
of Climate Resilience & Climate
Justice, 1, 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1162
/crcj_e_00011
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1162/crcj_e_00011
Corresponding Author:
Gretel Follingstad
gretelfollingstad@gmail.com
Copyright: © 2023
Istituto di Tecnologia del Massachussetts.
Pubblicato sotto Creative Commons
Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale
(CC BY 4.0) licenza.
The MIT Press
Scaricato da http://direct.mit.edu/crcj/article-pdf/doi/10.1162/crcj_e_00011/2157222/crcj_e_00011.pdf by guest on 07 settembre 2023
Tipping Points for a New Era
stem from discriminatory land use, planning, zoning, and design decisions that shaped the
built environment. The hangover (and in many cases, continuing enforcement) of these types
of decisions has created multigenerational assaults on marginalized and underserved neigh-
borhoods, which can now be used as a predictor of highly vulnerable areas to climate impacts.
Per esempio, the role of historic housing policies known as “redlining”––the practice of refus-
ing home loans or insurance to whole neighborhoods based on a racially motivated percep-
tion of safety for investment (Hoffman et al., 2020)––has subjected generations of Black and
Brown communities to increased exposure to climate inequities such as intra-urban heat,
flooding, poor air quality and other climate change impacts. Yet, this type of structural racism
lives on today in BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) and underserved neighborhoods.
These type of zoning decisions, which determine the placement of industrial areas that drive
the concentrations of pollution, became racialized when the placement of these land uses are
biased based on proximity to affluent suburbs, working-class suburbs, and downtown areas
(Pulido, 2017). There are numerous studies that confirm the role of these structural and
hegemonic forms of racism contributing to inequalities (Bullard, 2008; Pulido, 2017). These
practices encompass the concepts of environmental racism, which were first studied in the late
1980s with the United Church of Christ’s study on Toxic Waste and Race in the United States
(Pulido, 2017). Environmental racism has been extensively verified in communities of color
and BIPOC neighborhoods commonly located adjacent to toxic industrial facilities, putting
residents at higher risk of air pollution impacts (Terrell & St. Julien, 2022). Other analyses
show that subsidized housing is frequently located in the floodplain and features poor
building quality, such as deficient insulation, leading to a decreased ability to effectively
cope with climate challenges such as severe heat or strong storms (Simmons, 2020). Inoltre,
these types of exclusionary land use practices still plague efforts to address the affordable
housing crisis faced by communities nationwide, by constraining housing supply and raising
prices, which contributes to growing inequalities by making housing less affordable (Stegman,
2019).
Climate justice refers to the process of dismantling the systemic determinants of differing
social, economic, public health, and environmental outcomes that stem from climate change
and the disproportionate harm underserved, BIPOC, and marginalized populations experi-
ence. Pointedly, not all people feel the effect of climate change equally (Sultana, 2022). Questo
highlights the fact that climate change is as much a social, ethical, and political issue as it is a
physical and atmospheric sciences issue. Climate justice builds upon the fundamental con-
cepts of environmental justice, including meaningful public engagement, certainty in how
distributive justice is defined and implemented, and substantive requirements for addressing
distributional inequities (Ulibarri et al., 2022). David Schlosberg (2004) stresses four important
components of environmental justice, paraphrased here: 1. Distributive justice—equity in the
distribution of benefits and burdens for all social groups; 2. Procedural justice—fair, equitable,
and inclusive integration of impacted parties into decision-making processes; 3. Restorative
justice—improvement of risk and ensuring that perpetrators of harm are brought to justice;
E 4. Recognitional justice—diversity of the participants and experiences in affected commu-
nities, and participation in the political processes that create and manage environmental
policy. Fundamentally, the components of environmental justice must be embedded in climate
justice to responsibly redress the uneven and disproportionate impacts of climate change
(Sultana, 2022).
The compounding extremes of climate nonstationarity (when long-term climate trends are
no longer reliable for predicting or monitoring climate extremes and anomalies), coupled with
the impacts of current and historic land use decisions guided by environmental racism, creates
Journal of Climate Resilience and Climate Justice
4
Scaricato da http://direct.mit.edu/crcj/article-pdf/doi/10.1162/crcj_e_00011/2157222/crcj_e_00011.pdf by guest on 07 settembre 2023
Tipping Points for a New Era
a “wicked problem” (Kwakkel et al., 2016). While the direct processes by which environmen-
tal injustices occur may differ according to local and regional contexts, the patterns of
insecurity and vulnerability are reproduced across the global scale. This is highlighted in
the Climate Change 2023 synthesis report, noting that between 2010 E 2020 human
mortality from floods, droughts, and storms globally was 15 times higher in extremely vulner-
able areas, characterized by low-income, underserved, and unplanned development zones
(IPCC, 2023). These colliding circumstances leave many feeling that we are concurrently facing
tipping points in Earth’s natural systems and a global social emergency of climate injustices
across human society. As societal systems continue to be impacted and the falling dominoes
of interconnected dependences ricochet through communities, equitable and resilience-
focused community planning and disaster response are vital for responsible and ethical climate
action. Addressing the multiple layers of “wickedness” highlights a fundamental responsibility
to position environmental and social justice at the center of climate action and adaptation.
This in turn depends on the use of diverse and equitable methods to recalibrate natural and
social systems to protect social cohesion and minimize environmental catastrophes (Schlör
et al., 2018).
Instituting climate resilience requires building knowledge and awareness about social and
ecological systems (SES), where human systems are an embedded and conjunctive component
of the natural environment, ecosystems, and ecosystem services (Berkes, 2017; Berkes et al.,
2003). Implementing an SES approach to resilience requires evaluating environmental and
social vulnerabilities and their interdependencies as one synergized system (Berkes, 2017;
Berkes et al., 2003; Desouza & Flanery, 2013; Folke, 2006; Folke et al., 2005). The entwined
nature of SES depends upon coevolution (Folke et al., 2016) and requires the convergence of
diverse expertise to build equitable resilience to vulnerabilities. Fundamentally, resilience
deals with systems change, apprendimento, and adaptation (Berkes, 2017), and is useful for gauging
a community’s capacity to equitably recover from external torments, social injustices, environ-
mental changes, hazards, and the subsequent economic impacts.
When trying to account for both social and environmental systems in a planning process,
scale can quickly become a challenge. Resilience thinking is most easily understood at a scale
where the relationships embedded within the SES are changing at a rate in which the impact of
human actions are conceivable (Folke et al., 2011; Steffen et al., 2007; Turner et al., 2003).
Yet, the challenges of the Anthropocene are enormous and encompass both global ecosystems
and social justice systems. How a particular community’s SES dynamics influence the chal-
lenges of diminishing resources and societal upheaval depends upon the capacity to respond,
political structures, and ensuing resources (natural and monetary). The goal here is to focus on
the gradual changes in the fundamental variables within the localized SES (Folke, 2016). In so
doing, SES-based planning reinforces the social and environmental capacities needed to reor-
ganize, adapt, Imparare, and rebound from an event (hazard events, disasters). When this occurs at
the local level, the appropriate capacities and dynamics can be gauged to appropriately work
toward equitable transformation, innovation, and preparation (Berkes et al., 2003; Folke,
2016; Olsson et al., 2014).
Climate resilience planning positions environmental and climate justice at the core of
equitably rebuilding and regenerating our communities. The goal is to determine the critical
elements of risk and vulnerability and simultaneously build social capital and environmental
justice (Folke, 2016; Folke et al., 2010; Luthe & Wyss, 2015). This approach intentionally
breaks down sectoral and societal silos to transform standard processes and assure the well-
being of the tightly coupled dynamic of the whole SES (Folke, 2016). Inoltre, adapting to
climate risks requires restructuring current institutions and governance systems, shifting away
Journal of Climate Resilience and Climate Justice
5
Scaricato da http://direct.mit.edu/crcj/article-pdf/doi/10.1162/crcj_e_00011/2157222/crcj_e_00011.pdf by guest on 07 settembre 2023
Tipping Points for a New Era
from status quo governance and management systems (Sabatier & Weible, 2014). Così,
preparing for the impending risks and impacts of climate change also requires evaluation of
vulnerabilities embedded in key processes, procedures, and interactions within the SES
(Desouza & Flanery, 2013). Climate resilience solutions must create synergies and solutions
that prioritize protecting human rights and redressing past, present, and future losses to under-
served and vulnerable communities. This includes unpacking past climate injustices in the
context of reenvisioning and regenerating resilient systems. A cognizant approach to address-
ing the social and environmental tipping points conjunctively is an opportunity for regenera-
tive pathways for resilient social-ecological futures.
The promising pathways of climate resilience and climate justice are dependent upon inter-
connected, multidisciplinary, and coordinated efforts. These synergies guide adaptation in
such a way that generates new norms (social and ecological), which is fundamental to chang-
ing both the process and the outcomes. Braiding together the planetary circumstances of the
Anthropocene and pejorative community-planning decisions of the past (and present), neces-
sitates a resounding call for “just transitions” to resilient communities. Climate impacts are
cascading and will continue to intensify even as mitigation efforts take place. Climate
justice–centered solutions are requisite to creating climate resilient communities. Inoltre,
climate resilience and climate justice are fundamental components to responding to the
tipping points and veracities of the Anthropocene embedded in every sector and scale of
decision-making processes.
The Journal of Climate Resilience and Climate Justice (CRCJ ) aims to amplify the diverse
voices and multidisciplinary facets of Climate Resilience/Climate Justice by building a platform
for sharing case studies, strategies, lessons learned, research, and pathways for just transitions.
The CRCJ provides an accessible and sharable suite of articles that explore the challenges and
tipping points of the Anthropocene and opportunities for whole-systems transformation toward
brighter, more resilient futures.
REFERENCES
Berkes, F. (2017). Environmental governance for the Anthropocene?
Social-Ecological systems, resilience, and collaborative learning.
Sustainability, 9(7), Article 1232. https://doi.org/10.3390
/su9071232
Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (Eds.). (2003). Navigating social-
ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and
change. Cambridge University Press.
Bullard, R. D. (2008). Dumping in Dixie: Race, class, and environ-
mental quality. Avalon Publishing.
Desouza, K. C., & Flanery, T. H. (2013). Designing, planning, E
managing resilient cities: A conceptual framework. Cities, 35,
89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.06.003
Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for
social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental
Change, 16(3), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha
.2006.04.002
Folke, C. (2016). Resilience (republished). Ecology and Society,
21(4), Article 44. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09088-210444
Folke, C., Biggs, R., Norström, UN. V., Reyers, B., & Rockström, J.
(2016). Social-ecological resilience and biosphere-based sustain-
ability science. Ecology and Society, 21(3), Article 41. https://doi
.org/10.5751/ES-08748-210341
Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., &
Rockström, J. (2010). Resilience thinking: Integrating resilience,
adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society, 15(4),
Article 20. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03610-150420
Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., & Norberg, J. (2005). Adaptive gov-
ernance of social-ecological systems. Annual Review of Environ-
ment and Resources, 30(1), 441–473. https://doi.org/10.1146
/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511
Folke, C., Jansson, Å., Rockström, J., Olsson, P., Carpenter, S. R.,
Chapin, F. S., Crépin, A.-S., Daily, G., Danell, K., Ebbesson, J.,
Elmqvist, T., Galaz, V., Moberg, F., Nilsson, M., Österblom, H.,
Ostrom, E., Persson, Å., Peterson, G., Polasky, S., … Westley, F.
(2011). Reconnecting to the biosphere. AMBIO, 40(7), 719–738.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0184-y, PubMed: 22338712
Hoffman, J. S., Shandas, V., & Pendleton, N. (2020). The effects of
historical housing policies on resident exposure to intra-urban
heat: A study of 108 US urban areas. Climate, 8(1), Article 12.
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli8010012
International Panel on Climate Change. (2023). AR6 synthesis
report: Climate change 2023 (No. AR6). United Nations. https://
www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/
Kwakkel, J. H., Walker, W. E., & Haasnoot, M. (2016). Coping with
the wickedness of public policy problems: Approaches for deci-
sion making under deep uncertainty. Journal of Water Resources
Planning and Management, 142(3), Article 01816001. https://doi
.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000626
Journal of Climate Resilience and Climate Justice
6
Scaricato da http://direct.mit.edu/crcj/article-pdf/doi/10.1162/crcj_e_00011/2157222/crcj_e_00011.pdf by guest on 07 settembre 2023
Tipping Points for a New Era
Luthe, T., & Wyss, R. (2015). Introducing adaptive waves as a
concept to inform mental models of resilience. Sustainability
Scienza, 10(4), 673–685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015
-0316-6, PubMed: 30174729
Olsson, P., Galaz, V., & Boonstra, W. J. (2014). Sustainability trans-
formations: A resilience perspective. Ecology and Society, 19(4),
Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06799-190401
Pulido, l. (2017). Rethinking environmental racism: White privi-
lege and urban development in Southern California. In Environ-
ment (pag. 379–407). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324
/9781315256351-17
Revi, A., Satterthwaite, D., Aragón-Durand, F., Corfee-Morlot, J.,
Kiunsi, R. B. R., Pelling, M., Roberts, D., Solecki, W., Gajjar, S. P.,
& Sverdlik, UN. (2014). Towards transformative adaptation in cities:
The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment. Environment and Urbanization, 26(1),
11–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247814523539
Sabatier, P. A., & Weible, C. M. (2014). Theories of the policy pro-
cess (3rd ed.). Westview Press.
Schlör, H., Venghaus, S., & Hake, J.-F. (2018). The FEW-Nexus city
index – Measuring urban resilience. Applied Energy, 210,
382–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.02.026
Schlosberg, D. (2004). Reconceiving environmental justice: Globale
movements and political theories. Environmental Politics, 13(3),
517–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/0964401042000229025
Simmons, D. (2020, Luglio 29). What is ‘climate justice’? Yale Climate
Connections. https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/07/what
-is-climate-justice/
Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. J., & McNeill, J. R. (2007). The Anthropo-
cene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature?
AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 36(8), 614–621.
https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[614:TAAHNO]2.0
.CO;2, PubMed: 18240674
Steffen, W., Persson, Å., Deutsch, L., Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M.,
Richardson, K., Crumley, C., Crutzen, P., Folke, C., Gordon, L.,
Molina, M., Ramanathan, V., Rockström, J., Scheffer, M.,
Schellnhuber, H. J., & Svedin, U. (2011). The Anthropocene:
From global change to planetary stewardship. AMBIO, 40(7),
739–761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0185-x, PubMed:
22338713
Stegman, M. (2019). Eliminating exclusionary land use regulations
should be the civil rights issue of our time (Industry Perspectives).
Joint Center for Housing Studies. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu
/sites/default/files/harvard_jchs_exclusionary_zoning_civil_rights
_stegman_2019_0.pdf
Sultana, F. (2022). Critical climate justice. The Geographical
Journal, 188(1), 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12417
Terrell, K. A., & St. Julien, G. (2022). Air pollution is linked to higher
cancer rates among black or impoverished communities in
Louisiana. Environmental Research Letters, 17(1), Article 014033.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac4360
Turner, B. L., Kasperson, R. E., Matson, P. A., McCarthy, J. J., Corell,
R. W., Christensen, L., Eckley, N., Kasperson, J. X., Luers, A., Martello,
M. L., Polsky, C., Pulsipher, A., & Schiller, UN. (2003). A framework
for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8074–8079. https://
doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231335100, PubMed: 12792023
UCAR, NASA, & RUSD. (n.d.). Global climate change: Evidence
and causes. Down to Earth Climate Change. Retrieved April
18, 2023, from https://globalclimate.ucr.edu/resources.html.
Ulibarri, N., Pérez Figueroa, O., & Grant, UN. (2022). Barriers and
opportunities to incorporating environmental justice in the
National Environmental Policy act. Environmental Impact Assess-
ment Review, 97, Article 106880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar
.2022.106880
Journal of Climate Resilience and Climate Justice
7
Scaricato da http://direct.mit.edu/crcj/article-pdf/doi/10.1162/crcj_e_00011/2157222/crcj_e_00011.pdf by guest on 07 settembre 2023
