Archive for November, 2008

Expanding your Mind: Dealing with the Uncertainty of the Future

Thursday, November 6th, 2008

Carpenter’s seminar Imagination for Transformation provided another outlook on the future environmental problems of the world.  There was the address that what we are seeing now has not occurred before.  The human population is growing faster than we can provide resources for ourselves.  And while our use of environmental services are increasing, the conditions of the environment we are using are deteriorating.  But if these rates of deterioration and natural disasters can no longer be predicted, how do we prevent a catastrophe.  I believe this is where the role of imagination comes into play.  We cannot blindly propose a solution without some knowledge of the situation.  Thus we can create models of what we’ve already seen and attempt to apply them to the future.  Based on our current knowledge we make educated guesses based on what will happen in the future, and whether these future visions pose a problem or not.  It is however, difficult to foretell future events with a large degree of uncertainty.  It may then be necessary to stretch our minds eye and envision several possibilities, not just one.

One of the messages that struck me in Carpenter’s lecture was that our goal was not necessarily to stop these possible disasters from occurring but from increasing the resilience of our environment to these disasters.  This is relevant because you might consider that we don’t have the power to stop all the disasters that might plague the earth.  We might not be able to prevent a fleet of meteors from entering our atmosphere, but perhaps we can find ways to decrease the damage these meteors may cause.  A more relevant example is that we cannot stop the effects of climate change because they are already occurring, but we can reduce the impacts of climate change by controlling our emissions now.

I would suggest it is more important to reduce damages done than to prevent events from occurring on earth.  An event may have negative consequences at the beginning but turn out to have subsequent positive consequences.  Forest fires can be a damaging force, but they can also change the environment for new beings to grow and survive.  Who knows if there may be any benefits to climate change.

Carpenter also attempts to stress that positive change is not as hard as it looks.  Using the example of population, he showed that a difference of one child per woman can create a huge difference in population demographics.  Thus the “Imagination for Transformation” seminar wasn’t your usual doom and gloom “the world’s careening off a cliff and we have to change our ways now so its not a complete disaster”.  With a positive outlook, people will be more likely to seek change then giving into despair.

Finally the proposition is given for three tools that could assist us in the future.  These are education, innovation and imagination.  We would need to educate our children, who carry on a large legacy, especially with the trend of fewer children to inherit the world.  As mentioned previously, with education we may be able to estimate the events of the future.  Education itself is the greatest tool we have to our survival.  With regard to innovation we have the opportunity to change our environment and build it right the second time.  We can come up with technology that reduces our footprint on this earth.  Innovation would tie in with education.  By learning from our mistakes we can create a better future.  Finally concerning imagination, we can assess the possible scenarios, foresee a positive future and take heed of the warnings that we are faced with along the way.  In this way we can talk about what we should do without the panic of a need to act immediately.

A new face for America

Thursday, November 6th, 2008

As we speak, Barack Obama, 44th president of the United-States and first Afro-American ever elected as the head of the country is preparing his governement that will take over Bush’s on the 20th of January.

For those of you of understand french, i came across a nice statement reading the news on the net : «A l’heure où nous célébrons la victoire, nous savons que les défis de demain sont les plus importants de notre existence – deux guerres, une planète en péril, la plus grave crise financière depuis un siècle». It basically says that we are facing the greatess challenges of our existance, two wars, a planet in peril and an economic crisis.

Many obstacles are in lines for Obama. The economic recession is almost inevitable now and the Americans are asking for social changes in health care and education. If we look at the dominating issues of the last campain, economy ranks in first. With an unemployment rate around 6% and the annonced recession, jobs are needed and money needs to be put back in circulation. Yesterday, worldwide economy indicated that investors were not that trusting of Obama rise to presidency; Europeen, Canadian and American stock market taking a plunge. Only on the Asian market did we see a rise in the stocks. To reverse this tendency, a lot of work is to be done, knowing that most government welcomed warmly Obama as United-State next president. Obama might have won the confidence of his fellow countrymen and worldwide leaders, he still need to gain the support of the industries.

Obama promises to removes troops in Irak with a 16 month plan of action. A social movement for the good of his troops and the improvement in the political situation of that area of the globe? Maybe it is part of the answer. But I firmly believe that the real reason lies elsewhere. With a social deficit of 500 000 000 000$ (men, that’s a lot of zeros), the money to pay for that debt won’t come in waging war in some foreign country were victory seem virtually unachievable. Obama need that money to operate the social changes in health care (4th main concern in the campaign, after economy, Irak and terrorism) and education that he promised.

As for environment, no need to say that he can’t do worst than the business as usual enforced by the actual President. It’s hard to say if Obama will have either the time or the means to actually improve United-States standard in environment since he will be very busy elsewhere. Let’s hope that the slogan of his campaign «Yes we can» goes further than simply reorganising his own country. Let’s hope that it’s a new era were politic with United-States will be more fluent and that they assume their role as leader, especially in environment, and negotiate with the rising China for measures to mitigate their environment future impacts.

To the future President, all my wishes of good luck

Carpenter; the need to imagine a larger scale transformation

Monday, November 3rd, 2008

November 3, 2008, I attended the S.R. Carpenter seminar entitled, ‘Imagination for transformation.’ I have decided to focus on the article, ‘Uncertainty and the management of multistate ecosystems: an apparently ration route to collapse,’ written by S.R. Carpenter et al. Overall I enjoyed and learned from the article; I believe it is well written and gave a clear example of the detrimental cycle of collapse and renewal or recovery that human managed ecosystems are subject. The example of lakes switching between oligotrophic and eutrophic states as a result of Phosphorus loading, removing and recycling, and under the authority of the ‘lake manager’ gave an enclosed model of multistate ecosystem management failures. I especially liked the description of reactionary management (where policy and management approach changes is reaction to changes in lake state) opposed to informed management (policy and management developed according to scientific understanding of the multistate ecosystem). Carpenter et al. acknowledge that complete scientific understanding of environmental systems influenced by society is difficult to come by, but stresses how constant fluctuation in policy and management causes ecological instability as natural ecological functions are consistently undermined. Examples of socio-environmental systems that despite management have behaved stochastically are given and include the cod fishery collapse, AIDS in Africa and the ozone hole.

Carpenter et al. recommend that effective institutional designs (essentially a restructuring of modern social, economic and political frameworks) are needed for ecosystem management. This massive suggestion is reminiscent of that made by James Gustave Speth in his book, ‘The bridge at the end of the world,’ who claims that ‘working within the system will, in the end, not succeed when what is needed is transformative change in the system itself (86).’ Similarly, Speth’s book/traveling seminar and Carpenter’s article fail to suggest how we, citizens of the modern world, would go about effectively transforming the overarching system which we live under.

There is one significant aspect of Carpenter et al.’s article that, I believe, remains largely unexplained. The lake example given offers generalized lessons about ecosystem management on a relatively small spatial scale, and is circumstances where policy and management decisions are governed by not only a single country but by a single ‘lake manager.’ There exists too many assumptions (environmental, social, economic and political) in this model to apply it to a multinational scale ecosystem or environmental issue. Worldwide socio-environmental issue such as biological diversity loss, climate change, desertification, declining fish stokes, etc, are not governed by a single set of policies, decisions are not made by a single ‘lake or fish or climate manager’ and the cultural, social and economic costs and benefits of ecosystem management will be felt differentially across the countries. Therefore, while I think Carpenter et al. present an informative and well researched model that is important for understanding ecological collapse and recovery cycles on a small, single-country scale, this model does little to advance policy and management of the large, interacting environmental issues currently facing the entire world.