This paper argues that the need for a core “fourth pillar” of sustainability/sustainable development, as demanded in multiple arenas, can no longer be ignored on the grounds of intangibility. Different approaches to this vital but missing pillar (cultural-aesthetic, religious-spiritual, and political-institutional) find common ground in the area of ethical values. While values and aspects based on them are widely assumed to be intangible and immeasurable, we illustrate that it is possible to operationalize them in terms of measurable indicators when they are intersubjectively conceptualized within clearly defined practical contexts. The processes require contextual localization of items, which can nonetheless fit into a generalizable framework. This allows useful measurements to be made, and removes barriers to studying, tracking, comparing, evaluating and correlating values-related dimensions of sustainability. It is advocated that those involved in operationalizing sustainability (especially in the context of creating post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals), should explore the potential for developing indicators to capture some of its less tangible aspects, especially those concerned with ethical values.

A large, successful, residential food waste sorting (recycling) program in urban high-density housing was studied to elicit perceptions of the key elements of its success. An embedded mixed-methods approach was used with rigorous quantitative measures of weights and compositions of the waste to confirm the success of the program, combined with in-depth semi-structured interviews of stakeholders to reveal their opinions of the elements key for success. The program produced a 70% food waste capture rate slowly decreasing to 45% over 54 weeks, with <1% contamination. The key elements for success were found to relate to clarification of roles and responsibilities, and the usefulness of a ‘broker’ (here, an NGO (non-governmental organisation)) to co-develop new boundaries for stakeholder responsibilities. Residents first needed to be convinced of the serious intention of the local government to implement the policy, but then viewed waste sorting as a civic duty. This is different to the moderator of “authority’ in earlier studies. The use of volunteers to demonstrate and interact on a personal level with residents was seen as a key element. The three month period of volunteer involvement was seen as key to good habit forming

In this study we report on a doorstepping intervention which produced a 12.5%, statistically significant, increase in the recycling capture rate. More importantly, we investigate why doorstepping caused the increase, through focus groups, structured interviews and questionnaires. By analyzing the findings with respect to a pragmatic set of eleven clusters of determinants of behaviour change, we find that social norms and emotion were important, with prompts as a more minor determinant. We can now plan further doorstepping knowing an emphasis on these is useful. Knowledge, skills, belief of consequences, belief of capability, action planning, role clarification, feedback, and motivation were determinant clusters found not to be important in this case.Recycling behaviour change interventions often do not generally produce transferable learning because they are usually presented as case studies and not broken down into key elements. Our analytical approach of breaking down a poorly defined activity – doorstepping – into elements which influence different clusters of determinants, and then exploring their separate impacts, allows some predictive planning and optimization for other interventions. The specific context here was residential food waste recycling in apartment blocks of communities in Shanghai, China

The entry into force of the Paris Agreement on climate change brings expectations that states will be held to account for their commitments. The article elaborates on why this is not a realistic assumption unless a broader multilevel perspective is taken on the nature of accountability regimes for international (legal) agreements. The formal accountability mechanisms of such agreements tend to be weak, and there are no indications that they will be stronger for the recent global goals adopted in the Paris Agreement. Looking beyond only peer review among states, national institutions, direct civil society engagement and internal government processes – while each coming with their own strengths and weaknesses – provide additional accountability pathways that together may do a better job. Scientific enquiry is, however, required to better understand, support and find improved mixtures of, and perhaps to move beyond, these accountability pathways. Policy relevance This perspective provides something of a clarion call for a variety of different types of actors at both global and national levels to engage in ensuring that states keep the promises they made in the Paris Agreement. It particularly highlights the importance of national institutions and civil society to step up to the task in the present world order, where states are reluctant to build strong accountability regimes at the global level.