Scientists, innovators turn to digital sector for transformative ‘systems change’ on climate; ‘Digital Disruptions for Sustainability (D^2S): A Research, Innovation, and Action Agenda’
Youth on the streets are calling for “systems change, not climate change.” And, according to a new report by Future Earth, the digital transformations unfolding today could help answer this call.
Historically, the report says, climate and digital agendas have been approached as two independent issues but increasingly are recognized as intertwined. Humans are connected to each other through and dependent on both the digital and the natural worlds.
Global systemic risks are likely to emerge from both these worlds if we fail to act urgently and continue on our current trajectory.
Yet within this link lies an opportunity to re-shape our everyday interactions with each other and the natural world, the way we conduct business, and how we govern our society, to meet the climate crisis.
The report, Digital Disruptions for Sustainability (D^2S, available post-embargo at https:/
“Climate strategies tend to focus on targeting investments on emission reductions by sector,” says Amy Luers, Executive Director of Future Earth and the project’s leader.
“This sector-based work is critical, of course, but insufficient to meet our climate goals. This is because while research indicates that deep decarbonization is technically possible, we have not yet figured out how to steer society onto a deep decarbonization path. More research and innovation on this issue are urgently needed.”
“This is the focus of the D^2S Agenda. It approaches climate as a social challenge. Rather than focus on the high carbon-emitting sectors, the Agenda focuses on the rules, norms, power structures, and mindsets underpinning all sectors and constraining climate actions.”
It explores the opportunities and challenges of leveraging new capabilities of the digital age to break these constraints and drive rapid and unprecedented societal transformations needed to achieve the Paris Agreement climate goals.
Examples include leveraging the digital age to decentralize power from the top and empower more stakeholders, to shift social norms of consumption toward low carbon products, and to reshape society’s mindset from more efficient fossil fuel use to shifting off them.
“The initial promise of the digital revolution was democratized information, more accountable governments through broader citizen participation, and the growth of a more equitable and greener economy,” says Dr. Luers. “Yet many of these aspirations have not been realized, because society failed to anticipate how the digital revolution would unfold. As a result, today the digital world threatens individual rights, human dignity, social justice, the future of democracy, and environmental sustainability.”
According to the D^2S Agenda, it is not too late to change course.
Artificial intelligence, coupled with a broader range of digital tools, still have the potential to change for the better our economic systems, our governance systems, and even our cognitive systems – in short, to achieve the systems change that young protesters are demanding. But it will take a conscious collective effort to make that happen.
As Dirk Messner, President of the German Environment Agency, and a collaborator on the project, comments in the report, “We will only achieve our sustainability goals if digitalization is consciously geared towards them.”
The D^2S Agenda outlines a framework for this collective work.
It centers around steering the effect of four “digital disruptors” that are altering fundamentally the power, rules, and mindsets of society today.
The 4 “Digital Disruptors”
Unprecedented Transparency: Satellites and other remote sensors in cell phones and elsewhere are making transparency the norm and privacy harder to protect.
Mass Collaboration: The social web and the rapid spread of mobile devices are giving rise to new ways to collaborate around the world.
Intelligent Systems: Big data, machine learning capabilities, and cloud computing have enabled smart systems that combine human and machine intelligence.
Mixed Reality: Virtual and augmented reality are merging the physical and virtual worlds, shifting how we engage with each other and the environment.
Four digital disruptors are already driving transformations in our social and economic systems. Now, scientists, tech innovators, policy and business leaders, and citizens must collaborate consciously to steer these disruptions to drive transformations to a sustainable, climate-safe, and equitable world.
While these digital disruptors are already driving societal transformations at an unprecedented scale and pace, they are not on track to build a climate safe and equitable world. The D^2S Agenda outlines an initial set of research, innovation, and action priorities to make that shift, summarized below (high-res here).
This work will require collaboration across disciplines and sectors, including efforts from the private sector to build these partnerships.
For example, says Lucas Joppa, the Chief Environment Officer at Microsoft, and an advisor on the D^2S Agenda: “By accelerating investment and deployment of AI solutions, we have the potential not only to mitigate climate-related risk for our businesses, but to fundamentally transform how we manage Earth’s natural resources for a more prosperous and climate-stable future.”
While the private sector is a critical part of the solution, the D^2S Agenda highlights that success depends on involving all sectors of society, including the most marginalized, in digital transformations to achieve climate solutions.
As Leena Srivastava, Deputy Director of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and a co-chair of Future Earth Advisory Committee, writes, “Sustainability calls for digital empowerment of the poor; not digital empowerment for the poor.”
As a result tackling the climate crisis and working towards a just and equitable digital future are inherently interconnected agendas.
The D^2S Agenda is part of a new initiative – Sustainability in the Digital Age – which seeks to support and strengthen the growing diversity of actors engaging with the interconnected digital and sustainability agendas, a critical step in driving changes we need and to build a more sustainable and equitable world.
The framework of the D^2S Agenda is sketched out in an animated video here: http://bit.
Advisors / collaborators reflect on the D^2S Agenda
“Data is not the new oil – it’s the new plutonium. Amazingly powerful, dangerous when it spreads, difficult to clean up and with serious consequences when improperly used. Data governance is therefore more urgent as a policy challenge than climate change because abuse of data compromises the very democratic processes on which we rely to intelligently and effectively address challenges like climate change. The Digital Disruptions for Sustainability Agenda provides a helpful framework for understanding the powerful connection between the data governance and the climate agendas, and highlights important work needed to move forward on both.”
Jim Balsilie
Canadian Council of Innovators; member, Future Earth Advisory Committee
“Climate change is humanity’s biggest crisis. A critical obstacle to addressing this crisis is that, despite the growing intensity of extreme weather events, to many people climate impacts still often seem distant and abstract. Machine Learning and interactive technologies could help make climate risks more concrete and more personal. Our hope is that these technologies will enable the scaling of more targeted and personalized public engagement strategies that could ultimately strengthen collective action.”
Yoshua Bengio
A.M. Turing Award Winner, 2018; MILA; University of Montreal
“Many are optimistic about the role of unprecedented levels of transparency in securing more accountable and effective global sustainability governance. Yet, research suggests that transparency may not be all that it promises to be. For example, transparency is often assumed to be essential to trust, however, the opposite might well hold: there might need to be trust first, in order to have meaningful transparency. And thus it is critical to research not only the design of transparency systems, but also the normative and political contexts within which such systems are deployed, as these shape whether and under what conditions transparency may realize its transformative potential in global sustainability governance.”
Aarti Gupta
Professor, Wageningen University
“Digital technologies are enabling unprecedented transparency of lifecycle impact data of raw materials, products, and supply chains and present new platforms to channel consumer behavior into market signals to activate demand for sustainable products. In order to steer towards this opportunity, it is imperative to advance dialogues around the role of government and other actors in the digital economy.”
Tom Hassenboehler
Partner, The Coefficient Group; Executive Director and Founder, EC-MAP
“As we work to implement decarbonization strategies, we are proactively working with partners to leverage the power of data and artificial intelligence to be part of the broader solution of building a climate-safe world.”
Ravi Jain
VP Search Science and AI, Amazon
“At ClimateWorks, we’ve been exploring how alternative futures might impact climate strategies. One critical disruptive force is the digital revolution, which is creating new challenges but may also offer huge opportunities to drive systems change and accelerate climate action. The D^2S Agenda sets out a valuable framework for leveraging the digital revolution to achieve positive change.”
Charlotte Pera
President and CEO, ClimateWorks Foundation
“We need to focus on harnessing the potential of the digital sector for global public benefit. This will require public-private partnerships to both support the development of public benefit data and services, and to build the institutional and regulatory context needed to steer the digital transformations underway to both empower business and support the wellbeing of people and the planet.”
Asun Lera St. Clair
Senior Principal Scientist, DNV GL; member, Future Earth Advisory Committee
###
Future Earth
Future Earth is an international research organization, collaborating with science and society on solutions to global sustainability challenges. It encompasses nearly 30 research-to-action networks, groups of scientists and practitioners around the world, studying the environmental and human aspects of global change. We help incorporate the latest scientific knowledge into decision-making, with a mission to accelerate transformations to sustainability through research and innovation.
Future Earth is governed by the International Science Council (ISC), the Belmont Forum of funding agencies, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations University (UNU), the World Meteorological Organization, and the Science and Technology in Society (STS) forum.
* * * * *
Coverage highlights
Reuters, UK, Digital disruption holds virtual key to climate action, researchers say, click here
Agencia EFE, Spain, La revolución digital tiene que ser utilizada contra la crisis climática, click here
Heise Online, Germany, Vier digitale Disruptionsfaktoren für mehr Nachhaltigkeit in der Klimakrise, click here
Coverage summary, click here
News release in full, click here
]]>Survey reveals common concern of global scientists: interlinkages between crises; Part of Our Future on Earth, 2020, a 50-page synthesis of latest peer-reviewed, state-of-the-planet research and its interconnected complexities
The greatest threat to humanity hides in the potential cascading of impacts of five highly-related, highly-likely risks — a collision that can amplify these effects catastrophically, according to a new survey of 222 leading scientists from 52 countries.
Conducted by Future Earth, the international sustainability research network, the survey identifies five global risks — failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation; extreme weather events; major biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse; food crises; and water crises — as the most severe in terms of impact. Four of them — climate change, extreme weather, biodiversity loss, and water crises — were also deemed by scientists as most likely to occur.
Business leaders and policymakers, in a survey released in January by the World Economic Forum, likewise assigned these same five risks, chosen from a set of 30, top rank positions in terms of impact.
More than one-third (82) of the scientists, however, underlined the threat posed by the synergistic interplay and feedback loops between the top five– with global crises worsening one another “in ways that might cascade to create global systemic crisis.”
Extreme heatwaves, for example, can accelerate global warming by releasing large amounts of stored carbon from affected ecosystems, and at the same time intensify water crises and / or food scarcity; the loss of biodiversity weakens the capacity of natural and agricultural systems to cope with climate extremes, increasing vulnerability to food crises.
Some 173 of the scientists surveyed volunteered additional risks, beyond the list of 30, as deserving of greater global attention. Commons themes included erosion of societal trust and values; social infrastructure deterioration; rising inequality; rising political nationalism; overpopulation; and mental health decline.
Said the report: “Interestingly, the majority of these touch on issues of societal well-being and social security, suggesting that societal risks may be growing and in need of greater consideration. This is especially pertinent as we consider how society can transition to a climate-safe and equitable future…”
“Perhaps the most interesting theme to emerge from these responses was the failure to take into account feedback across different systems.”
“Despite this ubiquity of connections, many scientists and policymakers are embedded in institutions that are used to thinking and acting on isolated risks, one at a time. This needs to change to thinking about risks as connected.”
“As the scientific advisors for this survey, we call on the world’s academics, business leaders, and policymakers to pay urgent attention to these five global risks, and to ensure that they are treated as interacting systems, rather than addressed one at a time, in isolation.”
The survey (in full from Feb. 12: futureearth.org/initiatives/other-initiatives/grp), was led by Maria Ivanova, University of Massachusetts, Boston, and scientific advisors Markus Reichstein, Max Planck Institute, Germany; Matthias Garschagen, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany; Qian Ye, Beijing Normal University, China; Kalpana Chaudhari, Institute for Sustainable Development and Research, India; and Sylvia Wood, Science Officer, Future Earth, Canada office.
Joined-up thinking: Our Future on Earth, 2020
Publicly available at futureearth.org/publications/our-future-on-earth
The survey is presented as a chapter in a new report, Our Future on Earth, 2020, in which scientists summarize the latest peer-reviewed research on the state of our planet and distill the many, interconnected complexities into an authoritative, 50-page synthesis.
Today’s environmental problems, the report says, represent a blend of physical, chemical, biological, and social change that all interact and feedback on each other.
“Trying to understand how our impacts in one area, such as river extraction, affect another, such as food provision, is a complex task,” the report says. “But that’s what scientists, sociologists, economists, ecologists, and others are trying to do.”
“And while our problematic practices in one area can impact many other areas, the good news is that so can our restorative ones: improving biodiversity in a wetland ecosystem can also reduce water pollution and soil erosion, and protect crops against storm damage, for instance.”
“We are making our own Anthropocene, and we can make it a good one.”
Among the issues highlighted in the report:
- The rise and impact of populism, “characterized by a denial of complexity, including the complexity of environmental damage and the systemic, multi-layered interactions required to achieve sustainability,” as well as “fake news.”
- Increasing financial risk of climate and environmental change. Now deemed by insurers as their industry’s top risk, the report notes the first climate-change-related bankruptcy: California’s largest electric utility company, PG&E went under last year after sparking a huge forest fire.
- Trends in migration, and the impacts of digital technologies, including artificial intelligence, on sustainability.
- The ecological and social science of climate change, our food systems, and the collapse in biodiversity; developments in regulating the high seas; the rise of green finance mechanisms; and the new field of studying “transformations” in society: how, exactly, can we uproot ingrained ideas about economic development or wellbeing and wrench them into new, more sustainable frameworks?
“2020 is a critical time to look at these issues,” says Amy Luers, Executive Director of Future Earth. “Our actions in the next decade will determine our collective future on earth.”
Our Future on Earth, 2020 is the first of a series of such reports.
Chapter summaries
Introduction: Charting the future
Author: Gaia Vince, journalist and author, London.
We are a vast global population facing unprecedented environmental challenges, yet we still have the time and the capability to prevent extreme outcomes. The past year has been one of extraordinary social awakening to the hazards of environmental change, and of demands for action towards a sustainable future.
“Green deals” have been proposed by several nations, and if passed into legislation they could prove transformative. The global population is expected to be 9.7 billion by 2050. Their future is in our hands: can we make it more sustainable, resilient and fair?
Climate: Dialing down the heat
Lead author: Diana Liverman, School of Geography and Development, University of Arizona
Over the last 18 months, major assessments by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the US National Climate Assessment, and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), have all argued that time is running out to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that are causing the climate to warm.
This has inspired declarations of a climate crisis or climate emergency by the leaders of more than 700 cities, states and governments. Yet, during 2019, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere reached more than 415 ppm, and the five years from 2014 to 2018 were the warmest recorded over land and ocean since 1880.
Despite the evidence, “many countries have not yet risen to the challenge or are reversing prior commitments.” What is needed to dial down the heat?
This chapter also includes independently-authored boxes looking at the climate and social causes and impacts of wildfire; and the (predominantly negative) impacts of climate change on human health.
Politics: Populism versus grassroots movements
Author: Richard Calland, University of Cambridge’s Institute for Sustainability Leadership; Associate Professor of Public Law, University of Cape Town.
Right-wing populism is on the rise around the world: a breed of politics that exploits peoples’ fears during times of economic decline and growing inequality, and that focuses on nationalist tendencies to clamp down on borders and reject immigrants. Populism is often characterized by a “denial of complexity”, preferring to identify simple, seductive culprits for the erosion of society, the economy, and the welfare of the masses. This often leads to a denial of climate change facts or impacts. But grassroots organizations are emerging as a potentially strong, countervailing force. But is it politically strong enough and will it work?
Ocean: Governing the high seas
Lead author: Robert Blasiak, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University
Over three billion people are dependent on functioning marine ecosystems as their primary source of protein, and the livelihoods of nearly half of humanity are linked to marine and coastal biodiversity. While the ocean was once considered too big to be significantly altered through human activity, it is now clear that it too has entered the Anthropocene, an age in which humans are the dominant influence.
Stressors from climate change to pollution, fishing and shipping, have on average nearly doubled over the past decade. Officials from around the world are now negotiating a new United Nations treaty to govern the high seas (Biological diversity of areas Beyond National Jurisdiction), which may be hashed out in 2020. What are the expectations and challenges for regulating fish, seafloor mining, biodiversity and more?
This chapter includes spotlights on plastic pollution in the ocean; and the rise of conflicts over seafood resources, sometimes called “fish wars”.
Forced Migration: Empowering mobility when moving isn’t a choice
Lead author: David Wrathall, Oregon State University, College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences
As of September 2019, the Syrian Conflict had resulted in over 5.6 million refugees seeking refuge mainly in Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. As of 2018, 800,000 people had fled their home countries in North Africa as asylum seekers and refugees, some embarking on often-deadly boat trips across the Mediterranean.
For many observers in the wealthy, industrialized global North, the influx of migrants from Central America and the Middle East has been seen as a sign of an impending flood: their assumption is that climate change impacts will spur violence and/or push hundreds of millions of people into their borders, causing yet more violence and other problems.
The truth is more nuanced. Humanity is not at the mercy of forces seemingly beyond our control: it is policy, not climate change, behind the real crises.
This chapter also includes an independently-authored box on growing urbanization and solutions to make cities more liveable.
Media: Industrializing disinformation
Lead author: Owen Gaffney, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research & Stockholm Resilience Centre.
The flow of information in the world is changing. Today, around half of the planet’s 7.6 billion people are online, where they are deeply influenced by social media, search engines and eCommerce algorithms. These digital platforms tend to favour the spread of information designed to engage with emotion over reason, can cause the propagation of “fake news”, and can lead to social harms like an erosion of trust in vaccines. Some politicians are now calling for the tech giants to be split up, arguing that their power and dominance is bad for democracy. Digital information technologies and media, though messy, could support global action for sustainability. Yet it remains unclear whether information technologies will drive the Earth towards a pandemic or away from it; towards a destabilized climate or a potentially-manageable 1.5°C warmer world.
Biodiversity: The unravelling web of life
Lead author: Cornelia Krug, Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Humans have now “significantly altered” 75% of our planet’s land area; about a quarter of species in assessed plant and animal groups are threatened. In 2018, the world’s last male northern white rhino died in his Kenyan enclosure. The Brazillian blue parrot, Spix’s Macaw, was declared extinct in the wild, amongst a handful of other birds. And yet studies continue to show that biodiversity helps to make landscapes more resilient to climate change. Countries are now in the process of negotiating a “Global Deal for Nature”: a new global biodiversity framework to be discussed through the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2020. Reversing the trends of loss of life on this planet will require some new ways of thinking about conservation.
This chapter also includes a box on the long-term historical perspective of biodiversity change and extinctions, to better contextualize how altered ecosystems can cope with future change.
Finance: Making money work for green goals
Lead author: Kristina Alnes, CICERO Center for International Climate Research, Norway
Finance is a risky business. But the global situation today–economic, political, and environmental, especially thanks to climate change–is conspiring to make it riskier. Examples like the 2019 bankruptcy of the Californian utility PG&E illustrate the impacts of climate on financial risk; recent reports like that by the Network for Greening the Financial Services show how the financial world is starting to take this seriously. Efforts like the nascent Task Force on Climate Related Disclosure are helping to grapple with the issue.
The “great acceleration” of economic growth over the 20thcentury put a lot of pressure on earth systems. There is an opportunity now to reverse this trend. This piece looks at the potential for green bonds, sustainability-linked loans and more, to promote sustainable development.
Food: Rethinking global security
Lead author: Jiaguo Qi, Center for Global Change & Earth Observations, Michigan State University, USA
The amount of food produced per person on the planet has gone up more than 40 percent since the 1960s. Yet, ironically, the prevalence of undernourishment–which had been declining for decades–has started to tip upwards again: the total number of people undernourished in 2018 stood at more than 820 million people, up from a record low of 785 million in 2015. We will need to squeeze ever-more food out of the same amount of land for our growing population in our changing climate.
Strains on food production are expected to increase, as a result of various forces including climate change, biodiversity loss, and a global population on the rise. Solutions may include eating less meat, precision agriculture supported by new technologies, ensuring less waste, and taking a holistic approach to food production that looks at water, ecosystem protection, social welfare and more.
Transformation: How to spur radical change
Lead author: Sandra Waddock, Carroll School of Management, Boston College
When more than 150 world leaders met in 2015 to develop the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, their key phrase was “transforming our world.” Transformative change goes well beyond incrementalism or reform, both of which allow existing practices, goals, and structures to stay in place.
Transformation involves a step change, often in fundamental norms or assumptions. An emerging field of research is just starting to unpick exactly how to encourage, guide, and enact such changes, from a shifting mindset about single-use plastics to a revolution in how we think about economic growth.
Digital Innovation: Harnessing technology for good
Lead author: Dirk Messner, President, German Environment Agency (UBA), Co-Director, Centre for Global Cooperation Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany
Massive amounts of data, new computational abilities, and artificial intelligence are spurring disruptive progress: technical systems are becoming as good (or even better) than humans at recognizing faces and voices, diagnosing cancer, translating languages, and producing news articles, music and paintings. Artificial general intelligence (AGI)– a technical system able to accomplish any cognitive task at least as well as humans–could be achieved within the 21st century.
This will all cause massive disruption to labor markets, democracies, and our understanding of the planet and humanity. So far, these technological changes have largely been used to increase consumption, economic growth and resource extraction, rather than saving the planet or promoting just and fair societies. But the digital sector has immense potential for reducing emissions and empowering people to monitor and protect ecosystems. A new field of digital sustainability could be forged to encourage positive action.
This chapter includes a spotlight on the energy use of the digital sector.
###
Please note: the essays express the opinions of the authors and may not encompass the views of the entire Future Earth community.
About Future Earth
Future Earth is an international research organization, collaborating with science and society on solutions to global sustainability challenges. It encompasses nearly 30 research-to-action networks, groups of scientists and practitioners around the world, studying the environmental and human aspects of global change. We help incorporate the latest scientific knowledge into decision-making, with a mission to accelerate transformations to sustainability through research and innovation.
Future Earth is governed by the International Science Council (ISC), the Belmont Forum of funding agencies, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations University (UNU), the World Meteorological Organization, and the Science and Technology in Society (STS) forum.
Coverage highlights
The Guardian, UK, Humanity under threat from perfect storm of crises – study, click here
Agencia EFE, Spain, via El Mundo, Los científicos alertan sobre el efecto cascada del cambio climático, click here
Reuters, UK, Climate change could spark ‘global systemic crisis’, scientists warn, click here
Agence France Presse, France, Scientists Warn Multiple Overlapping Crises Could Trigger ‘Global Systemic Collapse,’ click here
The Conversation, Australia, Scientists Are Deeply Concerned These 5 Cascading Crises Threaten Future Generations. click here
* * * * *
Full coverage summary, click here
News release in full, click here
]]>
First holistic attempt to identify scientific risks, guardrails — akin to a 2C rise for climate — to create targets for land, water, oceans, biodiversity
Three of the world’s foremost scientists will co-chair a commission of leading international experts to identify risks and develop a coherent suite of scientific targets to protect Earth’s life support systems.
Johan Rockström, Joyeeta Gupta, and Dahe Qin will co-chair the Earth Commission, comprising an initial 19 members, announced today by the international research organisation Future Earth.
The group will begin immediately — and complete by 2021 — a high-level synthesis of scientific knowledge on the biophysical processes that regulate Earth’s stability and targets to ensure this stability. The commission will also explore social transformations required for sustainable development to reach these targets.
The goal, ultimately, is to translate these into tangible science-based targets for Earth specifically tailored to cities and companies.
This translational work will be undertaken by a new Science Based Targets Network (SBTN) comprised of leading NGOs, enabling cities and companies to reduce their impact on and restore our oceans, freshwater, land, and biodiversity.
The aim is to make this standard practice in leading companies and cities by 2025.
“This year’s fires in the Amazon, the rapidly warming Arctic, dying coral reefs, and unprecedented heat waves and floods across the world, are the clearest signals yet that human activities are pushing the planet further and further from the stable state we have enjoyed for 10,000 years,” says Prof. Rockström, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and co-chair of Future Earth.
“To combat climate change, nations have agreed to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees,” says Prof. Qin, director of the Academic Committee of Chinese Academy of Science.
“What we lack are comparable objectives for other key climate systems and environmental components that regulate the state of the Earth system and underpin sustainability– water, land, food, biodiversity, chemicals, and others,” adds Dr. Qin, also the Co-Chair of Working Group I of the Fourth and Fifth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Reports.
“The Earth Commission will fill this critical gap, amassing the information needed to create science-based targets for these other essential parts of the Earth system,” Dr. Qin adds.
The Earth Commission and the Science-Based Targets Network are parts of the Global Commons Alliance, a network of organizations aiming to transform our economic systems to ensure our planet remains habitable. The alliance, launched in June, includes Earth HQ, a media portal for the planet, which will share the big picture of how Earth Systems are performing and tracking progress towards solutions.
“We will work closely with SBTN to ensure our analysis is useful and implementable, and how our analysis can provide guidance for development at, for example, a river basin scale,” says Prof. Rockström.
Over 630 companies are already using science to commit how much and how quickly they need to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions through the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi) set up in 2014.
The Earth Commission will build on and complement existing assessments, such as those conducted by the IPCC and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).
Dr. Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at the University of Amsterdam: “The UN Sustainable Development Goals are largely aspirational. The Commission’s analysis will identify practical science-based targets that help realize these aspirations and deliver on Agenda 2030 to leave no one behind.”
“The Earth Commission’s work will also help inform intergovernmental treaty and/or policy negotiation processes such as those on biodiversity, desertification, and transboundary water,” adds Dr. Gupta, who also co-chaired the recent UN Environment’s Global Environmental Outlook-6.
The 19 commissioners include leading scientists in both natural and social sciences from 13 countries: Argentina, Australia (2), China (2), France, Germany (2), Ghana, India, Japan, Kenya, Netherlands (2), the United Kingdom, and the United States (4).
###
Co-chairs
Johan Rockström, Professor in Earth System Science and Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Co-Chair of Future Earth’s Advisory Committee
Joyeeta Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South, University of Amsterdam and IHE Institute for Water Education in Delft
Dahe Qin, Director of the Academic Committee of Chinese Academy of Sciences
Members
Xuemei Bai, Expert in urbanisation and sustainability, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University, Australia; co-chair Future Earth’s Urban Knowledge Action Network
Govindasamy Bala, Expert in climate and the carbon cycle, Indian Institute of Science, India
Stuart Bunn, expert in freshwater ecology and management, Professor and Director, Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Australia
Fabrice DeClerck, Expert in food systems and biodiversity, sustainable production and healthy consumption, France; Science Director EAT, Senior Scientist Alliance of Biodiversity, CIAT.
Sandra Diaz, Expert in biodiversity and plant ecology and ecosystems ecology. Professor at Córdoba National University and Investigador Superior at the Argentine National Research Council (CONICET), Argentina, and co-chair of the 2019 IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
Kristie Ebi, Expert in health risks and climate change, University of Washington, USA; co-chair Future Earth’s Health Knowledge Action Network
Peng Gong, Expert in Global environment monitoring, modeling and planetary health, Tsinghua University, China, member Future Earth Advisory Committee
Christopher Gordon, Expert in coastal wetland andintegrated river basin management, CDKN, CEL Institute for Environment and Sanitation Studies, University of Ghana
Benjamin Halpern, Expert in marine conservation, National Center for Ecological Analysis & Synthesis, UC Santa Barbara, USA
Norichika Kanie, Expert in sustainable development goals, Earth system governance, Keio University, Japan
Tim Lenton, Expert in tipping points, climate modeling, Global Systems Institute, University of Exeter, UK; Future Earth’s Analysis, Integration and Modeling of the Earth System Project
Diana Liverman, Expert in climate vulnerability and adaptation, University of Arizona, USA
David Obura, Expert in coral reef ecology and sustainability, CORDIO East Africa, Kenya
Veerabhadran Ramanathan, Expert in atmospheric sciences, air pollution, University of California, USA
Peter Verburg, Expert in land change, social-ecological dynamics,Vrije Universiteit, Netherlands, former Chair of Future Earth’s Global Land Programme
Ricarda Winkelmann, Expert in ice sheet dynamics, tipping points, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Germany
Future Earth, based at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, will host the Earth Commission’s scientific secretariat in collaboration with the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, IIASA.
The Earth Commission and the Science Based Targets Network are parts of the Global Commons Alliance, a network of organizations aiming to ensure our planet remains habitable.
The Earth HQ (under construction at globalcommonsalliance.org), will serve as a media portal for the planet, sharing an overall picture of how Earth Systems are performing and track progress.
Coverage highlights:
Agencia EFE, Spain, Científicos internacionales crean Comisión de la Tierra para mantener la vida, click here
Humans: The greatest contributor to diversity of minerals since oxygen; Officially recognized minerals, formed by nature: More than 5,000; Formed due to human activity: 208
Human industry and ingenuity has done more to diversify and distribute minerals on Earth than any development since the rise of oxygen over 2.2 billion years ago, experts say in a paper published today.
The work bolsters the scientific argument to officially designate a new geological time interval distinguished by the pervasive impact of human activities: the Anthropocene Epoch.
In the paper, published by American Mineralogist, a team led by Robert Hazen of the Carnegie Institution for Science identifies for the first time a group of 208 mineral species that originated either principally or exclusively due to human activities. That’s almost 4% of the roughly 5,200 minerals officially recognized by the International Mineralogical Association (IMA).
Most of the recognized minerals attributed to human activities originated through mining — in ore dumps, through the weathering of slag, formed in tunnel walls, mine water or timbers, or through mine fires.
Six were found on the walls of smelters; three formed in a geothermal piping system.
Some minerals formed due to human actions can also occur naturally. Three in that category were discovered on corroded lead artifacts aboard a Tunisian shipwreck, two on bronze artifacts in Egypt, and two on tin artifacts in Canada. Four were discovered at prehistoric sacrificial burning sites in the Austrian mountains.
Unparalleled pace of diversification
According to the paper, the first great ‘punctuation event’ in the history of Earth’s mineral diversity occurred more than 2 billion years ago when the increase of oxygen in the atmosphere — ‘the Great Oxidation’ — gave rise to as many as two-thirds of the more than 5,200 mineral species officially recognized today.
Says Dr. Hazen, who co-wrote the paper with Edward Grew of the University of Maine, and Marcus Origlieri and Robert Downs of the University of Arizona: “Mineral evolution has continued throughout Earth’s history. It has taken 4.5 billion years for combinations of elements to meet naturally on Earth at a specific location, depth and temperature, and to form into the more than 5,200 minerals officially recognized today. The majority of these have arisen since the Great Oxidation event 2 billion years ago. ”
“Within that collection of 5,200 are 208 minerals produced directly or indirectly by human activities, mostly since the mid-1700s, and we believe that others continue to be formed at that same relatively blazing pace. To imagine 250 years relative to 2 billion years, that’s the difference between the blink of an eye (one third of a second) and one month.”
“Simply put, we live in an era of unparalleled inorganic compound diversification,” says Dr. Hazen. “Indeed, if the Great Oxidation eons ago was a ‘punctuation event’ in Earth’s history, the rapid and extensive geological impact of the Anthropocene is an exclamation mark.”
Anthropogenic minerals
A mineral species is defined as a naturally occurring crystalline compound that has a unique combination chemical composition and crystal structure. As of February, 2017, the IMA had approved 5,208 species (see rruff.info/ima for a complete list).
The authors of the recent paper argue that with so many minerals and mineral-like compounds owing their origin to human activities, “a more comprehensive understanding and analysis of the mineralogical nature of the Anthropocene Epoch is warranted.”
Humanity has had a major impact on diversity and distribution in the mineral world in three principal ways, according to the paper:
1 a) Manufacturing synthetic “mineral-like” compounds, and b) causing minerals to form as an unintentional byproduct of human activity
a) Directly creating synthetic mineral-like compounds such as YAG (yttrium aluminum garnet) crystals used in lasers, silicon “chips” for semi-conductors, carbide grits for abrasives, and various specialty metals and alloys for magnets, machine parts, and tools. Other examples include bricks, earthenware, porcelain, glass and limestone-based Portland cement — the world’s most common form of cement, used in concrete, mortar, stucco and grout — a combination of calcium silicates, calcium sulfates, and other compounds
b) Indirectly contributing to the formation of new minerals through mining, with new compounds appearing on mine walls or in mine dumps, for example. Of special interest are minerals found associated with ancient lead-zinc mining localities, including some possibly dating from the Bronze Age, and others from as far back as 300 AD.?
2) Large scale movement of rocks, sediments, and minerals
In addition to creating new compounds, human activities such as mining and the transport of stone blocks, rocks, sediments, and minerals from their original location to help build roads, bridges, waterways, monuments, kitchen counters, and other human infrastructure, rivals in scale nature’s redistribution such as via glaciers.
Mining operations, meanwhile, have stripped the near-surface environment of ores and fossil fuels, leaving large open pits, tunnel complexes, and, in the case of strip mining, sheared off mountaintops.
Road cuts, tunnels, and embankments represent further distinctively human planetary modifications.
3) Global redistribution of highly valued natural minerals
Diamonds, rubies, emeralds, sapphires, and a host of semi-precious stones, accompanied by concentrations of gold, silver, and platinum, are found in shops and households in every corner of the globe.
Collections of fine mineral specimens juxtapose mineral species that would not occur naturally in combination. From modest beginner collector sets of more common minerals to the world’s greatest museums, these collections, if buried in the stratigraphic record and subsequently unearthed in the distant future, “would reveal unambiguously the passion of humans for the beauty and wonder of the mineral kingdom,” the paper says.
New compounds forming
Says Dr. Downs: “Given humanity’s pervasive influences on the environment, there must be hundreds of as yet unrecognized ‘minerals’ in old mines, smelters, abandoned buildings, and other sites. Meanwhile, new suites of compounds may now be forming in, for example, solid waste dumps where old batteries, electronics, appliances, and other high-tech discards are exposed to weathering and alteration.”
Adds Dr. Origlieri: “In the sediment layers left behind from our age, future mineralogists will find plentiful building materials such as bricks, cinder blocks, and cement, metal alloys such as steel, titanium, and aluminum, along with many lethal radioactive byproducts of the nuclear age. They might also marvel at some beautiful manufactured gemstones, like cubic zirconia, moissanite, synthetic rubies, and many others.”
Says Dr. Grew: “These minerals and mineral-like compounds will be preserved in the geological record as a distinctive, globally-distributed horizon of crystalline novelty–a persistent marker that marks our age as different from all that came before.”
Some anthropogenic minerals wouldn’t be officially recognized today
Calclacite, described by a Belgium-based scientist in 1959, and which originated in an old oak storage cabinet for mineral specimens at the Royal Museum of Natural History, Brussels, is an officially recognized mineral that wouldn’t qualify today; in 1998 the IMA decided to disallow any substance “made by Man.”
Other recognized anthropogenic minerals in this category include several slag-related minerals as well as a pair from Russia, niobocarbide and tantalcarbide, which some experts believe may have been a hoax — “a laboratory product … deliberately passed off as a natural material” in the early 1900s.
Though unlikely to pass scrutiny today, says Dr. Grew, previously recognized minerals such as these, rather than being invalidated, have been allowed to remain in the IMA catalog.
The IMA did agree to recognize a mineral in cases “in which human intervention in the creation of a substance is less direct.”
The origin of up to 29 forms of carbon: humanity
Of the 208 human-mediated minerals identified by the Deep Carbon Observatory researchers, 29 contain carbon.
Origins and forms, along with movements and quantities, are four themes of the DCO (deepcarbon.net). Dr. Hazen is the DCO’s Executive Director.
Now we know that as many as 29 carbon minerals originated with human activities, of which 14 have no recorded natural occurrences. It is fair, therefore, to consider the 14 as the youngest carbon mineral species. Among the 14, candidates for the very youngest include a dozen minerals related to uranium mines.
The mineral andersonite, for example, is found in the tunnels of certain abandoned uranium mines in the American Southwest. At places along the tunnel walls, sandstone becomes saturated with water that contains elements that form a beautiful crust of yellow, orange and green crystals. Prized for its bright green fluorescent glow under a black light, a good sample of andersonite will fetch up to $500 from a collector.
Another notable carbon-bearing mineral is tinnunculite, determined to be a product of hot gases reacting with the excrement of the Eurasian kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) at a burning coal mine in Kopeisk, Chelyabinsk, Russia. It was subsequently discovered also on Russia’s Mt. Rasvumchorr — an entirely natural occurrence.
Tinnunculite is one of eight new minerals identified as part of the Deep Carbon Observatory’s Carbon Mineral Challenge, launched in 2015 to track down an estimated 145 carbon-bearing minerals yet to be formally recognized. The IMA recognized tinnunculite as a mineral in 2015.
###
29 anthropogenic carbon-related minerals
Human-mediated phases with no confirmed natural occurrences
Recovered from ore dumps: wheatleyite, widgiemoolthalite
Associated with mine tunnel walls: albrechtschraufite, canavesite, je�ekite, línekite
Associated with mine dump fires, including coal mine dumps: acetamide, hoelite, kladnoite
Interaction with mine timbers or leaf litter: paceite, hoganite
Formed in storage cabinets in museums: calclacite
Allegedly from placers, possibly a hoax: niobocarbide, tantalcarbide
Inadvertently produced or human-mediated minerals, occurring or suspected to occur in nature
Recovered from dumps, including ore and serpentinite: hydromagnesite, lansfordite, nesquehonite
Alteration of mine tunnel walls: andersonite, bayleyite, swartzite, znucalite
Associated with mine fires (not coal mines): shannonite
Associated with coal mine and dump fires; Sublimation from gas escape from coal fires: dypingite, ravatite, tinnunculite
Other “post-mine” minerals or context undefined: rabbittite barstowite, phosgenite
Alteration of lead artifacts: barstowite, phosgenite
Alteration of bronze artifacts: chalconatronite
Endnotes
Although yet to be confirmed by the International Union of Geological Sciences, there is growing advocacy for formal recognition of the “Anthropocene Epoch,” the successor of the Holocene Epoch, which began some 11,500 years ago when the most recent ice age glaciers began to retreat. Epochs are normally separated by significant changes in the rock layers to which they correspond. A 35-member Working Group on the Anthropocene (WGA) recommended formal designation of the epoch Anthropocene to the International Geological Congress on 29 August 2016. It may be several years before a final decision is reached.?
About the authors:
- Robert Hazen is Senior Staff Scientist at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, DC, and Executive Director of the Deep Carbon Observatory
- Edward Grew is a Research Professor, Earth and Climate Sciences, University of Maine
- Marcus Origlieri is a Research Associate, University of Arizona
- Robert Downs is a Professor of Geosciences specializing in mineralogy and crystallography, University of Arizona
Carnegie Science seeks to encourage discovery and the application of knowledge to the improvement of humankind. carnegiescience.edu
The Deep Carbon Observatory is an international network of nearly 1000 multi-disciplinary scientists committed to investigating the quantities, movements, forms, and origins of carbon in deep Earth. deepcarbon.net
Anthropogenic minerals, photos:
Metamunirite (NaV O3), Big GypsumValley, San Miguel County, Colorado, USA. Credit RRUFF. Download: http://bit.
Abhurite [Sn21O6(OH)14Cl16] from the wreck of the SS Cheerful, 14 miles NNW of St. Ives, Cornwall, England. Credit RRUFF. Download: http://bit.
Simonkolleite [Zn5(OH)8Cl2·H2O] found on a copper mining artifact, Rowley mine, Maricopa County, Arizona. Credit RRUFF. Download: http://bit.
Fiedlerite [Pb3Cl4F(OH)·H2O] from a slag site, Greece. Credit RRUFF. Download: http://bit.
Nealite [Pb4Fe(AsO3)2Cl4·2H2O] from slag site, Greece. Credit RRUFF. Download: http://bit.
Chalconatronite [Na2Cu(CO3)2·3H2O], Mont Saint-Hilaire, Quebec, Canada. Credit RRUFF. Download: http://bit.
Andersonite: Hillside Mine, Arizona. Credit: Trevor Boyd/Causeway Minerals. Download:http://bit.
* * * * *
Example coverage:
Washington Post, USA
Humans have caused an explosion of never-before-seen minerals all over the Earth, (click here)
Los Angeles Times, USA
You are living in a unique time on planet Earth — mineralogically speaking, (click here)
Discover Magazine, USA
Human-Caused Minerals: Another Sure Sign of the Anthropocene?, (click here)
Forbes, USA
Human Activity On Earth Triggered A New Age Of Minerals Formation, (click here)
Scientific American, USA
Found: Thousands of Man-Made Minerals—Another Argument for the Anthropocene, (click here)
Popular Science, USA
Is the Anthropocene really a thing? Minerals we’ve helped create rekindle the debate, (click here)
Popular Mechanics, USA
Humanity Has Created Thousands of Artificial Minerals, (click here)
Newsy, USA (90 second report)
Humans Drastically Change The Environment — And We Always Have, (click here)
Nature World News, United States
Human Activity Ushers in the Planet’s Next Epoch Starting From a Spike in New Minerals, (click here)
Reuters, UK
New minerals back idea of man-made epoch for Earth – study, (click here)
BBC, UK
Humans help cook up mineral bounty, (click here)
BBC Mundo, UK
Vertederos, minas abandonadas y cajones de museos, los lugares donde los humanos hemos provocado que se creen nuevos minerales, (click here)
Daily Mail, UK
Human impact on the planet’s chemistry has created a catalogue of new minerals in ‘the blink of an eye’, say scientists, (click here)
The Guardian, UK
Rock of ages: impact of manmade crystals defining new geological epoch – study, (click here)
New Scientist, UK
Rock solid evidence of Anthropocene seen in 208 minerals we made, (click here)
Business Insider, UK
Earth entered a new epoch on July 16, 1945 — and humans have left behind more than 200 new minerals to prove it, (click here)
International Business Times, UK
Anthropocene: The 208 crystals that don’t exist anywhere else in the universe, (click here)
Chemistry World, UK
Human-made minerals add to evidence for Anthopocene epoch, (click here)
Press Trust of India
208 new human-caused minerals point to ‘Anthropocene Epoch’, (click here)
东方网 (Oriental Network), China
人类活动“一夜间”致200多种新矿物产生, (Human activities “one night” produced more than 200 kinds of new minerals)(click here)
RAI Novosti newswire, Russia
Люди меняют геологию Земли: 208 новых минералов имеют антропогенное происхождение (People change the geology of the Earth: 208 new minerals are of anthropogenic origin), (click here)
Spiegel, Germany
Geologie: Menschheit ließ 200 Mineralien neu entstehen (Humanity has newly created 200 minerals), (click here)
Berliner Morgenpost, Germany
Sind neue Mineralien ein Beweis für ein neues Erdzeitalter? (Are new minerals a proof of a new era?), (click here); 2nd story:
Der Mensch lässt neue Mineralien entstehen (Human beings create new minerals), (click here)
Die Presse, Austria
Mineralien des Menschenzeitalters (Minerals of the Human Age), (click here)
Science.ORF (Austrian Broadcasting Corporation), Austria
Ein Argument mehr für das „Anthropozän“ (A further argument for the “Anthropocene”), (click here)
El País, Spain
Los humanos han creado ya 208 nuevos minerales (Humans have already created 208 new minerals), (click here)
Agencia EFE, Spain
Científicos catalogan 208 minerales creados por la actividad humana (Scientists catalog 208 minerals created by human activity), (click here)
Europa Press, Spain
Un catálogo de 208 minerales generados por el hombre refuerza el argumento para declarar la ‘Época Antropocénica (A catalog of 208 man-made minerals reinforces the argument for declaring the ‘Anthropocenic Age’), (click here)
ABC, Spain
Confirmación del Antropoceno: El hombre ya es la segunda fuerza que ha creado más minerales (Confirmation of the Anthropocene: Man is already the second force that has created more minerals), (click here)
La Vanguardia, Spain
Los humanos hemos creado 208 minerales que no existían en la Tierra, (click here)
Corriere Della Sera, Italy
Uomo ha segnato nuova era geologica, (click here)
La Scienze, Italy
I minerali prodotti dall’uomo raccontano l’Antropocene (The minerals produced by man tell the Anthropocene), (click here)
Huffington Post, Italy
Antropocene, gli scienziati trovano una nuova prova a sostegno della tesi: “Scoperti minerali che non esisterebbero senza l’uomo” (Anthropocene, scientists found new evidence in support of the thesis: “Uncovered minerals that would not exist without the man”), (click here)
Reporterre, France
Nous sommes entrés dans l’anthropocène, affirment des minéralogistes (We have entered the anthropocene, say mineralogists), (click here)
Hirado.hu, Hungary
Több száz új ásványt hoztunk létre, (click here)
Tekniikka&Talous, Finland
Ihmiskunta synnyttänyt 208 aivan uutta mineraalia – vauhti hämmästyttävää (Mankind created 208 completely new minerals – an astonishing pace), (click here)
Energia, Greece
Το 4% των Ορυκτών της Γης Έχει Δημιουργηθεί Χάρη στους Ανθρώπους (4% of the Earth’s Minerals were created thanks to Humans), (click here)
Nederlands Dagblad, Netherlands
Mens zorgde voor nieuwe mineralen (Man brought new minerals), (click here)
Volkskrant, Netherlands
Versteende vogelpoep is gepromoveerd tot mineraal (Fossilized bird droppings promoted to mineral), (click here)
CBC, Canada
We’ve created 208 new minerals: Time for a new, human-influenced Anthropocene epoch?, (click here)
Mining.com, Canada
Human activity creates 208 new mineral species, (click here)
ABC Radio, Australia
Human activity helps create hundreds of new minerals, (click here)
Cosmos Magazine, Australia
Humans have created at least 208 new types of mineral, (click here)
O Globo, Brazil
Atividade humana criou 208 novos minerais no planeta, (click here)
O Globo TV, Brazil (two minute report)
Ação do homem pode dar início a nova era geológica, revelam cientistas (Man’s action may usher in new geological era, scientists reveal), (click here)
El Mercurio, Chile
Al menos 208 minerales no fueron creados por la naturaleza, sino que por los humanos (At least 208 minerals were not created by nature, but by humans), (click here)
Al Maghrib Today, Morocco
أبحاثجديدةتكشفأنالإنسانأثرعلى (New research reveals that the human impact on the chemistry of the planet), (click here)
Báo Mới, Viet Nam
Con người khiến Trái Đất bùng nổ đa dạng khoáng sản (Humans create boom of Earth’s mineral variety), (click here)
Fins.az, Azerbaijan
208 mineralı insanlar yaradıb – TƏDQİQAT (People have created 208 minerals – RESEARCH), (click here)
Full coverage summary, click here
News release in full, click here
]]>Paris
9 July 2015
UN Secretary-General’s Scientific Advisory Board calls for advisor, not observer seat for science at leaders’ policy-making table; recommends science test for pending policy decisions
Investing up to 3.5% of a nation’s GDP in science, technology and innovation – including basic science and education – is a key benchmark for advancing sustainable development effectively, leading experts say.
In papers released July 9 in New York, international scientists advising UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon say closing the gap between developed and developing countries depends on first closing international science, technology and innovation (STI) investment gaps.
According to the UN SG’s 26-member Scientific Advisory Board: “While a target of 1% of (Gross Domestic Product) for (research and development) is perceived high by many governments, countries with strong and effective STI systems invest up to 3.5% of their GPD in R&D.”
“If countries wish to break the poverty cycle and achieve (post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals), they will have to set up ambitious national minimum target investments for STI, including special allotments for the promotion of basic science and science education and literacy.”
The Board also recommends specific investment areas, including “novel alternative energy solutions, water filters that remove pathogens at the point-of-use, new robust building materials from locally available materials, nanotechnology for health and agriculture, and biological approaches to industrial production, environmental remediation and management.”
Instituted by the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on behalf of the Secretary-General, the Board is comprised of experts from a range of scientific disciplines relevant to sustainable development, including its social and ethical dimensions.
The Board contributes to a process concluding this fall to replace the UN’s Millennium Development Goals, agreed by nations in 2000 for achievement in 2015, with a new set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), through which progress in improving quality of life around the world will be tracked through 2030.
Among other highlights of the papers presented at UN Headquarters:
The Board recommends a dedicated seat for science at an influential new world leaders’ forum created to promote and monitor sustainable development – the UN High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development – saying science needs to be engaged “formally in the HLPF as an advisor rather than an observer.”
“This could be accomplished by creating a formal seat for science on the HLPF, and/or by involving the UNSG’s Scientific Advisory Board and organizations such as the National Academies of Sciences, UNESCO, ICSU, Future Earth, regional scientific bodies, and others.”
The High-level Political Forum meets every four years at the level of Heads of State and Government under the auspices of the General Assembly, and annually under the auspices of the UN Economic and Social Council. The Forum adopts negotiated declarations.
The Board also suggests engaging scientific bodies in reviews of pending policy decisions against scientific evidence.
“The UN Scientific Advisory Board, ICSU (the International Council for Science), National Academies of Science, and other bodies and networks, in collaboration with UNESCO and the UN system, would run a rigorous process of scientific review and assessment identifying possible risks and opportunities related to key political decisions.”
In addition, the Board calls for an annual Global Sustainable Development Report – a flagship UN publication like the Human Development Report – that monitors progress, identifies critical issues and root causes of challenges, and offers potential ways forward.
The report would synthesize and integrate findings from a wide range of scientific fields and institutions, developed with strong inter-agency support involving a suggested consortium of UN agencies working on sustainable development.
Needed to support long-term thinking: A better educated, informed world
Creating and engaging a better informed and educated public, it adds, would help establish policies that serve humanity’s long-term wellbeing over decisions that favour short-term economic and political interests.
The success of STI “will depend on the efficiency of the science-policy-society interface,” involving stakeholders from governments, civil society, indigenous peoples and local communities, industry and business, academia and research organizations.
“Such an active cooperation of multiple stakeholders will need more than the occasional by-chance interaction of different groups of society. It will require institutionalized architecture that brings together all affected actors to ensure linking scientific information and data as well as findings, scientific assessments and evidence-based advice with both policy and society.”
“Broader societal understanding and support of key scientific findings would make it more likely for science-based actions and evidence-based solutions to also be supported and promoted by decision-makers at all levels.”
The Board underlines that science, technology and innovation can be “the game changer” for the future development efforts.
“It can contribute to alleviating poverty, creating jobs, reducing inequalities, increasing income and enhancing health and well-being. It can assist in solving critical problems such as access to energy, food and water security, climate change and biodiversity loss.”
###
The papers in full:
- Science, Technology and Innovation: Critical Means of Implementation for the SDGs
http://bit.ly/ 1HfvAz6
and
- Strengthening the High-Level Political Forum and the UN Global Sustainable Development Report
http://bit.ly/ 1eFxuPG
Scientific Advisory Board of the United Nations Secretary-General
The Scientific Advisory Board was created in 2013 at the request of the UN Secretary-General to further inform the debate on sustainable development. The Board is composed of 26 eminent scientists representing all regions and many scientific disciplines relevant for sustainable development: the engineering, political and natural sciences are represented as well as for example oceanic, climate and biodiversity research. In addition, all members of the SAB have extensive and manifold experience with international scientific cooperation as well as the science-policy-society interface.
Board members are appointed in their personal capacity, and not as representatives of their respective States or of any other entities with which they may be affiliated. They will serve on a pro bono basis for a period of two years, with the possibility of renewal for one subsequent two-year term at the discretion of the UN Secretary-General.
The SAB held its 3rd meeting in Malaysia on 25-26 May, co-chaired by UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova and Zakri Abdul Hamid, Science Advisor to the Prime Minister of Malaysia. The meeting was hosted by the Malaysian Government and the Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology (MIGHT).
Example coverage:
Reuters / Thomson Reuters, UK “Investing in science can be ‘the game changer’ for development: experts,” click here
InterPress News Service, Italy, “Science and Technology a Game Changer for Post-2015 Development Agenda,” click here, German, click here
SciDev.net, UK, “Developing nations urged to spend big on science,” click here
Bernama, Malaysia, “UN Secretary-General Thanks PM Najib For Successful UN-SAB Meeting In May,” click here
Coverage summary, click here
News release in full, click here
]]>Malaysia hosts UN-backed symposium: ‘Beyond Gross Domestic Product — Transitioning into Sustainability’
Birth weight, hours slept, eyeglasses, city birds, washing machines, teenage schoolgirls and other quantifiable signals of well-being can help measure the wealth of a nation beyond Gross Domestic Product, experts say.
Moving beyond GDP to sustainability — the focus of a UN-backed high-level symposium May 19 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia — requires broad indicators of a nation’s social and environmental well-being to complement measures of economic production and income.
“World leaders are acknowledging GDP’s limitations, as well as the need for broader measures to evaluate societal progress,” says Anantha Duraiappah, Director of UN University’s International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, co-host of the symposium together with the Malaysian Industry Government Group for High Technology (MIGHT), in partnership with the Japanese Ministry of Environment and the Sime Darby Foundation.
Changes in natural capital (such as forest cover) can be relatively easy to quantify.
However, beyond education and health care statistics, how can social and individual well-being be tallied up?
“With policymakers focusing on complex indicators to measure societies’ success, it often seems as if they are missing some of the most meaningful and simple signs there are,” IHDP reports in a new edition of its magazine, “Human Dimensions.”
Candidates include:
BIRTH WEIGHT
Each ounce of birth weight can add significantly to a child’s overall quality of life over time. Beyond increasing the chance of survival, the effects of birth weight stretch far into a child’s lifetime. Babies weighing less than 3 pounds 10 ounces at birth are more likely to have negative long-term health effects. And many that appear to be developing normally arrive at school with learning disorders and behavioural difficulties. As a health indicator, why not start counting the rolls of fat on the limbs of our countries’ babies?
HOURS SLEPT
If we were to count our societies’ sleeping hours, we’d likely have a good idea of strength of its social bonds, sense of independence and optimism. More sleep has been proven to lead to better interpersonal relationships, emotional intelligence and empathy toward others. It also contributes to positive thinking, impulse control, self-regard and assertiveness. Altogether, sleep makes for a happy, healthy and productive population.
EYEGLASSES
With 700 million people in the developing world lacking affordable vision correction, eyeglasses provide an important service: raising individuals’ potential. Without glasses, school kids miss out on their potential to learn, and adults are unable to make the best of their most productive years. Glasses raise individual’s earning prospects by 20 per cent. Globally, uncorrected vision results in US$202 billion economic loss. Wanting to measure productivity, we can’t forget to measure its basic supporting factors. For example, simply being able to see.
CITY BIRDS
When you wake up to the sound of chirping birds, you are listening to one of the simplest indicators of local environmental health. Multiple programmes across the globe are empowering citizens to count, identify and register the birds they encounter, to aid researchers in their understanding of ecosystem changes. Not only are birds easy to see, and fun to identify, their position at the top of the food chain makes them susceptible to accumulating chemicals, and loss of biodiversity in the wider ecosystem. These factors make them a good and countable indicator of environmental hazards, climate change and biodiversity loss
WASHING MACHINES
A man pulling his laundry from a washing machine is more well-off than a big portion of the world population: only 2 of 7 billion have access to a washer. Requiring water and power to function, washing machine density is also a symbol of infrastructural density. More importantly, this humble appliance has transformed the nature of household work. With one, homemakers can spend their time and energy toward more noble (and interesting) pursuits.
TEENAGE SCHOOLGIRLS
A crowd of teenaged schoolgirls lining the streets of an African town is a rare sight. Fewer than one in five girls in sub-Saharan Africa are able to attend secondary school. A girl who does is making a big contribution to curbing population growth and raising global productivity. Statistically, she will marry four years later and have 2.2 fewer children. And with each extra year of education, she is able to raise future wages by 15-25 per cent. In this, counting teenaged school girls equates to predicting natural, social and economic sustainability.
Other candidates include smiles, random acts of kindness — even popsicles (the % of people who believe a child can leave their home, go to the nearest place to buy a popsicle or snack, and come home alone safely. See http://solari.com/articles/popsicle_index/)
While some of these may be considered whimsical, says Prof. Duraiappah: “New research has begun to show that people often value non-material wealth just as highly, if not more, than monetary wealth.”
“Moreover, as countries develop, there are diminishing returns to quality of life from economic output – indeed, the relationship becomes increasingly contentious and questionable. Growing inequality within and across nations is becoming a force for social tension and conflict in developing and developed countries alike, where calls grow for a more equal society and sustainability in a world of human-driven climate change and losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services.”
UNU-IHDP and the UN Environment Programme have led development of the Inclusive Wealth Index, debuted at the 2012 Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero.
A new, internationally-comprehensive Inclusive Wealth Report (IWR), including a major focus on human capital in national account measurement, will by released in Nagoya Japan in November.
A two-day IWR experts’ workshop and half-day IWR Science Committee Meeting precedes the May 19 public symposium (agenda: http://ihdp.unu.edu/file/download/11677).
Among the more than 500 attendees expected is eminent Cambridge University economist Sir Partha Dasgupta, a leader of the work on which the Inclusive Wealth Report is based.
In an article for UNU-IHDP on questions of Inclusive Wealth and investments, Prof. Dasgupta writes: “When the government invests in roads, the picture drawn is of bulldozers levelling the ground and tarmac being laid by men in hard hats.”
“But because the notion of ‘capital’ extends beyond reproducible assets to include human capital, natural capital, and knowledge and institutions (the enabling assets), we need to stretch the notion of ‘investment.’ To leave a forest unmolested would be to invest in the forest; to allow a fishery to restock under natural conditions would be to invest in the fishery; and so on.”
“That suggests investment amounts to deferred consumption. But the matter is subtler. Providing additional food to undernourished people by means of, say, food guarantee schemes not only increases their current well-being (food is enjoyable), it enables them also to be more productive in the future (they will have greater strength and stamina) and to live longer.”
“Because their human capital increases, the additional food intake should count not only as consumption but also as investment. Note, though, that food intake by the well-nourished doesn’t alter their nutritional status, which means the intake is pure consumption, not investment.”
Says Zakri Abdul Hamid, a member of the UN Secretary-General’s Scientific Advisory Board, Science Adviser to the Prime Minister of Malaysia, and co-chair of MIGHT: “Looking beyond GDP doesn’t mean its elimination. GDP provides valuable information about a country’s production, expenditure, and income streams, as well as the flow of goods across borders.”
“GDP and other traditional yardsticks will continue to inform our understanding of economic performance, but the world’s perspective on progress needs to be enlarged, balanced and integrated with social and environmental indicators. Only in this way can we respond to the unprecedented opportunities and challenges facing us in the 21st Century.”
27-May-2013
Founding Chair of new world biodiversity body offers first public remarks
The accelerating disappearance of Earth’s species of both wild and domesticated plants and animals constitutes a fundamental threat to the well-being and even the survival of humankind, warns the founding Chair of a new global organization created to narrow the gulf between leading international biodiversity scientists and national policy-makers.
In Norway to address an elite gathering of 450 international officials with government responsibilities in the fields of biodiversity and economic planning, Zakri Abdul Hamid offered his first public remarks since being elected in January to head the new Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) — an independent body modeled on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Dr. Zakri, a national of Malaysia who co-chaired 2005’s landmark Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and serves also as science advisor to his country’s prime minister, cited fast-growing evidence that “we are hurtling towards irreversible environmental tipping points that, once passed, would reduce the ability of ecosystems to provide essential goods and services to humankind.”
News release in full, click here
Example coverage by:
Reuters (UK), click here: Decline in biodiversity of farmed plants, animals gathering pace, also Spanish here, French here, and Portuguese here
EFE (Spain), click here: La pérdida de biodiversidad animal amenaza a la humanidad, advierte IPBES
ANSA (Italy), click here: Biodiversita’ a rischio anche fra piante e animali domestici, Allarme dell’Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
Bernama (Malaysia, Malay), click here: MIGHT: Penyusutan Spesis Bumi Tingkatkan Ancaman Kepada Kehidupan Manusia
Coverage summary: click here
]]>19-May-2013
Bonn Declaration issued by ‘Water in the Anthropocene’ science conference: A majority on Earth face severe self-inflicted water handicap within two generations
A conference of leading water scientists from around the world today issued a stark warning that, without major reforms, “in the short span of one or two generations, the majority of the 9 billion people on Earth will be living under the handicap of severe pressure on fresh water, an absolutely essential natural resource for which there is no substitute. This handicap will be self-inflicted and is, we believe, entirely avoidable.”
The scientists bluntly pointed to chronic underlying problems led by mismanagement and sent a prescription to policy makers in a 1,000-word declaration issued at the end of a four-day meeting in Bonn, Germany, “Water in the Anthropocene,” organized by the Global Water System Project and detailed in a pre-conference release: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-05/gwsp-sig051413.php.
The full text of The Bonn Declaration, click here
“Water in the Anthopocene” data visualization video, click here
Example coverage by
Agence France Presse (France), click here
The Guardian (UK), click here
Agencia EFE (Spain), click here
Asian News International (India), click here
ANSA (Italy), click here
Reuters AlertNet / SciDev (UK), click here
BBC Brazil, click here
Bloomberg News, click here
InterPress Service (USA), click here (English), here (Chinese) and here (Dutch)
Voice of America, click here
Coverage summary, click here
]]>
Earth System Science Partnership, Paris
28-Mar-2012
Brazil and India pay a high price for rapid economic growth, according to experts speaking at a major international meeting in London, Planet Under Pressure.
Between 1990 and 2008, the wealth of these two countries as measured by GDP per capita rose 34% and 120% respectively. But a myopic focus on economic capital is flawed, scientists and economists at the conference argue. Natural capital, the sum of a country’s assets, from forests to fossil fuels and minerals, declined 46% in Brazil and 31% in India, according to a new “Inclusive Wealth Indicator” designed to augment GDP as a measure of economic progress.
When measures of natural, human and manufactured capital are considered together to obtain a more comprehensive value, Brazil’s “Inclusive Wealth” rose just 3% and India’s rose 9% over that time.
“The work on Brazil and India illustrates why Gross Domestic Product is inadequate and misleading as an index of economic progress from a long-term perspective,” says Professor Anantha Duraiappah, Executive Director of UNU-IHDP.
“A country could completely exhaust all its natural resources while posting positive GDP growth. We need an indicator that estimates the wealth of nations – natural, human and manufactured and ideally even the social and ecological constituents of human well-being.”
The first Inclusive Wealth Report, to debut in full at a joint UNU-IHDP and United Nations Environment Programme event at June’s UN “Rio+20” summit in Brazil, will describe the “inclusive wealth” of 20 nations: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Ecuador, France, Germany, India, Japan, Kenya, Nigeria, Norway, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, USA, United Kingdom and Venezuela. The 20 nations featured in the report represent 72% of world GDP and 56% of global population.
Authored by 17 specialists from the UK, USA, Chile, Malaysia, India, Germany and Australia, the Inclusive Wealth Indicator is undertaken by UNU-IHDP with UNEP support and in collaboration with the UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC) and the Natural Capital Project of Stanford University.
News release in full, click here
Example coverage, by Reuters, click here
Coverage summary, click here
Additional coverage of the Planet Under Pressure conference by the New York Times, 1) here, 2) here, 3) here
]]>
Earth System Science Partnership, Paris
27-Mar-2012
Unless development patterns change, by 2030 humanity’s urban footprint will occupy an additional 1.5 million square kilometres – comparable to the combined territories of France, Germany and Spain, say experts at a major international science meeting underway in London.
UN estimates show human population growing from 7 billion today to 9 billion by 2050, translating into some 1 million more people expected on average each week for the next 38 years, with most of that increase anticipated in urban centres. And ongoing migration from rural to urban living could see world cities receive yet another 1 billion additional people. Total forecast urban population in 2050: 6.3 billion (up from 3.5 billion today).
The question isn’t whether to urbanize but how, says Dr. Michail Fragkias of Arizona State University, one of nearly 3000 participants at the conference, entitled “Planet Under Pressure”. Unfortunately, he adds, today’s ongoing pattern of urban sprawl puts humanity at severe risk due to environmental problems. Dense cities designed for efficiency offer one of the most promising paths to sustainability, and urbanization specialists will share a wealth of knowledge available to drive solutions.
How best to urbanize is one among many “options and opportunities” under discussion by global environmental change specialists today, Day 2 of the four-day conference March 26-29, convened to help address a wide range of global sustainability challenges and offer recommendations to June’s UN “Rio+20” Earth Summit.
News release in full, click here
Example coverage, by Reuters, click here, by United Press International, click here
Coverage summary, click here
]]>