Although an interesting conceptual approach, serious limitations of this study render it not very useful for addressing real-world problems. No one, including these researchers, has any idea of the true extent of global “planetary boundaries” nor the planetary boundaries of nations. As with virtually all sustainability studies the metrics applied are arbitrary and unvalidated. It makes for an interesting conceptual thought exercise but is not appropriate (and misleading) as a decision-making tool.
, , and A good life for all within planetary boundaries. Nature Sustainability, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0021-4
Humanity faces the challenge of how to achieve a high quality of life for over 7 billion people without destabilizing critical planetary processes. Using indicators designed to measure a ‘safe and just’ development space, we quantify the resource use associated with meeting basic human needs, and compare this to downscaled planetary boundaries for over 150 nations. We find that no country meets basic needs for its citizens at a globally sustainable level of resource use. Physical needs such as nutrition, sanitation, access to electricity and the elimination of extreme poverty could likely be met for all people without transgressing planetary boundaries. However, the universal achievement of more qualitative goals (for example, high life satisfaction) would require a level of resource use that is 2–6 times the sustainable level, based on current relationships. Strategies to improve physical and social provisioning systems, with a focus on sufficiency and equity, have the potential to move nations towards sustainability, but the challenge remains substantial.