Is urbanization a danger or a solution to global sustainabil-ity? What institutions need to change to make urban areas more sustainable? In examining urbanization rates in coun-tries over time, we see that they are often more correlated to carbon dioxide emissions than per capital income [1]. This tells us that urbanization patterns of the last 100 years have contributed to the increase in carbon emissions. We there-fore need to develop a new kind of urbanization in order to tackle global challenges. However, reports about global changes often portray urbanization as “a problem”. Cities are polluted and increasingly crowded; urban inhabitants consume proportionately more resources and are responsi-ble for a large portion of carbon emissions ([2], p. 927). As a urban planner, when I read those reports it seems I am looking at the books of urban planning in the last century, particularly those on urbanization in the colonies, where urbanization was presented as an unwanted process that caused a lot of harms to the “civilization” [3], [4]. We must therefore change the discourse on how we describe urban-ization if we want to transform it, as it will not be stopped. We must stress the many benefits that urbanization has brought to society, which are the main reasons people want to come to the cities in the first place. A question to be con-sidered is therefore how to make urban life compatible with global challenges? i.e., how can we continue implement-ing/developing urbanization and the benefits that come with it without disproportionally increasing carbon emissions, the destruction of ecosystems and unsustainable consump-tion. There are many opportunities for win-win strategies between global sustainability challenges and development in urban areas, or synergies, such as climate co-benefits, i.e., tackling climate change and promoting development, particularly in some developing countries where cities are still being built and the path of urbanization can be changed [5], [6]. Nevertheless, despite all we have learned about ur-banization and the possible co-benefits opportunities since the last century, we lack understanding of the contextual and institutional conditions that make those solutions emerge.

Rather than focusing on the contribution to planetary problems that the development of cities’ can cause, it would be more productive to frame urbanization as an opportunity leading towards a sustainable future. One characteristic of cities that opens opportunities for solu-tions is scale and efficiency. Urban areas constituted less than 2% of the worlds land surface area in the beginning of this century according to some estimates; however, these confined spaces are key centers of production and con-sumption [7]. Activities are concentrated in a small space, making some solutions (such as public transportation and district heating systems) more viable as compared to dis-persed settlements. Cities are also centers of knowledge, vast financial resources and decision-making, which can catalyze changes, quickly leading to a greener economy [8]. For many years, urban experts have believed that the spatial distribution (city form, density and land-use) is the key for determining environmental impacts, including climate change. More recently, however, other additional factors have been deemed important, such as energy use in buildings, transportation and citizens’ consumption be-haviors. For cities that are growing, linking land-use plan-ning to other urban activities is key. Spatial aspects, such as improving green areas to reduce the urban heat island effect or avoiding urban sprawl so public transportation can be more viable, are fundamental in making cities more sustainable. Buildings are another important sector, which, in addition to emissions, are places where a lot of the urban population spends most of their time. Once a build-ing is built in an unsustainable manner, it can stay there for decades. Improving sustainable construction would therefore make significant advancements in cities in the medium and long term [9]. For established cities, improv-ing efficiency in the use of energy in buildings and vehicles and allowing mix land-use should be a priority, as city form is difficult to change when the city is already functioning. Finally, we have the effects of consumption. City dwellers consume large amounts of energy and resources from other regions. Cities are massive drivers of consumption that affect the city within and beyond its boundaries.

This paper summarizes the critical importance of the Cerrado savannah biome in Brazil and examines key ways in which large-scale agriculture, in particular large-scale soy farming, threatens water security and increases socio-ecological stress. It connects agribusiness expansion to the globalized meat industry by defining how complex economic relationships result in deforestation on a massive scale. It describes how this radical change in land cover has led to changes in rainfall patterns that are associated with extended drought periods and analyzes how these critical water shortages jeopardize socio-economic health beyond the immediate region. Further, it explicates how intensified transgenic soy farming and other pesticide-heavy crop production contributes to rising public health crises associated with carcinogen-contaminated water and food sources. Lastly, it identifies emerging trends that suggest how agribusiness corporations and governments may be legally ascribed moral responsibilities for maintaining socio-ecological health of the biome. The paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the human dimensions of environmental issues and their impacts and reframe conservation social science discourse in regard to protection of land and water resources in the region.

This article reports evidence for substantial public support for the large-scale deployment of three renewable energy options in Kenya: wind, solar PV, and geothermal energy. With these renewable technologies, the government of Kenya could make a large contribution to reaching its national commitment under the Paris Agreement. Prices, infrastructural needs, and land-use requirements importantly contribute to shaping public opinion about these renewable energy alternatives, in different ways and directions for wind, PV, and geothermal energy. While overall the evaluation of these technologies is positive, public authorities should be wary of the possible inconveniences and drawbacks associated with them. Anticipating and, where possible, mitigating these shortcomings in national climate and energy development plans could preclude some of them becoming possible hindrances for broad-scale adoption of wind, PV, and geothermal energy. Furthering quantitative public acceptance studies, like the one presented here based on (semi-)expert elicitation and information-choice questionnaires, can assist in Kenya fully reaching its national climate and energy ambitions. More generally, we argue that the establishment of affordable, clean, and secure energy systems, as well as the mitigation of global climate change, can benefit from stakeholder engagement and public survey analysis like the one performed in our study—in developing countries as much as in the developed part of the world.