4.2.4 Shallow and unintended consequences

Interventions designed to induce positive tipping points towards safe and just Earth system boundaries can potentially lead to other outcomes that may be ‘shallower’ or insufficient (Pereira et al., 2023). Examples might include: changes to a system are not fully compatible with Earth system boundaries (ESBs); a social movement is assimilated into an existing power structure or regime before its aims are achieved; vested interests push for a suboptimal tipping point, for example the natural gas lobby pushing for hydrogen as the solution to future home heating when electric heat pumps are a far more efficient option. There may also be unintended consequences, which can negatively affect entire communities or regions. For example, in the rush to decarbonise transport and store electricity, the rising demand for lithium and cobalt for batteries can lead to heavily contaminated environments and shortage of drinking water surrounding mining communities, particularly in poorer countries. These areas have been labelled ‘green sacrifice zones’ because the environmental goods or services they provide also come with substantial costs (Zografos and Robbins, 2020; Hernandez and Newell, 2022). The report synthesis explores these risks, ethics and justice issues in more detail.

The speed of system change can be in tension or conflict with the ‘depth’ of positive change (Anderson et al., 2023; Newell et al., 2022; Skjølsvold and Coenen, 2021). The depth of change represents the extent to which the system is transformed into one that is sustainable or compatible with ESBs. The speed of transformation represents the time taken for the system to accelerate beyond its tipping point and re-establish itself in a new, qualitatively different stable state. These two forces are in tension when, for example, a sense of urgency to decarbonise as fast as possible leads to the further entrenchment of inequalities and injustices if policymakers are forced to rely on incumbent firms and investors to redesign systems in their own interests (Newell et al., 2022). The enabling conditions as outlined above must therefore consider policy architectures and forms of social engagement that neutralise these tensions.