MyOOPS開放式課程
請加入會員以使用更多個人化功能
來自全球頂尖大學的開放式課程,現在由世界各國的數千名義工志工為您翻譯成中文。請免費享用!
課程來源:TED
     
Johan Rockstrom: Let the environment guide our development
Johan Rockstrom 談讓環境引領我們發展
 
講者:Johan Rockstrom
2010年7月演講,2010年8月在TEDGlobal2010上線
 
 
翻譯:                劉契良
編輯:                洪曉慧
簡繁轉換:            陳盈
後制:                劉契良
字幕影片後制:        謝旻均
 
 
 
 
關於這場演講
 
人類的發展已耗用過量的地球資源,但 Johan Rockstrom 提醒我們,文明進展也讓我們習得科學來認清這一點並自我反省。他的研究已發現九種「星球極限」,這可以引領我們進而保護地球上許多重疊的生態系統。
 
 
關於 Johan Rockstrom
 
如果地球是個能自我調節的系統,那麼,很明顯地,人類的活動足以打斷其運作。Johan Rockstrom 領導一支科學家團隊,定義了九種不可逾越的星球極限,如此一來,才能保住這個系統的平衡。
 
 
為何要聽他演講:
 
Johan Rockstrom 是永續新作為─「星球極限」的領導,他率領著一支包含 29 名橫跨各領域的頂尖科學家團隊,Rockstrom 和斯德哥爾摩復原力中心辨認出九種關鍵的地球進程或說系統,並點出,當任一系統超越其極限時,將引爆一場重大的系統潰決。氣候變化即是其中的一項後果,但更包括其他人為的威脅,諸如海洋酸化、多元生態滅絕及化學污染。
 
Rockstrom 於斯德哥爾摩大學教授自然資源管理,且是斯德哥爾摩環境學院和斯德哥爾摩復原力中心的執行主任。他是全球水資源的有力說將,研究在全球缺水區域建立復原力的策略,Fokus 雜誌提名他為 2009 年「瑞典風雲人物」,因為他在將氣候變化科學與政策及社會相連結方面作出重大貢獻。
 
「Rockstrom 以簡單卻立基於科學的方式,成功傳達了我們對地球資源的依賴、逾越「星球極限」的危機和人類文明繼續發展契機所需的變革」。
Anna Ritter, Fokus magazine
 
Johan Rockstrom 的英語網上資料
 
 
 
[TED科技娛樂設計]
已有中譯字幕的TED影片目錄(繁體)(簡體)。請注意繁簡目錄是不一樣的。

「翻譯編輯:myoops.org

我們住在一顆受人類主宰的星球,我們將史無前例的重擔負在地球的諸多體系上,這是個壞消息,但也許讓各位驚奇的是,這也可算是個好消息,因為科學,我們成為第一個認知到我們可能危害地球的穩定和調節能力的世代,而那是人類發展的重要支援,這也是則好消息,因為我們所面臨的星球危機無比巨大,過往的解決方法已不足以應對,事實上,我們正處於需要巨幅轉變的時期,而那也為創新開了一扇窗,還有新概念和新作法,這是一趟面對人類文明挑戰的科學之旅,在這個全球永續發展的時期,在這趟旅程中,我除了要帶領各位,還有一位好朋友,一位利害相關者,但卻總是缺席,就當我們在處理環境議題談判時,而她拒絕妥協,大地之母,所以,今天我要帶她一同登臺,讓她一同見證這趟神奇之旅,這旅程也將謙遜地的提醒我們,在過去 10,000 年之間所享有的恩典,即過去10,000 年間,地球上的生活條件,這是非常重要的一段期間,那幾乎是我們在地球上完全成為現代人類的一半時間,也幾乎等同發展我們所知文明能力的時期。

 
 
這就是地球上的環境情況,這圖表示溫度變化的走向,80,000 年前溫度急遽上升的危機中,我們離開非洲,殖民澳洲,另一場危機是在 60,000 年前,我們離開亞洲來到歐洲,再一場危機,40,000 年前,我們進入了非常穩定的全新紀時期,這是地球全史中,我們所知唯一能維繫人類發展的時期,進入這個時期後的數千年間,我們放棄了集獵生活模式,人口從數百萬人成長到今日的 70 億人,美索不達米亞文化發展出農耕,開始圈養牲畜與種植農作,還有各位熟悉的羅馬、希臘與其他文明,而這些都發生在這顆星球上,因為她可以維繫人類文明的發展,問題是我們從四個方面壓榨,這顆可憐的星球,從四個方面壓榨她,首先當然是人口成長,這不僅是攸關數量,不僅是因為我們已成長到 70 億人口,並邁向 90 億人口的事實,這也是個攸關平等的問題,地球上主要的環污是由少數富有國家所造成,那 20% 在 18 世紀中期搭上了工業化的列車,而地球上的多數國家現在都想要發展、獲得發展的權利,且大部份都是在追求非永續的生活形態,這是一道很重要的壓力;第二道施於地球的壓力是氣候議程,這一個大問題,政策對科學的解析是,那已足以穩住溫室氣體不超過 450 ppm 的 CO2 警戒值,避開均溫超過兩度,避開我們可能造成南極西端冰原融化的危機,那會造成海平面上升 6 公尺,避開造成格陵蘭冰原融化的危機,那會造成海平面另外上升 7 公尺,各位可能認為氣候壓力已讓強壯且具復原力的地球夠煎熬了,但不幸的是,第三道壓力更強,那是生態系統的衰敗;史無前例,過去 50 年中,我們目睹了這般劇烈的地球生態官能與作用的衰敗,其中一項是其長期的氣候調節功能,無論是森林、陸地或多元生態;第四道壓力是詫異,見解與證據等都證實我們必需放下舊時作法,即認為生態系統是線性、可預知且可受我們線性系統的控制,但事實上,詫異是普及的,因為系統衰敗是非常快速、突然且常是無法逆轉的,各位,這種人類壓力施於地球之上,其程度是驚人的!
 
 
事實上,我們已進入一個全新的地質年代,「人類世」,即人類是變化的主要推動力量,就星球層級而言,身為一位科學家,我要問這話的證據何在?證據是,不幸地,多的很!不只是二氧化碳,那有著像曲棍球棒般的加速變化模式,各位可以採用幾乎任何種有關人類安康的參數,笑氣、甲烷、森林濫伐、過度漁獵、土地荒漠化與物種滅亡等,這些都有著同樣的模式,就在過去的 200 年間,同時,這些也在 50 年代中期開始多元化,二次世界大戰後的 10 年,清楚顯示出人類冒險的巨幅成長,從 50 年代中期開始,這是我們首次能清楚看到全球層級的痕跡,我可以很肯定地說,當深探以上所有類別的個別研究,各位會發現某些很重要的東西,截至目前,我們所獲致的結論是,我們要從哪裡開始扭轉曲線的上升?因為我們已經進入最具挑戰與刺激性的十年,就地球的人類文明史而言,這十年間,我們必需要扭轉這些曲線,但這似乎還不夠,如果僅是扭轉這些曲線,並瞭解其上升對地球造成的壓力,我們還必需體認到的事實是,系統的確有多種穩定的狀態,由多種臨界值分開來,如這張杯球圖所示,杯深代表系統的復原力,系統可能逐漸地因為氣候變化的壓力、侵蝕與多元生態滅亡,而失去杯深,即復原力,但那顯然是健康的,但突然間,從其中一個臨界點跌落(Upff),抱歉,改變了狀態並就此滑落到預料之外的後果中,之後,新生物物理學邏輯接手,新物種出現,系統被鎖住。
 
 
這麼說有憑據嗎?有,珊瑚礁系統、多元生態、低營養素和堅硬的珊瑚系統已面臨多層壓力,包括過度漁獵、非永續的觀光和氣候變化,危機成真,系統崩盤,失去其復原力,柔軟珊瑚取而代之,不受歡迎的系統出現,後者無法維繫經濟與社會的發展;北極是另一例,美麗的系統,這是一個全球層級的調節性生物群落,不斷地忍受氣候變化的衝擊,表面上看起來沒事,但在 2007 年時,沒有科學家會預料到,突然間,球滾過一個臨界點,系統突然,且非常令人驚訝地,失去 30% 到 40% 的夏日覆冰,戲劇性在於,當系統出現這個問題,邏輯可能改變,系統可能會被鎖在預料之外的狀態,因為它改變了顏色、吸收更多能量,系統可能會噎住,我認為,人類文明的最大警示旗是我們處在一個危險的勢態下,附提一點,各位都知道,這個議題中的唯一一面紅旗是,某國的潛艦將一面紅旗插在北極的底部,以便宣示對石油資源的控制,另外,如果我們有證據,而我們真的有,濕地、森林、〔不清楚〕、雨林是照著這種非線性的方式發展,全球 30 位左右的科學家首次聚在一起並提問,「我們真的要把地球放入鍋煮嗎」?我們因此要回頭自問,我們正在威脅這個超級穩定的全新紀狀態嗎?我們真的正在將自己放入那樣一個情境嗎?那情境就是我們太過接近臨界值,這會導致有害、且是我們極不願發生的,也可說是災難性的,造成人類的發展的改變。
 
 
你不想要站在那裡,事實上,你根本不被准許站在那裡,即這位先生所站在的地方滿是激流泡沫且濕滑的臨界點,事實上,有個柵欄位於這個臨界點的極上游處,超過那柵欄,就等於進入危險區,這是新作法,兩、三年前,我們才體認到舊作法,僅是分析、鼓吹和預測未來的參數,專注於縮小對環境造成的影響,但那是過去式,現在,我們必需要自問,哪些大型的環境進程是我們必需加以看管,以讓我們安然的活在全新紀?甚至,我們是否能,這要感謝地球系統科學的重大進展,指認出臨界點?即那個我們或許可以期待非線性變化的點,我們是否也能定義一個星球極限,一道柵欄?欄內是人類文明的安全運作空間,這項研究之前登在《自然》雜誌上,時間是 2009 年底,那是經過多年的分析得到的最終論點,我們僅能發現九種星球極限,這些在積極的控管下將能讓我們擁有一個安全的運作空間,這當然包括氣候,但可能讓你感到好奇的是那不只是氣候,但那顯示出我們與許多地球系統有相互的關連,包括三個大系統,氣候變化、平流層的臭氧破壞及海洋酸化,這三樣是大系統內含大量臨界值的科學證據,年代是地球的史前期間,但我們同時含括,我們稱之為,緩慢變量,這個系統深入探究了調節並緩衝地球復原力的能量,地球上大量氮與磷循環的相互干擾、土地使用變化、多元生態滅亡的比例、淡水的使用,其功能包括調節地球生物量、碳螯合作用和多元化等功用,但有兩個我們無法量化的參數,空氣污染,包括暖化氣體和污染空氣的硫與硝酸鹽,還有化學污染,合起來,這些形成一個完善的整體,在「人類世」中領引著人類的發展,瞭解到地球是一顆複雜的自我調節系統,事實上,大部份的證據指出,這九項的運作可能會像《三劍客》,「人人為我,我為人人」!
 
 
濫伐森林、逾越土地的極限,可能的後果是破壞氣候系統維持穩定的能力,事實上,故事的情節可能顯示為氣候挑戰,還算可以應付,如果考量整個永續發展挑戰的話,這是人類發展大爆炸的圖解,當放入星球極限的安全運作空間時,圖中的粗黑線所圍出的即是安全運作空間量化的極限,如同這份分析所示,中間的黃點是我們的起始點,工業化前的點,我們很明顯地處於非常安全的運作空間之中,50 年代時,我們開始多元發展,到了 60 年代,已因為綠色革命和哈柏法,從大氣中固氮,今日,人們從空氣中取出的氮氣量遠高於整個生物圈自然的轉換所得,我們一直到 90 年代初都還算沒越過氣候極限,事實上,在 Rio 之後,今日,我們所處的情況是約有三項極限已被逾越,多元生態滅亡的比率已是人類歷史中第六次絕種時期,恐龍絕跡是其中一次,因為氮氣與氣候變化,但我們在其他方面仍擁有一定程度的自由,可是邁向極限的速度驚人,在土地、水、磷和海洋等方面,但這也啟發了一項新作為來指引人類文明,將光明照向我們那到目前為止一直都被過度賦權的工業載具,後者的運作模式好像我們僅能開在黑暗筆直的高速公路上,問題是,這到底有多暗?永續發展是個烏托邦嗎?好像並沒有科學這樣提及。
 
 
事實上,有很多的科學指出我們可以做到這個轉形的改變,我們有能力移向一個全新、具創意,一個能變形的工具,橫跨所有領域,當然,情節會是地球上 200 多個國家必需同時開始移向同一個方向,但那會徹底地改變我們的管治作法,從現在線性的指揮與控制思維,在看待效率與最佳化時,移向較具彈性,較能調適的方法,我們可以辨識出其中餘裕,無論是在社會或環境系統之中,這是能處理一個全球變化大時代的關鍵所在,我們必需要有所堅持,還要有維續社會與生態系統的能力,才能禁得起震撼,並保持在理想杯深中,我們要有變形的能力,從危機走向創意,並在危機之後站起來,當然,還要能適應無可避免的改變,這是一種新作法,我們還未有任何關於這方面的治理,但有沒有人在做呢?是否有任何成功的範例?關於這種心境轉換應用於地方層級上,Yes,事實上是有的,而且名單愈來愈長。
 
 
還有一項好消息,例如,拉丁美洲,犁耕為主的農業系統,像 50 和 60 年代一般,基本上,會將農耕領向死巷子,農產愈來愈少、破壞有機物質,還有基礎的生計問題,巴拉圭、烏拉圭,還有像巴西等國都在邁向創意與創投,農夫們與科學家合夥進行不翻土系統的農業革命,結合覆蓋耕作與適應當地的技術,那在今日的某些國家,舉例而言,已達致巨幅的增產,在執行覆蓋耕作與不翻土耕作的區域,不僅產出更多的食物,而且降低了碳排放;澳洲大堡礁是另一個成功的故事,若非透過觀光業者、漁夫、澳洲大堡礁當局和科學家的實作,大堡礁註定消滅殆盡,如果還是以目前方式管治的話,全球變革、美化〔不清楚〕文化、過度漁獵和非永續的觀光,全加在一起後,讓這個系統真的化成一場危機,但機會之窗是創意和新款心境,那在今日已引領出一種全新的管治策略來建立具復原力,承認功能互補的重要性,並將整個系統視作一體來投資,並在系統創造出更多的功能互補條件。
 
 
瑞典,我的國家,有一些其他的範例,南瑞的濕地,在許多國家看來是會導致洪水的污染之境環繞在都市周邊區域,但同樣的是,一場危機、新合作關係,在地主角,將這些轉形成一個關鍵的永續都市計劃元素,所以,危機帶出轉機,未來又如何呢?未來當然會有一個巨大的挑戰,那就是餵飽全球 90 億的人口,我們不僅需要新的綠色革命,而星球極限也顯示出,農業必需要降低溫室氣體排放,而且,基本上,必需要在目前的土地上執行,我們無法再擴張,因為那會侵蝕星球極限,我們不能繼續像今日一樣的用水,全球 25% 的河流甚至流不入海,我們需要轉形,有趣的是,而且是依據我的與他人的研究看來,像非洲,我們已證實就算是最脆弱的少雨型農耕系統,透過創意與額外的灌溉,彌補乾季與乾旱的水分不足,永續的衛生系統將廁所中的養份回饋到農夫的田中,還有翻土系統的創新,我們可以將產量提高三到四倍,就在目前的土地上。
 
 
Elinor Ostrom,最新的諾貝爾經濟獎桂冠得主,從全球的實際觀察中指明,我們可以管治共同議題,如果我們投資信任、在地、實際作為的合夥關係,加上跨尺度的制度創意,還有當地主角,全力在一起,便能處理全球共同議題,其範圍巨大,但就算是在強硬政策上我們還是有創意,我們知道,必需從對石油的依賴,快速地在短期轉向低碳經濟,我們該怎麼做?每個人都在談碳稅(沒用)、排放交易,但舉例而言,一個政策措施,政府對能源系統的電力收購制度已行之各方,從中國在海上架風力發電系統,一路延續到美國,只要是可再生能源的投資,都可獲政府保證價格的收購,然後可以補助窮人用電,助民脫窮,在能源方面解決了氣候的問題,並同時激發了創意,範例之多可以很快的破表,且是星球的層級,無疑地,這其中有機會存在,我們還可以列出很多範例,關於全球轉形的機會,這些之間的關鍵,紅線,是心境的轉換,從將我們自己單純推向黑暗未來的勢態,移向取而代之的〔不清楚〕未來,並說:「地球的遊樂場在哪?星球極限為何?在其中我們可以安全地運作」,然後,尋回其中的創意所在,但,當然,情節清楚顯示,漸進的改變並非選項之一,科學證據提到的是,他們好像在說刺耳的新聞,我們正面臨最大的轉形發展,就從工業化以來,事實上,往後 40 年我們必需做的事會更戲劇性且更令人興奮,對比於我們已做過的事,當我們來到今天這塊田地的勢態,科學指出,Yes,我們可以達致一個繁榮的未來,且在安全的運作空間中,如果我們同時具進、全球協作,從在地到全球範圍,採取轉形作法,在一顆有限的星球上建立復原力,感謝聆聽,(掌聲)。
 

以下為系統擷取之英文原文

About this talk

Human growth has strained the Earth's resources, but as Johan Rockstrom reminds us, our advances also give us the science to recognize this and change behavior. His research has found nine "planetary boundaries" that can guide us in protecting our planet's many overlapping ecosystems.

 

About Johan Rockstrom

If Earth is a self-regulating system, it's clear that human activity is capable of disrupting it. Johan Rockstrom has led a team of scientists to define the nine Earth systems that need to be… Full bio and more links

Transcript

We live on a human-dominated planet, putting unprecedented pressure on the systems on Earth. This is bad news, but perhaps surprising to you, it's also part of the good news. We're the first generation, thanks to science, to be informed that we may be undermining the stability and the ability of planet Earth to support human development as we know it. It's also good news, because the planetary risks we're facing are so large, that business as usual is not an option. In fact, we're in a phase where transformative change is necessary, which opens the window for innovation, for new ideas and new paradigms. This is a scientific journey on the challenges facing humanity in the global phase of sustainability.

On this journey, I'd like to bring, apart from yourselves, a good friend, a stakeholder, who's always absent when we deal with the negotiations on environmental issues, a stakeholder who refuses to compromise -- planet Earth. So I thought I'd bring her with me today, on stage, to have her as a witness of a remarkable journey, which humbly reminds us of the period of grace we've had over the past 10,000 years. This is the living conditions on the planet over the last 100,000 years. It's a very important period. It's roughly half the period when we've been fully modern humans on the planet. We've had the same, roughly, abilities that developed civilizations as we know it. This is the environmental conditions on the planet.

Here, used as a proxy, temperature variability. It was a jumpy ride. 80,000 years back in a crisis, we leave Africa, we colonize Australia in another crisis, 60,000 years back, we leave Asia for Europe in another crisis, 40,000 years back, and then we enter the remarkably stable Holocene phase, the only period in the whole history of the planet, that we know of, that can support human development. A thousand years into this period, we abandon our hunting and gathering patterns. We go from a couple of million people to the seven billion people we are today, The Mesopotamian culture: we invent agriculture, we domesticate animals and plants. You have the Roman, the Greek and the story as you know it. The only place, as we know it, that can support humanity.

The trouble is we're putting a quadruple sqeeze on this poor planet, a quadruple sqeeze, which, as its first squeeze, has population growth, of course. Now, this is not only about numbers. This is not only about the fact that we're seven billion people committed to nine billion people, it's an equity issue as well. The majority of the environmental impacts on the planet have been caused by the rich minority, the 20 percent that jumped onto the industrial bandwagon in the mid-18th century. The majority of the planet, aspiring for development, having the right for development, are in large aspiring for an unsustainable lifestyle, a momentous pressure.

The second pressure on the planet is, of course, the climate agenda, the big issue, where the policy interpretation of science is that it would be enough to stabilize greenhouse gases at 450 ppm to avoid average temperatures exceeding two degrees, to avoid the risk that we may be destabilizing the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, holding 6 meters -- level rising, the risk of destabilizing the Greenland Ice Sheet, holding another seven meters -- sea level rising. Now, you would have wished the climate pressure to hit a strong planet, a resilient planet, but unfortunately, the third pressure is the ecosystem decline. Never have we seen, in the past 50 years, such a sharp decline of ecosystem functions and services on the planet, one of them being the ability to regulate climate on the long term, in our forests, land and biodiversity.

The forth pressure is surprise, the notion and the evidence that we need to abandon our old paradigm, that ecosystems behave linearly, predictably, controllably in our, so to say, linear systems, and that, in fact, surprise is universal, as systems tip over very rapidly, abruptly and often irreversibly. This, dear friends, poses a human pressure on the planet of momentous scale. We may, in fact, have entered a new geological era, the Anthropocene, where humans are the predominant driver of change at a planetary level.

Now, as a scientist, what's the evidence for this? Well, the evidence is, unfortunately, ample. It's not only carbon dioxide that has this hockey stick pattern of accelerated change. You can take virtually any parameter that matters for human well-being -- nitrous oxide, methane, deforestation, overfishing land degredation, loss of species -- they all show the same pattern over the past 200 years. Simultaneously, they branch off in the mid-50s, 10 years after the second world war, showing very clearly that the great acceleration of the human enterprise starts in the mid-50s. You see, for the first time, an imprint on the global level. And I can tell you, you enter the disciplinary research in each of these, you find something remarkably important, the conclusion that we may have come to the point where we have to bend the curves, that we may have entered the most challenging and exciting decade in the history humanity on the planet, the decade when we have to bend the curves.

Now, as if this was not enough -- to just bend the curves and understanding the accelerated pressure on the planet -- we also have to recognize the fact that systems do have multiple stable states, separated by thresholds -- illustrated here by this ball and cup diagram, where the depth of the cup is the resilience of the system. Now, the system may gradually -- under pressure of climate change, erosion, biodiversity loss -- lose the depth of the cup, the resilience, but appear to be healthy and appear to suddenly, under a threshold, be tipping over. Upff. Sorry. Changing state and literally ending up in an undesired situation, where new biophysical logic takes over, new species take over, and the system gets locked.

Do we have evidence of this? Yes, coral reef systems. Biodiverse, low-nutrient, hard coral systems under multiple pressures of overfishing, unsustainable tourism, climate change. A trigger and the system tips over, loses its resilience, soft corals take over, and we get undesired systems that cannot support economic and social development. The Arctic, a beautiful system, a regulating biome at the planetary level, taking the knock after knock on climate change, appearing to be in a good state. No scientist could predict that in 2007, suddenly, what could be crossing a threshold. The system suddenly, very surprisingly, loses 30 to 40 percent of its summer ice cover. And the drama is, of course, that, when the system does this, the logic may change. It may get locked in an undesired state, because it changes color, absorbs more energy, and the system may get stuck. In my mind, the largest red flag warning for humanity that we are in a precarious situation. As a sideline, you know that the only red flag that popped up here was a submarine from an unnamed country that planted a red flag at the bottom of the Arctic to be able to control the oil resources.

Now, if we have evidence, which we now have, that wetlands, forests, [unclear], the rainforests, behave in this nonlinear way. 30 or so scientists around the world gathered and asked a question for the first time, "Do we have to put the planet into the the pot?" So we have to ask ourselves: are we threatening this extraordinarily stable Holocene state? Are we in fact putting ourselves in a situation where we're coming too close to thresholds that could lead to deleterious and very undesired, if now catastrophic, change for human development? You know, you don't want to stand there. In fact, you're not even allowed to stand where this gentleman is standing, at the foaming, slippery waters at the threshold. In fact, there's a fence quite upstream of this threshold, beyond which you are in a danger zone. And this is the new paradigm, which we gathered two, three years back, recognizing that our old paradigm of just analyzing and pushing and predicting parameters into the future, aiming at minimalizing environmental impacts, is of the past.

Now we to ask ourselves: which are the large environmental processes that we have to be stewards of to keep ourselves safe in the Holocene? And could we even, thanks to major advancements in Earth systems science, identify the thresholds, the points where we may expect nonlinear change? And could we even define a planetary boundary, a fence, within which we then have a safe operating space for humanity? This work, which was published in "Nature," late 2009, after a number of years of analysis, led to the final proposition, that we can only find nine planetary boundaries with which, under active stewardship, would allow ourselves to have a safe operating space. These include, of course, climate. It may surprise you that it's not only climate. But it shows that we are interconnected, among many systems on the planet, with the three big systems, climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion and ocean acidification being the three big systems, where the scientific evidence of large-scale thresholds in the paleo-record of the history of the planet.

But we also include, what we call, the slow variables, the systems that, under the hood, regulate and buffer the capacity of the resilience of the planet -- the interference of the big nitrogen and phosphorus cycles on the planet, land use change, rate of biodiversity loss, freshwater use, functions which regulate biomass on the planet, carbon sequestration, diversity. And then we have two parameters which we were not able to quantify -- air pollution, including warming gases and air-polluting sulfates and nitrates, but also chemical pollution. Together, these form an integrated whole for guiding human development in the Anthropocene, understanding that the planet is a complex self-regulating system. In fact, most evidence indicates that these nine may behave as three Musketeers -- "One for all. All for one." You degrade forests, you go beyond the boundary on land, you undermine the ability of the climate system to stay stable. The drama here is, in fact, that it may show that the climate challenge is the easy one, if you consider the whole challenge of sustainable development.

Now this is the Big Bang equivalent then of human development within the safe operating space of the planetary boundaries. What you see here in black line is the safe operating space, the quantified boundaries, as suggested by this analysis. The yellow dot in the middle here is our starting point, the pre-industrial point, where we're very safely in the safe operating space. In the 50s, we start branching out. In the 60s already, through the green revolution and the Haber-Bosch process of fixing nitrogen from the atmosphere -- you know, human's today take out more nitrogen from the atmosphere than the whole biosphere does naturally as a whole. We don't transgress the climate boundary until the early '90s, actually, right after Rio. And today, we are in a situation where we estimate that we've transgressed three boundaries, the rate of biodiversity loss, which is the sixth extinction period in the history of humanity -- one of them being the extinctions of the dinosaurs -- nitrogen and climate change. But we still have some degrees of freedom on the others, but we are approaching fast on land, water, phosphorus and oceans. But this gives a new paradigm to guide humanity, to put the light on our, so far, overpowered industrial vehicle, which operates as if we're only on a dark, straight highway.

Now the question then is: how gloomy is this? Is then sustainable development utopia? Well, there's no science to suggest. In fact there is ample science to indicate that we can do this transformative change, that we have the ability to now move into a new innovative, a transformative gear, across scales. The drama is, of course, is that 200 countries on this planet have to simultaneously start moving in the same direction. But it changes fundamentally our governance and management paradigm, from the current linear, command and control thinking, looking at efficiencies and optimization towards a much more flexible, a much more adaptive approach, where we recognize that redundancy, both in social and environmental systems, is key to be able to deal with a turbulent era of global change. We have to invest in persistence, in the ability of social systems and ecological systems to withstand shocks and still remain in that desired cup. We have to invest in transformations capability, moving from crisis into innovation, and the ability to rise after a crisis, and, of course, to adapt to unavoidable change. This is a new paradigm. We're not doing that at any scale on governance.

But is it happening anywhere? Do we have any examples of success on this mindshift being applied at the local level? Well, yes, in fact we do, and the list can start becoming longer and longer. There's good news here, for example, from Latin America, where plow-based farming systems of the '50s and '60s led farming basically to a dead-end, with lower and lower yields, degrading the organic matter and fundamental problems at the livelihood levels in Paraguay, Uruguay, and a number of countries, Brazil, leading to innovation and entrepreneurship among farmers in partnership with scientists into an agricultural revolution of zero tillage systems combined with mulch farming with locally adapted technologies, which today, for example, in some countries, have led to a tremendous increase in area under mulch, zero till farming, which, not only produces more food, but also sequesters carbon.

The Australian Great Barrier Reef is another success story. Under the realization from tourist operators, fishermen, the Australian Great Barrier Reef Authority and scientists that the Great Barrier Reef is doomed under the current governance regime. Global change, beautification [unclear] culture, overfishing and unsustainable tourism, all together placing this system in the realization of crisis. But the window of opportunity was innovation and new mindset, which today has led to a completely new governance strategy to build resilience, acknowledge redundancy and invest in the whole system as an integrated whole, and then allow for much more redundancy in the system.

Sweden, the country I come from, has other examples, where wetlands in southern Sweden were seen as -- as in many countries -- as flood-prone polluted nuisance in the peri-urban regions. But again, a crisis, new partnerships, actors locally, transforming these into a key component of sustainable urban planning. So crisis leading into opportunities.

Now, what about the future? Well, the future, of course, has one massive challenge, which is feeding a world of nine billion people. We need nothing less than a new green revolution, and the planet boundaries shows that agriculture has to go from a source of greenhouse gases to a sink. It has to basically do this on current land. We cannot expand anymore, because it erodes the planetary boundaries. We cannot continue consuming water as we do today, with 25 percent of world rivers not even reaching the ocean. And we need a transformation. Well, interestingly, and based on my work and others in Africa, for example, we've shown that even the most vulnerable small-scale rainfall farming systems, with innovations and supplementary irrigation to bridge dry spells and droughts, sustainable sanitation systems to close the loop on nutrients from toilets back to farmers' fields, and innovations in tillage systems, we can triple, quadruple, yield levels on current land.

Elinor Ostrom, the latest Nobel laureate of economics, clearly shows empirically across the world that we can govern the commons if we invest in trust, local, action-based partnerships and cross-scale institutional innovations, where local actors, together, can deal with the global commons at a large scale. But even on the hard policy area we have innovations. We know that we have to move from our fossil dependence very quickly into a low-carbon economy in record time. And what shall we do? Everybody talks about carbon taxes -- it wont work -- emission schemes, but for example, one policy measure, feed-in tariffs on the energy system, which is already applied, from China doing it on offshore wind systems, all the way to the U.S., where you give the guaranteed price for investment in renewable energy, but you can subsidize electricity to poor people. You get people out of poverty. You solve the climate issue with regards to the energy sector, while at the same time, stimulating innovation -- examples of things that can be out scaled quickly at the planetary level.

So there is, no doubt, opportunity here, and we can list many, many examples of transformative opportunities around the planet. The key though in all of these, the red thread, is the shift in mindset, moving away from a situation where we are simply are pushing ourselves into a dark future, where we instead [unclear] our future, and we say, "What is the playing field on the planet? What are the planetary boundaries within which we can safely operate?" and then backtrack innovations within that. But of course, the drama is, it clearly shows that incremental change is not an option.

So, there is scientific evidence. They sort of say the harsh news, that we are facing the largest transformative development since the industrialization. In fact, what we have to do over the next 40 years is much more dramatic and more exciting than what we did when we moved into the situation we're in today. Now, science indicates that, yes, we can achieve a prosperous future within the safe operating space, if we move simultaneously, collaborating on a global level, from local to global scale, in transformative options, which build resilience on a finite planet.

Thank you.

(Applause)
 


留下您對本課程的評論
標題:
您目前為非會員,留言名稱將顯示「匿名非會員」
只能進行20字留言

留言內容:

驗證碼請輸入2 + 2 =

標籤

現有標籤:1
新增標籤:


有關本課程的討論

課程討論
1

Anonymous, 2015-09-10 19:13:58
課程討論
1
Anonymous, 2015-09-10 19:13:57
課程討論
1
Anonymous, 2014-04-14 12:41:33
課程討論
1
Anonymous, 2014-04-14 12:41:17
-1'
1
Anonymous, 2014-04-14 12:40:23
課程討論
1
Anonymous, 2014-04-14 12:40:07
課程討論
-1'
Anonymous, 2014-04-14 12:39:18
課程討論
先說聲抱歉,如果打擾到您們。 誠摯告訴您一個機會:  你想致富嗎? 相信我 ! 這是一個已被眾多名人保證最有效, 低 門 檻 的 創 業 -> http://azyyeayzz.weebly.com/
workonet, 2010-10-13 14:53:46

Creative Commons授權條款 本站一切著作係採用 Creative Commons 授權條款授權。
協助推廣單位: