ArticleRoyal Society open science2025
Policy principles for sustainable and just land systems.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Land systems are the nexus of many global sustainability and justice challenges. Here we present eight guiding principles (P1-8) for improved land system policies following the heuristic stages of a policy cycle. The principles are as follows: embrace recognitional justice (P1), be politically strategic (P2), consider multiple policy goals (P3), address systemic issues (P4), take an integrative scope (P5), foster co-development (P6), adopt clear and monitorable targets (P7) and integrate diagnostic and adaptive capacities (P8). We then explore how well policies align with these principles in two globally relevant cases (land-based climate mitigation and biodiversity-friendly agriculture). In both cases, we find that when policies align poorly with the principles at the agenda-setting stage, there is further misalignment at the policy formulation stage. In the instances when recognitional justice is embraced at the onset, policies subsequently integrate more diverse goals and co-development, but they insufficiently consider political strategy and struggle to handle system complexity. Nonetheless, we identify promising policy mixes that provide benefits to multiple actors, integrate multiple goals, take an integrative scope and have strong monitoring and adaptation, aligning well with multiple principles. Further investigation of these principles could reveal promising policy pathways for land systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.