A growing body of evidence and experience suggests that the needed understanding must encompass the interaction of global processes with the ecological and social characteristics of particular places and sectors.[2] The regional character of much of what sustainability science is trying to explain means that relevant research will have to learn how to integrate the effects of key processes across the full range of scales from local to global.[3] It will also require fundamental advances in our ability to address such issues as the behavior of complex self-organizing systems, the responses, some irreversible, of the nature-society system to multiple and interacting stresses, and the options for combining different ways of knowing and learning so that social actors with different agendas can act in concert under conditions of uncertainty and limited information.

With a view toward promoting the research necessary to achieve such advances, an initial set of core questions for sustainability science has begun to emerge. These are meant to complement the core questions of existing global change programs by focusing research attention on both the fundamental character of interactions between nature and society and on society's capacity to guide those interactions along more sustainable trajectories.  The questions as posed at the Friibergh Workshop on Sustainability Science are summarized below.  The Editors of the Forum invite comments on and additions to this list, and will use subsequent "editions" of the Forum as a means of promoting a dialogue on the questions.  Contributions should be submitted to the Managing Editor at .

1. How can the dynamic interactions between nature and society – including lags and inertia – be better incorporated in emerging models and conceptualizations that integrate the Earth system, human development, and sustainability? [4]
   
   
2. How are long-term trends in environment and development, including consumption and population, reshaping nature-society interactions in ways relevant to sustainability? [5]
   
   
3. What determines the vulnerability or resilience of the nature-society system in particular kinds of places and for particular types of ecosystems and human livelihoods? [6]
   
   
4. Can scientifically meaningful "limits" or "boundaries" be defined that would provide effective warning of conditions beyond which the nature-society systems incur a significantly increased risk of serious degradation? [7]
   
   
5. What systems of incentive structures – including markets, rules, norms and scientific information – can most effectively improve social capacity to guide interactions between nature and society toward more sustainable trajectories?  [8]
   
   
6. How can today's operational systems for monitoring and reporting on environmental and social conditions be integrated or extended to provide more useful guidance for efforts to navigate a transition toward sustainability?  [9]
   
   
7. How can today's relatively independent activities of research planning, observation, assessment, and decision support be better integrated into systems for adaptive management and societal learning? [10]

Endnotes
1 A sampling of the kinds of interdisciplinary perspectives on which sustainability science is building includes Thomas E. Graedel, "The evolution of industrial ecology," Environmental Science and Technology 34(1): 28A-31A (2000); Timothy O'Riordan, Chris Church, "Synthesis and context," in Globalism, Localism and Identity: Fresh Perspectives on the Transition to Sustainability in Europe (Earthscan, London, 2000); Jeffrey D. Sachs, "A new map of the world," The Economist 355:81-83 (June 24, 2000); Anders Wijkman, "Sustainable development requires integrated approaches," Policy Sciences 32(4): 345-350 (1999); Fikret Berkes, Carl Folke, eds., Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998); Narpat S. Johda, "Reviving the social system--ecosystem links in the Himalayas," in Linking Social and Ecological Systems, Fikret Berkes, Carl Folke, eds. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988), pp. 285-310; Peter Cebon, Urs Dahinden, Huw Davies, Dieter Imboden, Carlo G. Jaeger, eds., Views from the Alps: Regional Perspectives on Climate Change (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1998); Gretchen Daily, Partha Dasgupta, Bert Bolin, Pierre Crosson, et al., "Food production, population growth, and the environment," Science 281:1291-1292 (1998); Pamela A. Matson, Rosamond Naylor, Ivan Ortiz-Monasterio, "Integration of environmental, agronomic, and economic aspects of fertilizer management," Science 280:112-115 (1998); Steve Rayner, E. L. Malone, eds., Human Choice and Climate Change (Batelle Press, Columbus, Ohio, 1998); Jared M. Diamond, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies (W. W. Norton and Company, New York, 1997); S. Faucheux, M. O'Connor, J. van der Straaten, eds., Sustainable Development: Concepts Rationalities and Strategies (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1997); Keith Pezzoli, "Sustainable development: A transdisciplinary overview of the literature," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 40(5): 549-574 (1997); J. Kasperson, R. E. Kasperson, B. L. Turner II, eds., Regions at Risk: Comparisons of Threatened Environments (United Nations University Press, Tokyo, 1995); W. C. Clark, R. E. Munn, eds., Sustainable Development of the Biosphere (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986); R. W. Kates, J. H. Ausubel, M. Berberian, eds., Climate Impact Assessment: Studies of the Interaction of Climate and Society, ICSU/SCOPE Report No. 27 (John Wiley, Chichester, 1985).

2 National Research Council, Committee on Global Change Research, Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999), p. 533; National Research Council, Board on Sustainable Development, Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999), p. 8; C. S. Holling, "Regional responses to global change," Conservation Ecology 1(2): 3 (1997); German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU), World in Transition: The Research Challenge, Annual Report 1996 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997).

3 David W. Cash, Susanne C. Moser, "Linking global and local scales: Designing dynamic assessment and management processes," Global Environmental Change 10(2): 109-120 (2000); Clark Gibson, Elinor Ostrom, Toh-Kyeong Ahn, "The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: A survey," Ecological Economics 32(2): 217-239 (2000); Thomas J. Wilbanks, Robert W. Kates, "Global change in local places: How scale matters," Climatic Change 43(3): 601-628 (1998); G. Peterson, C. R. Allen, C. S. Holling, "Ecological resilience, biodiversity, and scale," Ecosystems 1(1): 6-18 (1998); Thomas Rosswal, Robert G. Woodmansee, Paul G. Risser, Scales and Global Change: Spatial and Temporal Variability in Biospheric and Geospheric Processes (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1988); William C. Clark, "Scales of climate impacts," Climatic Change 7: 5-27 (1985).

4 For discussions of existing work on, and possible approaches to, this question see International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, "Global analysis, integration and modelling" (2000); H. J. Schellnhuber, "Earth system analysis and the second Copernican revolution," Nature 402: C19-23 (1999); National Research Council, Committee on Global Change Research, Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999), p. 531ff; National Research Council, Board on Sustainable Development, "Exploring the future," in Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability(National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 133-184.

5 For a critical discussion of contemporary thinking on trends shaping a sustainability transition, see National Research Council, Board on Sustainable Development, "Trends and transitions," in Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 59-132; Arnulf Grübler, Technology and Global Change (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998); D. S. Landes, The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some are so Poor and Some so Rich (W. W. Norton and Co., New York, 1998); United Nations, Critical Trends: Global Change and Sustainable Development (United Nations, New York, 1997); M. Gell-Mann, The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and Complex (W. H. Freeman, New York, 1994); J. G. Speth, "The transition to a sustainable society," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 89: 870-872 (1992); William C. Clark, "Visions of the 21st century: Conventional wisdom and other surprises in the global interactions of population, technology and environment," in Perspective 2000: Proceedings of a conference sponsored by the Economic Council of Canada, K. Newton, T. Schweitzer, J. P. Voyer, eds. (Economic Council of Canada, Ottawa, 1988), pp. 7-32.

6 An overview of current thinking on vulnerability is given in W. C. Clark et al., "Assessing Vulnerability to Global Environmental Risks," Report of the Workshop on Vulnerability to Global Environmental Change, 22-25 May 2000, Airlie House, Warrenton, Virginia. Research and Assessment Systems for Sustainability Program Discussion Paper 2000-12 (Environment and Natural Resources Program, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 2000); and Thomas E. Downing, "Toward a vulnerability science," IHDP Update 2000 (3). Representative research is reported in Thomas E. Downing et al., Climate Change Vulnerability: Toward a Framework for Understanding Adaptability to Climate Change (Environmental Change Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, 2000); S. C. Lonergan, ed., Environmental Change, Adaptation, and Security (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1999); Roger E. Kasperson, Jeanne X. Kasperson, B. L. Turner II, "Risk and criticality: Trajectories of regional environmental degradation," Ambio 28(6): 562-68 (1999); Coleen Vogel, "Vulnerability and global environmental change," LUCC Newsletter 3: 15-18 (1998); George E. Clark et al., "Assessing the vulnerability of coastal communities to extreme storms: The case of Revere, MA., USA.," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 3: 59-82 (1998); Susan L. Cutter, "Vulnerability to environmental hazards," Progress in Human Geography 20(4): 529-539 (1996); Jesse C. Ribot, Antonio Rocha Magalhaes, Stahis Panagides, eds., Climate Variability, Climate Change and Social Vulnerability in the Semi-Arid Tropics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996).

The current state of the debate on system resilience can be sampled in G. D. Peterson, "Scaling ecological dynamics: Self-organization, hierarchical structure, and ecological resilience," Climatic Change 44(3): 291-309 (2000); L. Gunderson, "Resilience, flexibility and adaptive management—antidotes for spurious certitude?" Conservation Ecology 3(1): 7 (1999); C. S. Holling, "Engineering resilience vs. ecological resilience," in Engineering within Ecological Constraints, P. C. Schulze, ed. (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1996), pp. 31-43; D. Tilman, J. A. Downing, "Biodiversity and stability in grasslands," Nature 367: 363-365 (1994).

7 The problematical nature of contemporary concepts of carrying capacity, critical loads, irreversibility and thresholds are reviewed in M. S. Cresser, "The critical loads concept: Milestone or millstone for the new millennium?" Science of the Total Environment 249(1-3): 51-62 (2000); R. A. Skeffington, "The use of critical loads in environmental policy making: A critical appraisal," Environmental Science and Technology 33(11): 245A-252A (1999); S. R. Carpenter, D. Ludwig, W. A. Brock, "Management of eutrophication for lakes subject to potentially irreversible change," Ecological Applications 9(3): 751-771 (1999); K. Arrow, B. Bolin, R. Costanza, P. Dasgupta, C. Folke, C. S. Holling, B. O. Jansson, S. Levin, K. G. Maler, C. Perrings, D. Pimentel, "Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment," Ecological Applications 6(1): 13-15 (1996); G. C. Daily, P. R. Ehrlich, "Socioeconomic equity, sustainability, and Earth's carrying capacity," Ecological Applications 6(4): 991-1001 (1996); J. E. Cohen, "Population growth and earth's human carrying capacity," Science 269: 341-346 (1995); C. S. Holling, "The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: Local surprise and global change," in Sustainable Development of the Biosphere, W. C. Clark, R. E. Munn, eds. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986).

8 An excellent review of the problem of incentives from a multi-problem perspective is T. Sandler, Global Challenges: An Approach to Environmental, Political, and Economic Problems (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997). A sampling of additional perspectives is provided by L. H. Goulder, I. W. H. Parry, R. C. Williams et al., "The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting," Journal of Public Economics 72(3): 329-360 (1999); F. Schneider, J. Volkert, "No chance for incentive-oriented environmental policies in representative democracies? A public choice analysis," Ecological Economics 31(1): 123-138 (1999); J. B. Wiener, "Global environmental regulation: Instrument choice in legal context," Yale Law Journal 108(4): 677-800 (1999); B. Gustafsson, "Scope and limits of the market mechanism in environmental management," Ecological Economics 24(2-3): 259-274 (1998); N. O. Keohane, R. L. Revesz , R. N. Stavins, "The choice of regulatory instruments in environmental policy," Harvard Environmental Law 22(2): 313-367 (1998); E. Gawel, "Mixed instrument strategy in environmental policy: Economic considerations on a new policy approach," Jahrbuch Sozialwissenschaft 43 (2): 267-286 (1992).

9 An especially insightful discussion of the role of indicator and information systems is provided in Donella Meadows, Indicator and Information Systems for Sustainable Development: A Report to the Balaton Group (The Sustainability Institute, Hartland Four Corners, VT, 1998); and Kai N. Lee, Compass and Gyroscope (Island Press, Washington, D.C., 1993). A review of challenges currently facing the field are given in National Research Council, Board on Sustainable Development, "Reporting on the transition," Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999), pp. 233-274.

10 An overview of the historical performance of such systems is given in D. E. Bell, W. C. Clark, V. W. Ruttan. "Global research systems for sustainable development: agriculture, health and environment," in Agriculture, Environment and Health: Sustainable Development in the 21st Century, V.W. Ruttan, ed. (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1994), pp. 358-379. More recent developments are outlined in David W. Cash, "Distributed assessment systems: An emerging paradigm of research, assessment and decision making for environmental change," Global Environmental Change 10(4): 241-244 (2000); David H. Guston, ed., Special issue on "Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science," Science, Technology & Human Values 26(4) (2001); B. L. Johnson, "Introduction to the special feature: Adaptive management - scientifically sound, socially challenged?" Conservation Ecology 3(1): 10 (1999); L. Gunderson, "Resilience, flexibility and adaptive management—antidotes for spurious certitude?" Conservation Ecology 3(1): 7 (1999); Thomas M. Parris, C. A. Zracket, W. C. Clark, "Usable Knowledge for Managing Responses to Global Environmental Change: Recommendations to Promote Collaborative Assessments and Information Systems," Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs (BCSIA) Discussion Paper E-98-26 (Environment and Natural Resources Program, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 1998); C. Walters, "Challenges in adaptive management of riparian and coastal ecosystems," Conservation Ecology 1(2):1 (1997).