Resilience building has become a growing policy agenda, particularly for urban risk management. While much of the resilience agenda has been shaped by policies and discourses from the global North, its applicability for cities of the global South, particularly African cities, has not been sufficiently assessed. Focusing on rights of urban citizens as the object to be made resilient, rather than physical and ecological infrastructures, may help to address many of the root causes that characterize the unacceptable risks that urban residents face on a daily basis. Linked to this idea, we discuss four entry points for grounding a rights and justice orientation for urban resilience. First, notions of resilience must move away from narrow, financially oriented risk analyses. Second, opportunities must be created for “negotiated resilience”, to allow for attention to processes that support these goals, as well as for the integration of diverse interests. Third, achieving resilience in ways that do justice to the local realities of diverse urban contexts necessitates taking into account endogenous, locally situated processes, knowledges and norms. And finally, urban resilience needs to be placed within the context of global systems, providing an opportunity for African contributions to help reimagine the role that cities might play in these global financial, political and science processes.

The normative concepts of equity and justice are rising narratives within global climate change discourse. Despite growing considerations of climate equity and justice within the adaptation literature, the extent to which adaptation research has worked to empirically assess and operationalize concepts of equity and justice in practice remains unclear. We employ a systematic mapping approach to examine how equity and justice are defined and understood within empirical climate change adaptation research, and how extensively they are being assessed within adaptation literature. Structuring our work using a conceptual approach focusing on distributional, recognition, procedural, and capability approaches to justice, we document and review articles that included empirical assessments from searches performed in Web of Science™, Scopus®, and Google Scholar™ databases. Our results highlight that greater attention in the literature is given to certain aspects of justice (e.g. distributive and procedural justice concerns) on certain topics such as climate policy and adaptation finance. Most of the included papers scored highly according to our criteria on their empirical assessment of equity and justice. The lowest scores were found for the methodological rigor of assessments. We find limited research on empirical equity and justice assessment and call for a multiscale and holistic approach to justice to address this research gap.

Extreme impacts from climate change are already being felt around the world. The policy choices that we make now will affect not only how high global temperatures rise but also how well-equipped future economies and infrastructures are to cope with these changes. The interests of future generations must therefore be central to climate policy and practice. This raises the questions:Whoshould represent the interests of future generations with respect to climate change? And according to whichcriteriashould we judge whether a particular candidate would make an appropriate representative for future generations? In this essay, we argue that potential representatives of future generations should satisfy what we call a “hypothetical acceptance criterion,” which requires that the representative could reasonably be expected to be accepted by future generations. This overarching criterion in turn gives rise to two derivative criteria. These are, first, the representative'sepistemic and experiential similarity to future generations, and second, his or hermotivation to act on behalf of future generations. We conclude that communities already adversely affected by climate change best satisfy these criteria and are therefore able to command the hypothetical acceptance of future generations.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused an unprecedented disruption of food systems worldwide, with most governments taking severe containment measures to curb the spread. This resulted in unpredicted negative impacts of the agri-food supply chains coupled with food price inflations. Ultimately, this affected the food security and urban livelihoods for most households, who are dependent on urban markets for food supply. This study examined the implications of the pandemic on food prices and commodities supplies to urban markets conducted through structured interviews. A review of the secondary data was also conducted to show the trends of commodity prices over the last 5 years. The high inflation of commodity prices with a decline in sales volumes was reported by most traders (97%) with decreases in supply quantities. Changes in the consumption behaviour in households was reported by consumers (75%), with 65% experiencing reduced food diversity at home. Households adopted varied coping mechanisms, including reduced food portions (52%), reduced food varieties (44%) and skipping meals (32%). Market prices increased by an average margin of 13.8% for grains and pulses with price decline observed for cabbages (−30.8%) and Irish potatoes (−19.4%). The findings may inform policymakers of additional future shock and pandemic control protocols, whose actions would assure food protection of urban livelihoods.

There is a rapidly developing literature on risks that threaten the whole of humanity, or a large part of it. Discussion is increasingly turning to how such risks can be governed. This paper arises from a study of those involved the governance of risks from emerging technologies, examining the perceptions of global catastrophic risk within the relevant global policymaking community. Those who took part were either civil servants working for the UK government, U.S. Congress, the United Nations, and the European Commission, or cognate members of civil society groups and the private sector. Analysis of interviews identified four major themes: Scepticism; Realism; Influence; and Governance outside of Government. These themes provide evidence for the value of conceptualising the governance of global catastrophic risk as a unified challenge. Furthermore, they highlight the range of agents involved in governance of emerging technology and give reason to value reforms carried out sub-nationally.

Food and nutrition insecurity continue to risk the lives and wellbeing of millions of people throughout the world today. Further, food and nutrition insecurity are still major challenges in Kenya and have triggered the adoption of a number of modern biotechnologies for agricultural transformation. Consequently, many food technologies have been approved to secure sustainable access to food for millions of people. This study investigated the perceptions and implementation of two technologies for addressing food insecurity in Kenya, namely, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the use of antibiotics in livestock production. In particular, the study explored how their implementation can be governed responsibly through approved legislation. Therefore, the knowledge, attitudes and practices, as well as the governance, of GMO technology and antibiotic resistance risks were assessed. In-depth key interviews were conducted for a qualitative survey with triangulation using quantitative data sources. The findings showed that 46% of the population have limited knowledge about GMO technology, with about 79% indicating that foods with GM ingredients were already being consumed in the country despite the government ban. The majority of respondents agree that GMOs can contribute to an increase in the global food supply (65%), make food affordable (57%) and produce more nutritious foods (50%). Further, most agree that GMOs can produce crops more resistant to pests and reduce pesticide use on food crop plants (89). The main concerns reported regarding GMO technology by most respondents included the impact on the environment and human health and the adverse effects on traditional farming practices. About 36% of these respondents indicated that the technology diminishes traditional farming technologies, and 32% reported that it contributes to loss of biodiversity. Notably, 64% reported that GMO technology is a solution to food security and that GM foods are safe. Regarding the use of antimicrobials mainly meant to prevent diseases and access better markets, respondents perceived their use to be associated with a “large level of risk” of antimicrobial resistance (score of 2 on a scale of 1–3) (M = 1.85, SD = 1.06). A total of 56% of the respondents reported that the efforts towards promoting awareness of antibiotic resistance risks and their associated effects on human health are relatively limited. Our findings show that most of the respondents have only observed minimal awareness campaigns. Regarding the governance of the two technologies, 71% and 50% of the respondents reported that scientists and elected officials, respectively, have the greatest roles in the governance of GMOs, with small-scale farmers playing a negligible role. These findings are crucial to the advancement of food innovations that are geared towards achieving food security in Kenya as they highlight the risks associated with the poor governance and implementation of technologies. Therefore, there is a need for a framework for technological risk governance that is sensitive to local values and socio-economic circumstances and that will facilitate the achievement of food security goals.