This article is co-authored by a team of social and natural scientists from the Earth Commission who have conceptualised and operationalised Earth system justice (ESJ). The article discusses socio-ecological issues and solutions on a global scale. It is relevant for government, organisations and businesses interested in driving change rooted in socio-ecological justice.

Planetary limits aim to protect life’s support systems, yet biophysical boundaries do not inherently include justice elements. The ESJ approach is operationalised to apply justice principles to planetary limits. Underpinned by ESJ, the article discusses safe and just Earth system boundaries (ESBs) which are concerned with stabilising Earth systems whilst minimising significant harm to people, ensuring everyone’s access to resources, and providing a dignified life or escape from poverty.  

ESJ is an integrated framework that builds on justice scholarship, including Kate Raworth’s ‘doughnut economics’ which aims to meet the needs of everyone whilst not overshooting planetary limits. The article defines ESJ as the global population equitably sharing environmental risks, benefits and responsibilities within planetary limits. 

The ESJ framework seeks ‘just means’ and ‘just ends’ referring respectively to social targets that achieve safe and just boundaries and processes of transformation that address drivers of vulnerability and environmental degradation.  

ESJ also adopts the 3 Is which the article defines as: 

• Intragenerational justice – justice among present nations, communities and individuals 
• Intergenerational justice – justice for future generations 
• Interspecies justice and Earth stability – justice for all living things and Earth’s systems 

The article finds that planetary boundaries may not adequately reduce all harm to people today as for example the impacts of 1°C warming affects tens of millions of people. Thus, ESBs may need to be more stringent or complemented by local standards to reduce injustices. 

Aligned with the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals, the article stipulates that everyone should have at least minimum access to food, energy, water, and infrastructure. Through examining the impacts of satisfactory access to food, energy, water, and infrastructure for everyone in 2018, the article finds that meeting these needs greatly crosses the 1.5°C mark. Even if everyone’s emissions are equalised at ‘escape from poverty’ levels which necessitates reallocating resources from rich to poor, this may also lead to overshooting ESBs. Thus, the article asserts that there is a need for redistribution combined with new technology to achieve ‘just ends’. The article proposes the ‘just end’ of a minimum access level for all people, creating a safe and just a corridor whilst the safe and just ESBs are the ceiling. ‘Just means’ need to include challenging power politics, transforming current economies and revisiting current market allocation mechanisms that inequitably make resources unaffordable for the poor. 

The article urges society to engage with ESJ to ensure injustices are rectified to achieve a just and sustainable future. Furthermore, the authors outline that the ESJ narrative needs to be further debated to address all justice issues. It suggests starting conversations about structural changes to ensure just resource consumption to meet the needs of all species whilst maintaining a stable Earth system.