Civilization faces ‘perfect storm of ecological and social problems’
February 22, 2012 | Source: The Guardian
(Credit: BP)
Celebrated scientists and development thinkers today warn that civilization is faced with a perfect storm of ecological and social problems driven by overpopulation, overconsumption, and environmentally malign technologies.
In the face of an “absolutely unprecedented emergency,” say the 18 past winners of the Blue Planet prize — the unofficial Nobel for the environment — society has “no choice but to take dramatic action to avert a collapse of civilisation. Either we will change our ways and build an entirely new kind of global society, or they will be changed for us.”
The stark assessment of the current global outlook was published Feb. 21, on the 40th anniversary of the foundation of the UN environment program (Unep). The paper, which was commissioned by Unep, will feed into the Rio +20 earth summit conference in June.
The group warns against over-reliance on markets but instead urges politicians to listen and learn from how poor communities all over the world see the problems of energy, water, food and livelihoods as interdependent and integrated as part of a living ecosystem.
“The long-term answer is not a centralized system but a demystified and decentralized system where the management, control and ownership of the technology lie in the hands of the communities themselves and not dependent on paper-qualified professionals from outside the villages,” they say.
The paper urges governments to:
- Replace GDP as a measure of wealth with metrics for natural, built, human and social capital and how they intersect.
- Eliminate subsidies in sectors such as energy, transport and agriculture that create environmental and social costs, which currently go unpaid.
- Tackle overconsumption in the rich world, and address population pressure by empowering women, improving education and making contraception accessible to all.
- Transform decision-making processes to empower marginalized groups, and integrate economic, social and environmental policies instead of having them compete.
- Conserve and value biodiversity and ecosystem services, and create markets for them that can form the basis of green economies.
- Invest in knowledge through research and training.
Comments (23)
by Spikosauropod
To phatz4ever:
Actually, the ban on DDT was a conspiracy. This harmless insecticide was banned to support manufacturers of more expensive (and more dangerous) products.
The ban led to an incalculable loss of human life. On the up side, it resulted in a terrific song by Joni Mitchel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgMEPk6fvpg
by phatz4ever
Seriously? It’s all some kind of environmental conspiracy is it? If we don’t move to green energy sources should we just use more oil and hope that China wont drive the price to 10$ a gallon. Maybe we should spill more oil in our oceans and go back to using DDT on our crop if its all some big conspiracy. I always consider it an old rule we should all follow called pick up after yourself.
by Solomon Kleinsmith
Was it purposeful tongue in cheek to put a graph that shows one indicator that completely goes against the point the article is making? Namely that energy use per unit of economic activity is getting smaller and smaller, and you could add another graph that shows that the energy that is being produced is getting cleaner every year as well, in most countries anyway.
These are the same people that predicted peak oil. We’re less than a generation away from a tipping point where it will actually become CHEAPER to produce energy with solar than coal, and solar and wind energy already is competitive with coal in some areas of the world where it is costly to deliver coal. Solar and wind can only replace a certain percentage of base load energy, at least until battery tech gets geometrically cheaper, but that will come in time as well… and new nuclear tech, and enhanced geothermal could push that pollution per unit of energy number down as well, at the same time that the energy per unit of GDP continues to go down.
These people are seeing the forest for the trees, and they’re in la la land if they think people will accept the sort of drastic changes to their lives that they suggest here. The focus needs to be getting technology that makes cleaner energy cheaper come to be sooner, not social engineering like this garbage.
On a personal note… I actually live up to these sorts of personal standards myself. I’m a huge energy miser, drive as little as I can get away with and buy as much as I can used. But I’m not so egotistically out of touch with reality to think that it’s realistic to convince most people to live that way, or that the sort of economic disruption a quick shift like they suggest would cause wouldn’t at the same time cause such an huge economic downturn that people would care even less about the environment than they do now.
People care about the environment when the economy is healthy… and even then only insomuch as wont significantly harm their way of life. This has to be the baseline of any reality based plan to try and avoid future climate change problems.
by Editor
Solomon: “Was it purposeful tongue in cheek to put a graph that shows one indicator that completely goes against the point the article is making?”
No, I used the only chart shown in the Unep report.
by Spikosauropod
To Pintada:
Singularitarians are not primarily people who advocate the Singularity. They are people who have observed a pattern and are interested in that pattern as a testable hypothesis. Singularitarians do not necessarily advocate any political position and they would seldom agree on what political position should be advocated. Singularitarians are not utopians. They hope to steer technology in a constructive direction, but they do not anticipate any guarantees.
The Singularity is not an anti environmentalist view. Properly understood, the Singularity is actually an environmental issue. Anyone who is concerned with the environment should also be concerned with the effects of runaway technology.
The observation of most singularitarians is that technological change is increasing at such a rate as to render any longer term concerns, such as population growth or global warming, completely moot.
In answer to your query, the comparison between the two graphs has already been made. The rate of technological growth is brutally outpacing any other environmental concerns.
To Joe:
I don’t think the West will collapse because of actions by the left. The left never succeeds because their ideas are incompatible with natural law. I just think it is funny how the left keeps finding new ways to repackage communism.
by Joe
Some of you need to rethink your position. While I am not 100% for this article I can see their point. The thing they are missing is that with tech we can lower birth rates, have clean energy, build better buildings. This is the way to a better future, education not compassion.
But overconsumption is a problem, look around at the world around you. We do not need to re-live the dark ages to fix the problem.
Also, I thought people hear believed in the Singularity, it is only 30 years away. Do you really think the West will collapse because of the “left”. Get a grip, the West is currently spreading, fighting and winning…..
by James
Wait. Is there something wrong with Spain ? :)
by Spikosauropod
So, they want to deprivatize the means of production and create a new world order.
It does sound terribly familiar.
by Bob Smith
LOL,, traumatic to see the naysayers dis people and ideas but have nothing to offer in rebuttal, nothing at all. It’s sad to live in a time when ignorance is worshiped like an idol. To see them bathe in it all full of arrogance though, is sickening. The public are mostly fitting players in a real world version of Idiocracy. Some of them still don’t think we went to the moon, and many more are rightly called flat earthers. Send your kids for an education guys, and shut off the NASCAR,, hint,, they just go round and round.
by Atmic
I agree with DougW. Analyze the findings, determine for yourself whether or not anything they say is worth paying attention to. Dismissing knowledge with prejudice because you don’t agree with ideologies is active ignorance.
by Pintada
RE: Environment and Development Challenges
Gentlemen;
I urge you, please think about doing the little data search that I now propose. This is a project that is a natural fit for the singularitarians; big data, big need for creativity, big need for math.
Both camps – the singularitarians and the peak oil people – use charts to make their points. Both camps are apparently made up of very bright people. The singularitarians seem to be a lot richer than the others, but that shouldn’t come as a surprise given the way representatives from the two camps think (see “Quiet” and the first part of “Abundance”). But the two camps disagree. You disagree because the Peak-Oil guys are looking at the back of the elephant, while the singularitarians refuse to look at anything but the trunk and head.
According to Kurzweil and crew, all we need to do is wait 10-30 years, and viola, a beautiful ecological, financial, and sociological utopia will blossom of its own accord. For the Peak-oil people the resources are gone and this civilization is over – the collapse has begun and there is nothing to be done. I don’t know which view is true, but I’ve spent a pile of money planning (and acting) for the worst while hoping the singularitarians are correct. Wouldn’t it be great to actually know who is right?
Please, simply plot “resources” and “technology” against time on the same graph. I am just an old programmer and subsistence farmer, but I will begin to flesh out the project below.
The Proposal:
“Resources” will need to be defined carefully to include all of the things listed in the recent paper (Ehrlich, et al). No doubt the authors can help with a list of relevant things on which to gather data. The aggregating formula will need to include oil, coal, gas, timber, soil, environmental diversity, etc. as actual resources and global warming, and other growing problems as deductions to those resources. (You might want to talk to Dr. Jeff Masters to get the global warming stuff right.)
“Technology” … Well, if the singularitarians can’t create a good aggregate number to represent technological progress then no one can. Something close actually appears at location 1313 on my Kindle edition of “The Singularity is Near”. That graph is just a pictorial representation (i think) but the gist is the same.
What I Hope We Learn:
The data will show one of three things:
1. We are in fact on track to be as Gods and we should get good at it.
In this scenario, we have seen a little dip in resources already, but it isn’t enough to worry about. Business as usual will allow some environmental degradation and we will move down the “wrong side” of the peak oil curve some, but then smart computers and whatever (nanotech) makes the problems go away.
2. If we do everything right (maybe by triggering a depression), we can still make it.
This is the tough scenario. We can make it! All that needs to happen is for our leaders to understand both issues and take action despite being paid not to by Exxon etc.. Imagine the frustration of knowing that our civilization can come out the other side into the promised utopia if only Mitt or Newt or Barry will do the right thing.
Wow, what a stark choice they would be presented with! Do the right thing now – conserve, slow down the resource depletion – and give our children a future utopia, OR do nothing, take your bribes (Sorry, I mean donations.) and meet us in hell.
The data may be too complex for the graph to be beyond interpretation, but its real value is what it will show over time. If the first running of the model shows nothing or only a little, fine, wait a year or two and run it again. Eventually, the truth will begin to be more obvious. Hopefully, before its too late to take any action you will be able to present something undeniable.
“Maybe by triggering a depression” – WTF is that guy nuts??!?!?!? No, I’m dead serious, and certifiably sane. It bears repeating – a little suffering now compared to permanent utopia – not a difficult choice.
3. Its over … There is a little farm right next to mine, come join me. We will watch the collapse of this civilization together.
I’ve been reading a few things and you should be familiar with the following if you are to understand where I am at (in order of priority):
Environment and Development Challenges: The Imperative to Act – 17-2-2012 – Paul Ehrlich, et. al.
Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1% | Society | Vanity Fair – May, 2011 – Joseph E. Stiglitz
“The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality” – Richard Heinberg
“The Ecotechnic Future: Envisioning a Post-Peak World” – John Michael Greer
“Bird on Fire: Lessons from the World’s Least Sustainable City” – Andrew Ross
“A Great Aridness: Climate Change and the Future of the American Southwest” – William deBuys
“Race Against the Machine: How the Digital Revolution is Accelerating Innovation” – Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee
“Abundance” – Steven Kotler
“Death of the Liberal Class” – Chris Hedges
“The End of Energy” – Michael Graetz
“The Great Stagnation” – Tyler Cowen
“Quiet” – Susan Cain
by Toddbadname
@Arcange1m:
– Who’s going to kill us all? People like gaoptimize? I agree that fear mongering is not the way to go but overpopulation is happening… or is everybody blind to the news? Are you all stupid to what is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, the Great Pacific Garbage Patch? The garbage is located located roughly between 135°W to 155°W and 35°N to 42°N. While some exaggerations specify the patch at being as large as the continental U.S., or larger, it’s more than likely twice the size of Hawaii… which is still COLOSSALLY gigantic. I guess what better place to have trash huh?… if you actually thought that you’re ignorant. I don’t apologize for that statement either.
And what about all of this war? All of you are really ignorant aren’t you if you really think we are just there because of the Taliban. We are there to make sure a democracy takes hold but not for their sake… but for the well-being of the United States. A democracy insures that the United States has a trading partner for RESOURCES… the resources that the world is running out of. If the Taliban wins do you think they will offer goods to the U.S.? Enough of that, I don’t like politics and if you’re too stubborn to hear what I’m saying then you’re too dumb to listen.
Then, what about all of the polar regions? WHO GIVES A FLYING F*** IF THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE!!! DO WE REALLY WANT TO HELP IT ALONG??? YOU PEOPLE ARE REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, STUBBORN, STUPID, BLIND, ARROGANT, CONCEDED, NARCISSISTIC, and many many more words that you probably don’t understand because you’ve probably never taken a second of your day to look outside of your own lives… with your wisdom of words, or what little wisdom you do have it’s used incorrectly and that can be dangerous to influential people listening.
Agghhh I digress, you continue to live your lives… what little meaning there is in them but enjoy that time. I hope you are correct but unfortunately, I know, you are wrong.
by Louis Parsons
I urge you, please think about doing the little data search that I now propose. This is a project that is a natural fit for the singularitarians; big data, big need for creativity, big need for math.
Both camps – the singularitarians and the peak oil people – use charts to make their points. Both camps are apparently made up of very bright people. The singularitarians seem to be a lot richer than the others, but that shouldn’t come as a surprise given the way representatives from the two camps think (see “Quiet” and the first part of “Abundance”). But the two camps disagree. You disagree because the Peak-Oil guys are looking at the back of the elephant, while the singularitarians refuse to look at anything but the trunk and head.
According to Kurzweil and crew, all we need to do is wait 10-30 years, and viola, a beautiful ecological, financial, and sociological utopia will blossom of its own accord. For the Peak-oil people the resources are gone and this civilization is over – the collapse has begun and there is nothing to be done. I don’t know which view is true, but I’ve spent a pile of money planning (and acting) for the worst while hoping the singularitarians are correct. Wouldn’t it be great to actually know who is right?
Please, simply plot “resources” and “technology” against time on the same graph. I am just an old programmer and subsistence farmer, but I will begin to flesh out the project below.
The Proposal:
“Resources” will need to be defined carefully to include all of the things listed in the recent paper (Ehrlich, et al). No doubt the authors can help with a list of relevant things on which to gather data. The aggregating formula will need to include oil, coal, gas, timber, soil, environmental diversity, etc. as actual resources and global warming, and other growing problems as deductions to those resources. (You might want to talk to Dr. Jeff Masters to get the global warming stuff correct.)
“Technology” … Well, if the singularitarians can’t create a good aggregate number to represent technological prgress then no one can. Something close actually appears at location 1313 on my Kindle edition of “The Singularity is Near”.
What I Hope We Learn:
The data will show one of three things:
1. We are in fact on track to be as Gods and we should get good at it.
In this scenario, we have seen a little dip in resources already, but it isn’t enough to worry about. Business as usual will allow some environmental degradation and we will move down the “wrong side” of the peak oil curve some, but then smart computers and whatever (nanotech) makes the problems go away.
2. If we do everything right (maybe by triggering a depression), we can still make it.
This is the tough scenario. We can make it! All that needs to happen is for our leaders to understand both issues and take action despite being paid not to by Exxon, etc.. Imagine the frustration of knowing that our civilization can come out the other side into the promised utopia if only Mitt or Newt or Barry will do the right thing.
Wow, what a stark choice they would be presented with! Do the right thing now – conserve, slow down the resource depletion – and give our children a future utopia, OR do nothing, take your bribes (Sorry, I mean donations.) and meet us in hell.
3. Its over … There is a little farm right next to mine, come join me. We will watch the collapse of this civilization together.
I’ve been reading a few things and you should be familiar with the following if you are to understand where I am at (in order of priority):
Environment and Development Challenges: The Imperative to Act – 17-2-2012 – Paul Ehrlich, et. al.
Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1% | Society | Vanity Fair – May, 2011 – Joseph E. Stiglitz
“The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality” – Richard Heinberg
“The Ecotechnic Future: Envisioning a Post-Peak World” – John Michael Greer
“Bird on Fire: Lessons from the World’s Least Sustainable City” – Andrew Ross
“A Great Aridness: Climate Change and the Future of the American Southwest” – William deBuys
“Race Against the Machine: How the Digital Revolution is Accelerating Innovation” – Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee
“Abundance” – Steven Kotler
“Death of the Liberal Class” – Chris Hedges
“The End of Energy” – Michael Graetz
“The Great Stagnation” – Tyler Cowen
“Quiet” – Susan Cain
by Rob
“Either we will change our ways and build an entirely new kind of global society, or they will be changed for us.” In other words; control the increase in population, or an external control – disease, wars, crime etc- will. See this; http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ . The sooner we control our own family size, the later disease, famine, wars and other disasters control it for us – regardless of energy use. In fact, I think the chart shows good news; that energy use per GDP is declining. Doesn’t that also suggest we’re being more efficient? The authors need to stop with the generalized psycho-bable and talk hard facts and suggestions.
by Lukas
gaoptimize:
Bullshit. If you want the human civilization to last past this century, we have to address these issues NOW.
by Barlennan
From the report:
“Effective training programs should be implemented to multiply the number of competentdecision makers in business and government. They must learn how to integrate programmesand policies within sustainability constraints, to understand the business case thereof, andacquire the skills to strategically move towards such sustainability goals….
How so, do you think? UN indoctrination camps?
by rolliesmith
To simply dismiss this report ideologically, add does gaoptimize, is not thoughtful. I agree with DougW. Critique it on its own terms. Physicist David Deutsch argues that problems like this can and are to be solved though falsifiable theory and evidence. We should be seeing this as opportunity, but first acknowledge its possibility.
by Jotto999
I agree with you, gaoptimize. This is the usual claptrap that won’t work. I come to this site to read things related to the singularity, not the same old pascal’s wager and fearmongering from environmentalists. Perhaps I’m expecting too much of whoever is running the show here.
by DougW
Wow, pretty harsh. Now this is just me, but I’d greatly prefer that if you are going to dismiss these findings you do it with actual analysis. Pick apart their assumptions, double check their math, debunk their theories. Just calling them ‘leftists’ and dismissing the information is ignorant. I’m betting when you go to the doctor, you aren’t dismissing what he tells you quite so flippantly. Now, it is certainly possible, perhaps even likely, that the findings of the group are slanted and their conclusions incorrect. But your ‘solution’ seems to be just as bad. If you are saying we should place our trust in the people who run multinational corporations, because they wouldn’t do something that will lead to major problems in the world, I fear for the future….
by RicharAE
I didn’t quite follow that. Is it global cooling or global warming this time?
by MyKindOfTown
This article reminds me of a classic song by Iron Maiden:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zs4zd9vEi7g
by gaoptimize
Here we go again. The masterminds of the environmental left are telling people (the ones listening in the West) to have fewer children due to overpopulation and overconsumption. With their benevolent wisdom, they are going to accelerate the demographic collapse of the West and help usher in a new dark age guided by ideologies that will not tollerate empowered women or even birth control. These are the same wise men who brought you the “green” economy of Spain. Don’t waste your time looking for nuggets in this pile of intellectual tailings.
by Arcange1m
People like you are going to kill us all.