How can we effectively modify the dangerous human striving for more and more?

In one of the last issues of Science (3 July, p.11), Thomas R. Pickering, in an Editorial mentioned, “ We can begin to think now on a larger scale – an opportunity not to be wasted.” and pointing to interrelationships “…that the issues of economic growth, development, and poverty be seen as linked with the key drivers of food, water, and health, just as climate change is now linked to the key drivers of energy and environment…” he suggested: “Because improvements in any one area depend on the other two, why not devote a summit at the UN General Assembly to the interlinked broad questions of food water and health ?”

Indeed a wonderful idea and first and foremost demonstrating, the world is not a collection of things but a system of interacting processes (dynamics in signaling networks!) So, focusing on natural sciences alone will never be enough, to solve the challenging questions for our planet’s future. There is a human-induced warming in addition to natural trends and cycles of natural climate change and of course, if there should be a solution at all, we have to mind social sciences as well.

Truism is: Economic growth cannot be unlimited and ecology shows the fatal consequences of the call for a never ending consumerism. Ongoing conceptions, initiated by the global financial crisis together with “Peak Oil” and climate crisis, like the “Green New Deal” together with an up-dated “green Keynesianism” are perhaps better than nothing but, basing on sole economic growth, they cannot be the solution.

Kohlmann

How can the world community achieve a shared, new, understanding of the complex, interactive and non-linear nature of the Earth System, against the prevailing, misleading and policy-impeding assumption of a mechanistic ‘Newtonian’ world, amenable to reductionist technical fixes applied in incremental fashion?

Modern societies, and their governments, typically view the natural world in essentially mechanistic fashion — imagining that piecemeal technical solutions can be found for specific aspects of environmental disruption or depletion. Systems thinking and analysis, including an understanding of ecological processes, has not been part of our schooling, culture and world-view. We are thus failing to grasp the potential seriousness of exponential change functions, synergistic stressors, natural limits, critical thresholds and surprises.

Obstacles to achieving such change include the familiar difficulties in ‘re-educating’ existing adult generations, failure of imagination, resistance from those with vested interests in prevailing views/models (including conservative religious and schooling authorities), and the difficulties and diffidences that afflict scientists in their potential public role as communicators and educators. Governments’ (electoral) preoccupation with balancing the budget rather than the biosphere is a natural consequence of the above — and therefore a further major impediment.

How the scientific community is going to cope with interactions between economic growth, population development and ecology which at present perpetuate vicious circle? Do we need a new scientific speciality, complexology, to deal with the challenge?

Meeting the challange we have to cope with complexity our predominantly disciplinary science is poor prepared for. We need a new scientific subject complexology which has to combine systems approaches with the ability to address required disciplines and to communicate with the scientific community. That does not exist, yet.

How should we develop a system of systems approach to the study of the earth, its system and its environment?

The earth and its environment is a set of quasi-independent systems, the oceans, the atmosphere and the land, the flora and the fauna, and the species homo sapiens. The developing system of systems approach would provide a helpful way of categorizing and studying earth system science, which has the potential to help the construction of new insights of the component systems and their interaction.

Model experiments, intercomparisons and data evaluation are needed to quantify and help with management decisions and, ultimately, to provide scientific knowledge to improve the sustainability of the living Earth. Which interactive physical, chemical and biological processes – including the role of human activities from global to regional and at short and long timescales – are fundamental to study in order to gain a deeper understanding of the Earth System and priority areas such as vulnerability, impacts and adaptation?

The International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (www.igbp.net) is embarking on a series of scientific syntheses to be completed by 2014. the initial synthesis topics, try to bring together some of the issues raised in the above question and include

• Global limits to growth
• Geoengineering
• The role of changing nutrient loads in coastal zones and the open ocean in an increased CO2 world
• Global nitrogen assessment and a future outlook
• Earth-system resilience: Earth-system prediction
• Earth-system impacts from changes in the cryosphere
• Megacities and coastal zones
• Global environmental change and sustainable development: the needs of least developed countries
• The role of land cover and land use in modulating climate
• Aerosols
• Additional themes forthcoming (e.g. freshwater cycle; global to regional predictions on shorter timescales)

The scientific effort, much along the lines of what the recent review of ICSU advised for IGBP, is open to the global change community and partner programmes and will
- be guided by scientific excellence;
- Identify knowledge gaps, focus future efforts, and set priorities at IGBP core project level and beyond;
- Complement and draw from IGBP’s core projects and other global change research;
- Frame the Earth as an integrated system strongly affected by humans;
- Integrate the multiple stressors on the Earth system, its limits and its resilience;
- Develop a suite of products for a range of audiences, primarily the research community to identify future priorities and policymaker to formulate policy;
- Provide policy-relevant information and solutions on mitigation, adaptation, key uncertainties, tipping elements, integrated effects and responses in critical regions;
- Engage with a wide range of stakeholders to assist us develop a consistent set of guidelines for the syntheses and identify key science- and policy‐relevant themes. Stakeholders include IGBP scientists and core projects, other policy‐oriented scientists, policymakers, national committees, international ICSU unions, key leaders involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and other large international activities.

What is the proper role of hard-rock geology within the Earth System perspective?

Earth System Science tends to focus on surficial Quaternary processes. Classic geology and geophysics should be part of a truly systems based approach. How do we ensure these fields are included in the field?