Harmful tipping points in the natural world pose some of the gravest threats faced by humanity. Their triggering will severely damage our planet’s life-support systems and threaten the stability of our societies.
In the Summary Report:
• Narrative summary
• Global tipping points infographic
• Key messages
• Key Recommendations
Executive summary
• Section 1
• Section 2
• Section 3
• Section 4
This report is for all those concerned with tackling escalating Earth system change and mobilising transformative social change to alter that trajectory, achieve sustainability and promote social justice.
In this section:
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Key Concepts
• Approach
• References
Considers Earth system tipping points. These are reviewed and assessed across the three major domains of the cryosphere, biosphere and circulation of the oceans and atmosphere. We then consider the interactions and potential cascades of Earth system tipping points, followed by an assessment of early warning signals for Earth system tipping points.
Considers tipping point impacts. First we look at the human impacts of Earth system tipping points, then the potential couplings to negative tipping points in human systems. Next we assess the potential for cascading and compounding systemic risk, before considering the potential for early warning of impact tipping points.
Considers how to govern Earth system tipping points and their associated risks. We look at governance of mitigation, prevention and stabilisation then we focus on governance of impacts, including adaptation, vulnerability and loss and damage. Finally, we assess the need for knowledge generation at the science-policy interface.
Focuses on positive tipping points in technology, the economy and society. It provides a framework for understanding and acting on positive tipping points. We highlight illustrative case studies across energy, food and transport and mobility systems, with a focus on demand-side solutions (which have previously received limited attention).
Beyond the UNFCCC and IPCC (see Chapter 3.4), a number of other international and transnational fora may be relevant to consider for the governance of ESTPs. The UN Secretary General could establish a governance forum to make recommendations to be taken up by the UN General Assembly. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) is an issue-specific UN agency and general authority regarding global environmental governance which could serve as a facilitator, agenda-setter and authoritative source of information on tipping points. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO), also a specialised UN agency, could continue to provide scientific assessments and advice regarding ESTPs, building on its most recent effort to coordinate multiple international science bodies for an up-to-date assessment of climate change science (World Meteorological Organization (WMO) et al., 2022). And while not part of the UN system, the International Energy Agency (IEA) could lend its modelling and assessment capacity related to the world’s energy system. (Issues of data ownership and access, model selection and transparency will have to be addressed.)
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) should consider the potential for tipping points in various biological and ecological systems, including tropical coral reefs, forest biomes, savannas and drylands, and marine systems. The recent UN High Seas Treaty might address tipping points in marine ecosystems and its relationship to tipping points in ocean circulation patterns.
A set of global and regional institutions that address global forest governance can consider forest-related tipping elements, including ACTO, the UN Forum on Forests, the International Tropical Timber Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the Forest Stewardship Council (a mixed membership organisation). Given the highly fragmented landscape for forest governance, it might be challenging to create a focal point and momentum for addressing tipping points. At the same time, this setting provides opportunities for polycentric, multi-scale governance.
A range of existing international actor coalitions and initiatives might engage with tipping points, including the High Ambition Coalition, the Climate Overshoot Commission, or the Climate Vulnerable Forum. All national governments are policymakers with relevant authority regarding Earth system tipping processes – e.g. fostering energy transitions, managing deforestation, regulating pollution or conducting climate adaptation planning. For example, the UK government’s net zero target and associated revision of the national Climate Change Act explicitly reference tipping point risks as part of the regulatory rationale. Other legislatures might also have to take tipping points into account when developing future regulations and policies. Several industries, corporate actors and private-sector alliances, such as the Global Commons Alliance, might also have relevant interests and authority as, for example, research on the financial industry has pointed out (Galaz et al., 2018; Folke et al., 2019). And of course, a diverse set of civil society actors and NGOs will be engaged in the governance of ESTPs.