GTI Paper Series - No.16; selected excerpts:
A key feature of the planetary phase then is the increasing interdependence of human and ecological systems. As the coupling between the anthroposphere and the biosphere becomes more intense and varied, we must speak of a unitary global process—the co-evolution of human and environmental systems. By altering the bio-physical conditions for life on Earth, humanity changes its own evolutionary prospects. The appropriate unit of analysis for this coupled process is what we shall call the human-ecological system (HES). [p.4]
...in considering processes of change within human-ecological systems, it is useful to distinguish between adaptation -- alterations of social relations within a given societal structure -- and transformation -- modification of the societal structure itself. [p.5]
Since the capacity to adapt is an essential feature of any successful HES, such systems are inherently conservative, seeking to accommodate novelty without structural re-adjustment. They resist change by managing disturbances through counterbalancing responses or new features that mute disruption. But when severe and prolonged strains overwhelm compensatory mechanisms, the coping capacity is compromised. When system elements become unsynchronized, structures destabilized, and behavior turbulent, a relatively rapid break may occur as institutional, cultural, and environmental patterns crack. This is the revolutionary moment when conditions are in place for systemic transformation.
During the transition phase, small perturbations can have large effects on the character of the structural shift. In the midst of a planetary transition, the theory of complex systems suggests a heightened risk of discontinuous branching of the global trajectory as socio-economic and environmental stresses force the system into unprecedented circumstances. At the same time, it suggests that the scope for proactive human effort to affect the structure of the post-transition global system is amplified. We may well be passing through a window of opportunity for shaping the future, a window that could close rapidly if unfavorable structures consolidate. [p.6]
Ideas. Live locally with quality and equal opportunity. Education is transformed from certification to wisdom, limits (i.e. graduation) to no limits (life-long learning) An organization that encompasses all needs.
In a world of great aggregate wealth, more than half the population struggle to meet basic needs on less than $2 per day, a shameful indictment of the ethical basis of contemporary global arrangements. [p.9]
A twenty-first century crisis is brewing in a world where twentieth century ideas and behaviors linger. Contemporary economic, political, and cultural institutions are ill-suited for coping with the de-stabilizing environmental, security, and social tensions that they have created (Held et al., 1999). The chasm between obsolete institutions and new global challenges is unsustainable. If allowed to intensify, the gap could close rapidly, for better or worse, through structural transformation. [p.11]
...civil society also suffers from significant limits—fragmentation around a thousand separate issues, organizational entrenchment, and the negative politics of protest. These delimit the mobilization of a mass movement of ordinary citizens at a scale that can redirect global development.[p.13]
civil society action continues but does not coalesce as a unified force, failing to offer a global vision and organizational space for a self-expanding movement. [p.15]
What can be done to encourage civil society (action)? What type of action? Provide organizational space in the way of physical infrastructure?
The breathtaking diversity of human cultures stands as evidence of the openness of that human possibility. The defining adaptive strategy of Homo sapiens was the evolution of plasticity of behavior. The essentialist reduction of human nature (“people are selfish” or “people are cooperative”) fails to grasp the flexibility that defines humanity (“people are both depending on context”). Humanity is both the sculptor and the sculpture, changing and adapting to its cultural and physical environment in an open process. The outcome of the global transition will be the next expression of this historical dialectic. [p.19]
The potential of other global actors—multinational governmental bodies, corporations, NGOs—to mount a systemic response to the global challenge is limited. They are enfeebled, respectively, by nationalism, narrow self-interest, and fragmentation. [p.20]
The burning uncertainty is whether a strong GCM [Global Citizens Movement] can emerge in time. That may seem improbable. These turbulent years apparently cause more resignation, complacency, and anger than hope, engagement, and idealism. Nevertheless, experience suggests that there is a growing, albeit often latent, hunger throughout the world for a positive vision of the future and sense of global identity. This is the cultural energy upon which a GCM could coalesce. It would not be the first time that an effervescence of popular will arrived unexpectedly to torque the direction of history. [p.20]
Now, the emergence of a novel global system is stimulating the formation of a new discipline to address its structure, dynamics, and uncertain future (Kates et al., 2001; Gallopín and Raskin, 2002; Swart et al., 2004; Schellnhuber et al., 2004). Although the biogeophysical aspects of “earth system science” have been the research focus to date, it is recognized that the larger conceptual framework of co-evolving human and environmental systems will be needed. Global system studies promises to be a great intellectual adventure of the twenty-first century, urgently needed for informing policy and action. It would provide the knowledge platform for a GCM.
In these early years, five theoretical strategies can be discerned for the new discipline: It is systemic, focusing on whole structures, integrated patterns, and reciprocal interactions; synthetic, blending bio-physical, socio-cultural, and ideational aspects and perspectives; prospective, taking a long view to reflect delayed processes, deep uncertainties, and developments beyond the fluctuation of passing events; dynamic, drawing attention to transformational processes where novel structures can form; and normative, understanding human values as key internal features of the system.
Global system analysis is normative in a second important sense. By illuminating the perils and possibilities of the planetary phase, it influences the values, perspectives, and intentions of human actors. The study of the global system is itself a causative element of the very system it ponders. Knowledge and action become bi-directional: by studying the world, we change it; by changing it, we deepen our understanding of the global system. [p.20&21]
EpilogueSo are these the best of times or the worst of times? One need not be a cynic to harbor deep foreboding—rigorous pessimists can mount considerable evidence to indict the future. But the wheel is still in spin. The shape of the global future rests with the reflexivity of human consciousness—the capacity to think critically about why we think what we do—and then to think and act differently. The Italian revolutionary Antonio Gramsci famously counseled “pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will” – unsentimentally facing portentous developments, while affirming the belief that action can make a meaningful difference. Poised at a planetary tipping point, dystopian premonitions cannot be denied. But they can still be defied. It will take collective “optimism of the will” to bend the global trajectory toward a civilization worth living in. Then, more than a vision, a Great Transition to one thriving human family, sustained by and sustaining the web of life, would become an objective possibility for our global future. [p.23]
I was excited to come across this material -- and somewhat disappointed that I had not discovered it earlier. But you never know, a few years ago it may not have resonated as well as it did today...
