What changes in policies (global to local) and human behavior will most strongly reduce human pressures on the planet’s life support systems, and how can the scientific community influence their implementation?

Humanity has perhaps a couple of decades to radically reshape the relationship between society and the biosphere. This requires research on human perceptions and motivations as well as communications between scientists and society. Very little global change research is focused on these critical issues which will determine whether more basic research on global change will have any impact at all.

There are large disconnects between the world of scientific (including social-scientific) experts and the general public on subjects such as risk, vulnerability, and socio-ecological change. This presents challenges to generating the political change we need for embarking on more sustainable development pathways. In what ways does this disconnect affect the creation of appropriate policy, and how do we deal with it?

The public is growing increasingly distrustful of politicians and of what academic Tim Mitchell calls “the rule of experts.” For real, transformative changes, we need mass buy-in and political pressure. What is our responsibility, as academics, in terms of making our research accessible, relevant and usable by the public? How do we bridge this gap?

How can we get all scientists and engineers to serve their “whistles-blowing” role when necessary to protect public health, saftey, or welfare or otherwise uphold and defend the values and codes of ethics of their professions? What are the reasons and factors at play when they fail to serve this role?

When scientists and engineers put personal or professional advantage before professional duty, their professions and the public welfare they exist to serve lose.

This is more the rule than the exception when they have to choose between “blowing whistles,” particularly on institutional wrongdoing, and “looking other way.”

Why is this and can it be changed? If society does not trust engineers and scientists to do their duty, ethically and competently, then the results of whatever research is conducted will not have the credibility required to cause significant societal change, if that is what the research indicates is necessary.

How do we overcome the apparent unreadiness of the scientific community to take a leadership role in addressing the interrelated ecological, biological, social, and economic complexities of the global catastrophe we are currently experiencing before it is too late?

Actions taken by the scientific community must consider the complex interrelationship between the crises. It is the combined impact of Climate Change+ the Ecological Emergency+ Global Warming + the Global Economic Crisis + Armed Conflict + Public Health Emergencies + Extreme Poverty that has brought the planet and its people to breaking point. These crises have created an unprecedented catastrophe of unparalleled complexity.

Attention must also be paid to human life on the planet. We are a species first — biologically, physiologically, psychologically, and emotionally – before we are separated by gender, ethnicity, race, religion, politics or national identity. There is much that can be accomplished if we work with people to preserve biodiversity. It is critical that scientists harness both new and old media to engage with governments, financial institutions, industry, NGO’s, educational institutions, and people.

Global networks of scientists need to spend time in communities, understand local conditions and support local initiatives. Mathematical models will not help us understand human misery caused by the destruction of ecosystems. For many, harmony of living with the Earth has been destroyed by wars, the removal of natural resources by industry, and the co-opting of land for agribusiness. One billion people are already at the point of starvation. We will not reach those who live so close to death with our one hundred facts about the global crises. They are in crisis and it is already deadly.

It is also critical we make the health and well-being of women central to the ecological survival of the planet, and their education a global priority. Protect women’s reproductive rights and they will have fewer children – but their children will be healthy. The mantra should be “what’s good for the planet is good for the humanity,” and the shifts in thinking and behavior will begin to take place. The task is monumental. We should begin immediately.

Denny Taylor, ICEC, Hofstra Univerisity

If continuing and unsustainable growth in the global human population is accepted as the principal cause of accelerating environmental/natural resource degradation, what is keeping the global science community from more forcefully engaging the key political establishments to educate and drive the radical changes required, to lead the world towards a level of reasonable sustainability? How can we get them to take on such a role?

Without leadership and urgent government action, to date sadly lacking, we are likely to reach crisis point, leading to global catastrophe. Continual waffle and ‘feel good’ measures such as ‘cap & trade’ legislation are unlikely to achieve any real positive/timely result.

Given that political administrations tend to be driven by poling statistics/insuring incumbency, it would seem that the general public must somehow become engaged in a grassroots driven campaign to give voice to the very real issues raised by the global science community. Without a sense of urgency we will reach a point of ‘no return’ and, ‘too little too late’ to achieve any meaningful result.