One of the defining characteristics of the Anthropocene, characterised by a new and destructive human–nature relationship, is that for the first time in humanity’s history, the access to a clean and healthy environment is uncertain for large groups of persons and ecosystems. This transformational shift in humankind’s relationship to nature was the catalyst for a debate between scholars, policy-makers and environmental and human rights activists on whether there is a right to the environment and who would be the right and duty holders. To the extent that the intrinsic value and agency of nature is recognised, there is also the related question of the rights of nature, or the right of the environment not to suffer the effects of the Anthropocene.

This chapter takes stock of the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals within countries. It explores the various initiatives taken by national governments, sub-national authorities, the corporate sector and civil society, and assesses their strategies and approaches to implement the Sustainable Development Goals in their spheres. The chapter finds that the steering effects of the global goals are so far mainly present in political discourse. While we also witness the emergence of new types of institutions, relationships and partnerships, they apparently reproduce existing structures and priorities of key players, indicating selective goal implementation. What we observe the least are steering effects on the (re-)allocation of resources. Thus, the chapter suggests that the Sustainable Development Goals are not (yet) leading to fundamental change and the voluntary nature of the 2030 Agenda makes it fairly easy for actors to implement the global goals in a way that benefits their self-interests.

This chapter focuses on the national level and studies interlinkages, institutional integration and policy coherence in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals. After defining key terms, the chapter reviews how perspectives on interlinkages have shaped a new discourse, followed by an analysis of the steering effects of the global goals on institutional integration and policy coherence. The chapter finds that some measures have been taken by national governments to advance institutional integration through coordination by central agencies and inter-ministerial exchanges. Growing policy coherence, however, is not clearly observable. Existing barriers in political-administrative systems preventing institutional integration and policy coherence have not vanished with the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals. Although recent studies have considerably enhanced knowledge on the conceptual understanding of interlinkages, integration and coherence, empirical data about how these concepts play out in practice at national level is still very limited.

There is a growing consensus in the literature that governance architectures matter. However, we lack sufficient knowledge about their emergence, dynamics and impacts. This concluding chapter summarizes all insights in the book Architectures of Earth System Governance, and emphasizes how this book has made a scientific contribution by enhancing conceptual clarity, synthesizing a decade of intense research, and charting directions for future research. The book has made at least one point clear: the ‘architecture lens’ offers a bird’s-eye view on the global governance landscape that is highly valuable in explaining outcomes of world politics. The architectures matter in how institutions interact with others, how institutions are entangled with others in larger regime complexes and how institutions are affected by broader architectures that are more or less fragmented or polycentric. In this concluding chapter, we also illustrate how such key insights gained could inform a set of transformative policy proposals regarding the architecture of earth system governance.

− ESG–Agency scholarship highlights the multiscalar and multilevel dynamics of earth system governance, with particular focus on the institutional and geographic scales.− Agents in earth system governance deploy diverse strategies and mechanisms, such as networks, bridging organisations, and orchestration, to navigate across global to local levels and ecological, social, economic, and political scales.− Whether multilevel and multiscalar dynamics enable or constrain agency in earth system governance depends on power dynamics and the resource capacities of agents.− Future research should examine the role of agents in political struggles related to the social construction of levels and scales in earth system governance.

− ESG–Agency scholarship highlights the fragmented, expanding, and complex forms of authority that prescribe, steer, and govern behaviour on environmental issues. − Agency scholarship on earth system governance covers interdisciplinary debates in four broad areas: the types of agents, the ways authority is exercised, the nature of agents’ influence, and the varieties of governance structures or architectures within which agents act.− Even with increasing scholarship into the fragmentation of authority and multiplication of the types agents to include nonstate, transnational, and subnational actors, states continue to be the centre of agency scholarship. Future research is needed on agency theory and the theoretical nature of relationships between actors and within differing geographic, economic, and political contexts.

− Agency is one of five core analytical problems in the Earth System Governance (ESG) Project’s research framework, which offers a unique approach to the study of environmental governance. − Agency in Earth System Governance draws lessons from ESG–Agency research through a systematic review of 322 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2008 and 2016 and contained in the ESG–Agency Harvesting Database.− ESG–Agency research draws on diverse disciplinary perspectives with distinct clusters of scholars rooted in the fields of global environmental politics, policy studies, and socio-ecological systems. − Collectively, the chapters in Agency in Earth System Governance provide an accessible synthesis of some of the field’s major questions and debates and a state-of-the-art understanding of how diverse actors engage with and exercise authority in environmental governance.

− ESG-Agency scholarship on accountability is linked to legitimacy and agency theories and to research on architecture and power. − ESG-Agency scholars often consider accountability as an isolated, static and normative property, with relatively little critical reflection on its broader, evolving role in earth system governance. − Greater theoretical development is needed on how accountability operates between extremes of governance level (individual to international) and how this relates to international environmental governance initiatives.

− The role of the state as an agent of earth system governance has become more complex, contingent, and interdependent. − Although participatory and collaborative processes have contributed to more effective, equitable, and legitimate environmental governance outcomes in some instances, analyses of these processes should be situated within a broader governance perspective, which recasts questions of policy change around questions of power and justice. −The complexity and normative aspects of agency in earth system governance requires new forms of policy evaluation that account for social impacts and the ability of governance systems to adapt. − Many of the core analytical concepts in ESG–Agency scholarship, such as agency, power, authority, and accountability, remain under-theorized. In addition, some types of actors, including women, labor, non-human agents, those who work against earth system governance, and many voices from the Global South, remain largely hidden. − ESG–Agency scholars need to develop research projects and collaborations in understudied regions while also recruiting and supporting scholars in those regions to engage with this research agenda.