Re-imagining the use of integrated assessment models from a social science perspective—lessons from the Sustainable Development Pathways (SDP)

Abstract Socio-political factors in Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), and their scenario narratives often lack transparency for policymakers and interdisciplinary scholars. As these tools increasingly support sustainable development goals, their assumptions and methodologies require scrutiny, particularly from social scientists. We address critiques of climate isolationism, overemphasis on technological transitions, and insufficient inter- and transdisciplinarity, advocating for robust interdisciplinary integration and clearer methodological transparency. Our recommendations stem from expert interviews and over 200 stakeholders across 30 countries from 2019 to 2024, emphasizing the need for cohesive theory and comprehensive social science engagement to refine these critical tools. Our main case study uses a new scenario set, the Sustainable Development Pathways (SDPs), that made substantial efforts to address social sciences critiques. The SDPs consist of both narratives and IAM-quantified target-seeking scenarios that are supported by social science concepts and theories to ensure not only theoretical coherence, but also their credibility among policymakers. As such tools are increasingly used to facilitate policies and actions for sustainability transformation, questions are raised about how they can effectively represent the complexities behind the current polycrisis that is marked by the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, economic inequality and social injustice. The paper concludes by reflecting on the remaining challenges and open questions related to the role of exogenous sociopolitical factors, the potential for scenarios to transcend political ideologies, and the need for ongoing adaptation of SDPs to reflect the dynamic global context. It calls for continued engagement and exploration of these issues to ensure the scientific representation of sustainable and equitable futures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2024-11-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad91c8
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.94
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Re-imagining the use of integrated assessment models from a social science perspective—lessons from the Sustainable Development Pathways (SDP)

Vassilis Daioglou, Sarah Cornell, Dorothee Keppler, Bjoern Soergel et al.
6 citations
Environmental Research Letters
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
2.94
article

Re-imagining the use of integrated assessment models from a social science perspective—lessons from the Sustainable Development Pathways (SDP)

Vassilis Daioglou, Sarah Cornell, Dorothee Keppler, Bjoern Soergel, Ariel Macaspac Hernández
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Abstract Socio-political factors in Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), and their scenario narratives often lack transparency for policymakers and interdisciplinary scholars. As these tools increasingly support sustainable development goals, their assumptions and methodologies require scrutiny, particularly from social scientists. We address critiques of climate isolationism, overemphasis on technological transitions, and insufficient inter- and transdisciplinarity, advocating for robust interdisciplinary integration and clearer methodological transparency. Our recommendations stem from expert interviews and over 200 stakeholders across 30 countries from 2019 to 2024, emphasizing the need for cohesive theory and comprehensive social science engagement to refine these critical tools. Our main case study uses a new scenario set, the Sustainable Development Pathways (SDPs), that made substantial efforts to address social sciences critiques. The SDPs consist of both narratives and IAM-quantified target-seeking scenarios that are supported by social science concepts and theories to ensure not only theoretical coherence, but also their credibility among policymakers. As such tools are increasingly used to facilitate policies and actions for sustainability transformation, questions are raised about how they can effectively represent the complexities behind the current polycrisis that is marked by the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, economic inequality and social injustice. The paper concludes by reflecting on the remaining challenges and open questions related to the role of exogenous sociopolitical factors, the potential for scenarios to transcend political ideologies, and the need for ongoing adaptation of SDPs to reflect the dynamic global context. It calls for continued engagement and exploration of these issues to ensure the scientific representation of sustainable and equitable futures.

Environmental Research LettersVol. 19(12)
Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (NL), Stockholm Resilience Centre (SE), German Institute of Development and Sustainability (DE), Stockholm University (SE), German Institute for Global and Area Studies (DE), Utrecht University (NL), Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
2.94
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.