Current trajectory of human action is not sustainable at a global scale: how can scientific understanding of complex systems and human perturbations devise sustainable development pathways across the scientific, policy and resource management divide, particularly at the regional level where most decisions are taken?

During the last 50 years the human population has risen from to 2,5 to over 6 billion. The use of land, water, minerals and other natural resources has increased almost ten-fold over the last two hundred years and approximately 50% of the ice-free land surface has now been significantly modified by humans and most of the rest is managed for human purposes. This phenomenon, which has obvious implications, creates the need to study the interactions, which occur on different temporal and spatial scales, affecting the biosphere and which are particularly susceptible to human actions, especially the efforts to provide a growing human population with food, energy, shelter and employment.

A global change research perspective which places primary emphasis on the global scale often misses a vast amount of work, frequently done under other guises, which is directly relevant to the study of global change phenomena. Such work is crucial for understanding the underlying processes which when aggregated constitute global change. Ultimately global change research will provide much of the underlying scientific understanding of complex systems and human perturbations that is required to devise sustainable development pathways at regional level. The drive for sustainability – the desire to make the development of the growing ‘human enterprise’ more compatible with the natural evolution of the Earth system – gives global change research its most fundamental rationale and connection to applications in policy and resource management. Where global change research is weak – application of the work through interaction with the policy and resource management sectors, sustainable development science is strong; and where sustainable development work is often weak – understanding the fundamental dynamics of complex environmental systems, global change research is strong. Clearly, the two fields of enquiry should work in much closer harmony in the future.

Comments are closed.