Is Global Change such a bad thing after all?

Allow me to play Devil’s advocate for a moment in order to make rather cynical observations that – unfortunately – common-sense is dictating me: (1) melting of the arctic ice cap offers fantastic opportunities for transport, land use and oil extraction; (2)sea level rise will offer Pacific islanders opportunities (denied to them up until now) of relocation in often far better places, due to international pressure; (3) as some places will probably suffer extreme weather patterns due to Climate Change, other will enjoy far better conditions compared with historical records; (4) oilpalm plantations are indeed prime destroyers of biodiversity but they sustain far more people per acreage compared with native forests…and might play an essential role in solving the energy dilemma in many tropical countries.

I guess this is enough to illustrate my point: ‘average Joe’ has always had the feeling that WE, human beings, are integral parts of an endless journey on a boat called GAIA. Over billions of years, things have changed, they are currently changing and will most certainly continue to do so in the future. Sometimes changes are brutal and their consequences dramatic for entire civilizations.

Here is the crux of my argument: earth sciences (and, by definition, earth scientists) need to embark into a history-contingent and holistic story-telling of the changes we observe. Over the last century, earth sciences have moved towards causality-driven approaches and models, renegating – to some extend – basic premises of physics where things are, evolve and interact without searching for causal factors as such.

This is a paramount shift for earth sciences and the way we communicate its results: as long as ‘average Joe’ will feel like he belongs to the group of culprits who CAUSE all these changes…nothing will change as a well established psychological process, called cognitive dissonance, will prevent humanity at large to become pro-active about Global Change. Science needs to step out from the ‘blame game’ as soon as possible and to go back to Newton’s fundamentals: things and beings are, evolve and interact.

If the current perturbations we call Global Change serve as a wake-up call, I’d say that it is not such a bad thing after all!

What are the most effective and cost-efficient ways to influence local land use decision-making in order to achieve sustainable outcomes?

A better understanding of the factors driving local land use decision-making is crucial to formulate well-targeted policies and interventions that provide the right incentives for land users to achieve socially desired outcomes. Such interventions should have long-term time horizons and concurrently maintain or increase the natural resource base, safeguard or improve local livelihoods, and attain the necessary benefits for man and nature at minimum costs.

What are the possible policies for meeting the problems of climate change, overfishing, and depletion of mineral resources? What is the effectiveness of tradeable permits and taxes, how can they deal with tradeoffs over time, and especially how are they compatible with the need for economic growth among the poorer nations who are, at the same time, contributing to the problems? What is the scope for directed technological change?

Recognizing the importance of challenges to the Earth system is only the beginning. We must ask how to meet them. This requires a great deepening of our knowledge of economic and social systems and of changes in values to accompany the changes in needs.

What political and economic changes can reverse climate change and the loss of biodiversity?

The world’s economy depends upon a system of capital accumulation that does not support a sustainable relationship between the nature and the human communities. Natural resources are exploited above the threshold to sustainability. Political changes are required.

How many humans can the earth system sustain under different scenarios of “development status” that exist in current societies?

There is a need to link current limits in natural systems (e.g. freshwater resources, agricultural productivity, natural versus altered habitats, ability of ecosystems to tolerate pollutants, etc) to the size of the human population, recognising that the earth system does not have infinite resources. This can help contextualise current conflicts, anticipate future ones and indicate limits to growth that should inform all individuals. This is a politically-sensitive topic that needs to be addressed from local to global scales in order to understand the consequences of global change in the future.

What is the best fit trajectory of development to balance economic growth, natural resource use and low carbon emission in the less developed and emerging economies of Africa, Asia, and Latin America?

To increase economic growth and reduce the number of the poor, the low income and emerging economies of Africa, Asia and Latin Ameria are going to strive more vigorously to achieve higher economic growth in the coming decade. This implies that they are going to explore every resources (importantly, natural resources)to do this. It is clear now, judging from current levels of knowledge on the state of the earth, these contries must not follow the development trajectory of todays’ developed nations, otherwise the planet earth (and all of us) will be in greater jeopardy in future. It is critically important now to ponder on what is the optimum developmenent trajectory that should be followed to balance sustainable use of natural resources, achieve low carbon economy, and record the levels of economic growth that can take majority of population out of poverty, in a win-win fashion. Specific country level (and local level)investigations using cross discipline methodologies may be required. It may also require radical spatial/land use re-organization which may be in conflict with existing social organization.

How can a fair distribution of access to natural resources be established and maintained?-demographic stress, environmental values and behaviour.

Most significant impacts on the Earth system result not only from pollution but likewise from exploitation of natural resources. This creates imbalances in the eco system and the socio-economic system. Balancing ecogological, economic and social needs is key to maintain flourishing societies and a intact Earth. This research agenda requires the linkage of Earth science and socio-economic data.

How can we develop empathy for a global environmental system?

In the past conflicts and wars were mainly about self-determination and food (18th and 19th Century) and space and resources (19th and 20th Century). Looking to the future and the 21th Century we will see more and more conflicts due to the overuse of environmental resources and systems. We are now living in the Anthropocene and human interference is reaching into nearly every natural system. This will lead to major changes in those systems with possible catastrophic consequences. The increasing world population will become more vulnerability to environmental threads.

Since the 1960s an environmental movement has established. Notable cornerstones are the book “Silent Spring” by Rachel Carson and the foundation of the “Club of Rome”. Only a small percentage of the western world population is aware of their environmental impact yet. It will be a major task for the 21th Century to establish a global awareness and empathy for nature. This is not anymore a blurred hippie idea, but a necessary step to enable a global sustainable development. We will have to achieve that every person realizes the environmental consequences and systemic impact of its action.

The question is, in which way can Earth System Research contribute to this.
Education and outreach need to be enhanced. Research results need to be translated to the public in a comprehensive way.

How to articulate the geopolitical and geoeconomic interests, the global politics of decision-making and decision-taking and the Earth System Research both for the Arctic and the Antarctic?

In articulation with the previous question, this one aims to consider the subject within the political decision process which makes everything else dependent.

As the previous one, I couldn’t find any question considering these 3 factors in parallel.

How to articulate the geopolitical and geoeconomic interests around resource exploitation in the Artic with the Earth System preservation?

I couldn’t find any question considering any of these aspects and, according to your suggestion, I think these are very important issues to be considered.