Skip to content
Planetary Integrity Foundation Contact
Knowledge Founding phase

Evidence Library

A curated field-orientation layer for the sources, gaps and institutional signals shaping Decision Integrity.

Listed sources are references for field orientation. Inclusion does not imply affiliation, endorsement, partnership or support.

01

Legitimacy ecosystems

Ecosystems identify the field contexts each source helps orient. They are not claims of affiliation or institutional relationship.

Planetary Boundaries / Earth System Science

Scientific context for planetary limits, Earth system stability, systemic risk and human activity within a safe operating space.

AI for Sustainability Science

AI-enabled approaches to climate, nature, sustainability science, system understanding, communication and decision support.

Sustainability Disclosure / ESG / CSRD / ISSB

Disclosure, reporting, risk and accountability contexts already shaping institutional responsibility.

Systems Risk / Interconnected Shocks

Cross-domain risk structures where climate, land, biodiversity, health, finance, infrastructure and public systems interact.

Finance / Insurance / Risk Pricing

How hidden biophysical pressures, liabilities and systemic exposure can affect capital allocation, underwriting and risk governance.

Legal Due Diligence / Foreseeability / Liability

Foreseeable harm, diligence, governance, accountability and defensible decision-making.

Open Standards / Commons Governance

How public protocols, open knowledge and shared infrastructure can become trusted and auditable.

Cities / Procurement / Urban Resilience

Public decisions, urban systems, procurement, infrastructure and local resilience as application domains.

Responsible AI / AI Governance

Risks, responsibilities, limits and governance requirements for AI in high-impact contexts.

Collective Decision-Making / Democratic Governance

Public-interest contexts where reviewability, participation, legitimacy and accountability shape material decisions.

02

Evidence sources

Curated sources that help frame the emerging field around Decision Integrity, planetary intelligence, AI for sustainability science and consequence-aware governance.

Filter by ecosystem

Evidence source

AI for a Planet Under Pressure

Source / institution / journal
Stockholm Resilience Centre and Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Year
2025
Reference
Galaz, V. and M. Schewenius (eds, 2025). AI for a Planet Under Pressure. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
Use level
Level 3 — Evidence Library + Decision Integrity Note

Ecosystems

AI for Sustainability ScienceResponsible AI / AI GovernancePlanetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceCollective Decision-Making / Democratic Governance

Why it matters

The report frames AI for Sustainability Science as an emerging, integrated field across climate, nature, people, science, communication and decision-making. It treats AI neither as a simple technological solution nor as a neutral tool, and it identifies opportunities, risks, data gaps, bias, access inequality and the environmental footprint of AI itself.

Decision Integrity gap

AI-enabled sustainability insight still needs a structured layer that connects evidence, uncertainty and accountability to decisions before they become reality.

PIF connection

The report helps frame the gap that Planetary Integrity Foundation addresses: translating sustainability intelligence into Decision Integrity before major decisions become reality. The strategic gap remains the operational translation of this intelligence into material decisions, institutional accountability and consequence-aware governance.

Outreach hooks

  • AI governance and sustainability science
  • public-interest technology institutions
  • research-policy translation
  • decision-support accountability

Evidence source

Breaching planetary boundaries: Over half of global land area suffers critical losses in functional biosphere integrity

Source / institution / journal
One Earth
Year
2025
Reference
Stenzel, F., et al. (2025). Breaching planetary boundaries: Over half of global land area suffers critical losses in functional biosphere integrity. One Earth, 8, 101393.
Use level
Level 3 — Evidence Library + Decision Integrity Note

Ecosystems

Planetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceSystems Risk / Interconnected ShocksCities / Procurement / Urban ResilienceLegal Due Diligence / Foreseeability / Liability

Why it matters

This source helps frame functional biosphere integrity as a spatial condition that can shape whether material decisions carry elevated systemic risk.

Decision Integrity gap

Decision review often treats location as background context rather than as evidence of existing planetary boundary pressure.

PIF connection

This source helps frame the need for spatial planetary consequence intelligence. Major material decisions must understand whether they operate in territories already beyond critical biosphere integrity conditions.

Outreach hooks

  • cities and public institutions
  • legal due diligence and foreseeable harm
  • territorial planning and procurement
  • consequence-aware infrastructure decisions

Evidence source

Humans have depleted global terrestrial carbon stocks by a quarter

Source / institution / journal
One Earth
Year
2025
Reference
Ganzenmüller, R., et al. (2025). Humans have depleted global terrestrial carbon stocks by a quarter. One Earth, 8, 101392.
Use level
Level 2 — Evidence Library + outreach hook

Ecosystems

Planetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceFinance / Insurance / Risk PricingSustainability Disclosure / ESG / CSRD / ISSBSystems Risk / Interconnected Shocks

Why it matters

This source helps frame hidden biophysical debt created by accumulated land-use and development decisions.

Decision Integrity gap

Institutional review often evaluates new decisions without making already-depleted natural stocks visible as a material constraint.

PIF connection

Decision Integrity should help make depleted natural stocks visible before new decisions add further systemic deficit.

Outreach hooks

  • investors and risk analysts
  • disclosure and ESG governance
  • land-use and restoration policy
  • climate-risk and natural-capital discussions

Evidence source

Mapping human-nature archetypes to guide global biodiversity, food security, and land-use policy

Source / institution / journal
One Earth
Year
2025
Reference
Sietz, D., et al. (2025). Mapping human-nature archetypes to guide global biodiversity, food security, and land-use policy. One Earth, 8, 101416.
Use level
Level 2 — Evidence Library + outreach hook

Ecosystems

Cities / Procurement / Urban ResilienceCollective Decision-Making / Democratic GovernancePlanetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceSustainability Disclosure / ESG / CSRD / ISSB

Why it matters

This source helps frame why global decision rules require local socio-ecological context.

Decision Integrity gap

Decision systems can flatten territorial differences, treating land-use choices as comparable even when biodiversity, food security and socio-ecological conditions differ materially.

PIF connection

Decision Integrity must account for territorial archetypes, land-use trade-offs, biodiversity, and food-security implications.

Outreach hooks

  • land-use policy reviewers
  • food-system researchers
  • urban/regional planning
  • territorial Decision Check design

Evidence source

Unpacking the risks of zoonotic and vector-borne pathogen transmission to humans in the context of environmental change

Source / institution / journal
One Earth
Year
2025
Reference
Carvalho, R. L., et al. (2025). Unpacking the risks of zoonotic and vector-borne pathogen transmission to humans in the context of environmental change. One Earth, 8, 101348.
Use level
Level 2 — Evidence Library + outreach hook

Ecosystems

Systems Risk / Interconnected ShocksLegal Due Diligence / Foreseeability / LiabilityCollective Decision-Making / Democratic GovernanceCities / Procurement / Urban Resilience

Why it matters

This source helps frame the need to evaluate environmental decisions across hazard, exposure, vulnerability and systemic public-health risk.

Decision Integrity gap

Single-factor environmental analysis can obscure multi-dimensional consequence chains that connect land, climate, infrastructure, exposure and public-health vulnerability.

PIF connection

Decision Integrity must prevent single-factor environmental analysis from obscuring multi-dimensional consequence chains.

Outreach hooks

  • One Health and public-health risk
  • city resilience
  • environmental-change governance
  • legal foreseeability of systemic harm

Evidence source

Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

Source / institution / journal
Science Advances
Year
2023
Reference
Richardson, K., et al. (2023). Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries. Science Advances, 9, eadh2458.
Use level
Level 3 — Evidence Library + future Decision Integrity Note candidate

Ecosystems

Planetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceSystems Risk / Interconnected ShocksFinance / Insurance / Risk PricingLegal Due Diligence / Foreseeability / Liability

Why it matters

This source helps frame the current planetary context in which major decisions are being made. It shows that the safe operating space is no longer a theoretical concern; multiple boundaries are already transgressed.

Decision Integrity gap

Decision systems often treat climate, biodiversity, freshwater, land, pollution and biogeochemical flows as separate issues, while the planetary boundaries framework requires systemic interpretation.

PIF connection

The source helps establish why Decision Integrity needs to treat major decisions as operating within an already stressed planetary context, not as isolated technical or financial choices.

Outreach hooks

  • institutional risk and governance
  • legal foreseeability and duty of care
  • finance, insurance and risk pricing
  • scientific reviewers for planetary boundary integration

Evidence source

Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet

Source / institution / journal
Science
Year
2015
Reference
Steffen, W., et al. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347, 1259855.
Use level
Level 3 — Evidence Library + future Decision Integrity Note candidate

Ecosystems

Planetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceSystems Risk / Interconnected ShocksCities / Procurement / Urban ResilienceLegal Due Diligence / Foreseeability / Liability

Why it matters

This source helps frame why planetary boundaries require cross-scale and regional interpretation, not only global averages.

Decision Integrity gap

Decision-making still lacks a routine operational layer that connects planetary boundaries, regional thresholds, uncertainty and accountable material choices.

PIF connection

The source supports the need for place-specific consequence visibility in material decisions, especially where regional thresholds and systemic uncertainty matter.

Outreach hooks

  • territorial planning
  • procurement and infrastructure review
  • public-sector decision defensibility
  • protocol design for place-sensitive Decision Checks

Evidence source

Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity

Source / institution / journal
Ecology and Society
Year
2009
Reference
Rockström, J., et al. (2009). Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecology and Society, 14(2), 32. Companion reference: Rockström, J., et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472-475.
Use level
Level 3 — Evidence Library

Ecosystems

Planetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceOpen Standards / Commons GovernanceCollective Decision-Making / Democratic GovernanceSystems Risk / Interconnected Shocks

Why it matters

This source helps frame the foundational concept of a safe operating space for humanity.

Decision Integrity gap

The framework identifies systemic boundaries, but public and private decisions still need operational checks that make boundary-relevant consequences visible before action is locked in.

PIF connection

The source is relevant because Decision Integrity needs a way to translate safe-operating-space science into reviewable decisions.

Outreach hooks

  • open protocol design
  • planetary governance
  • scientific legitimacy stack
  • education and public field orientation

Evidence source

Planetary Integrity

Source / institution / journal
Cambridge University Press chapter
Year
2021
Reference
Kotzé, L. J., Kim, R. E., et al. Planetary Integrity. Cambridge University Press chapter.
Use level
Level 3 — Evidence Library + Decision Integrity Note

Ecosystems

Legal Due Diligence / Foreseeability / LiabilityCollective Decision-Making / Democratic GovernanceSustainability Disclosure / ESG / CSRD / ISSBOpen Standards / Commons Governance

Why it matters

This source helps frame planetary integrity as a governance concern, not only a scientific condition.

Decision Integrity gap

Global goals and sustainability agendas can invoke planet, people and prosperity without creating operational decision discipline capable of protecting planetary integrity.

PIF connection

The source is especially relevant because the term planetary integrity is close to the Foundation name; it should be handled carefully as a field reference, without implying affiliation or institutional relationship.

Outreach hooks

  • legal scholars and governance reviewers
  • SDG/ESG accountability discussions
  • institutional design
  • post-2030 sustainability governance

Evidence source

Complexity of Coupled Human and Natural Systems

Source / institution / journal
Science
Year
2007
Reference
Liu, J., et al. (2007). Complexity of Coupled Human and Natural Systems. Science, 317, 1513-1516.
Use level
Level 2 — Evidence Library + outreach hook

Ecosystems

Systems Risk / Interconnected ShocksCollective Decision-Making / Democratic GovernanceCities / Procurement / Urban ResilienceResponsible AI / AI Governance

Why it matters

This source helps frame why material consequences emerge in coupled human-natural systems rather than isolated domains.

Decision Integrity gap

Linear decision checklists often miss reciprocal feedback loops and delayed effects across social and ecological systems.

PIF connection

The source supports the need for consequence intelligence that can surface feedbacks, time lags, thresholds, heterogeneity, legacy effects and surprises.

Outreach hooks

  • Kairo model design
  • social-ecological systems reviewers
  • city and land-use governance
  • systemic risk communication

Evidence source

Doing Business Within Planetary Boundaries

Source / institution / journal
Research brief / report by Beatrice Crona, Emmy Wassénius, Giorgio Parlato and Shruti Kashyap. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University; Global Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere Programme, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences / Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics.
Year
2024
Reference
Crona, B., Wassénius, E., Parlato, G., and Kashyap, S. (2024). Doing Business Within Planetary Boundaries. Research brief/report, version 2024-11-05. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University; Global Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere Programme, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences / Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics.
Use level
Level 3 — Evidence Library + Decision Integrity Note

Ecosystems

Sustainability Disclosure / ESG / CSRD / ISSBFinance / Insurance / Risk PricingPlanetary Boundaries / Earth System ScienceLegal Due Diligence / Foreseeability / Liability

Why it matters

This source helps frame why corporate reporting, investor analysis and nature-related risk assessment need to account for cumulative environmental impacts, not only narrow financial materiality. It is directly relevant to companies, investors and corporate stakeholders because it connects environmental disclosure, planetary boundaries, location-specific impacts and systemic risk.

Decision Integrity gap

Corporate and investor decisions can appear well-informed while still excluding cumulative environmental impacts that become material at planetary scale. Disclosure focused mainly on currently financially material environmental impacts can fail to reveal whether business activity is moving economies toward or away from planetary boundaries.

PIF connection

Decision Integrity requires environmental materiality, absolute impact data and location-specific information before corporate, financial or investment decisions are treated as reliable. This source helps frame why decision review must expose where, what and how much environmental pressure is created before capital allocation, business strategy, reporting or investment decisions become locked in.

Outreach hooks

  • corporate governance and sustainability reporting
  • investors and risk analysts
  • CSRD / ESG / disclosure reviewers
  • legal due diligence and foreseeable harm
  • nature-related financial risk
  • corporate decision integrity / investment decision integrity