Papers by Graeme M Taylor
Although the 2015 Paris Agreement climate targets seem certain to be missed, only a few experts a... more Although the 2015 Paris Agreement climate targets seem certain to be missed, only a few experts are questioning the adequacy of the current approach to limiting climate change and suggesting that additional approaches are needed to avoid unacceptable catastrophes. This article posits that selective science communication and unrealistically optimistic assumptions are obscuring the reality that greenhouse gas emissions reduction and carbon dioxide removal will not curtail climate change in the 21st Century. It also explains how overly pessimistic and speculative criticisms are behind opposition to considering potential climate cooling interventions 1 as a complementary approach for mitigating 2 dangerous warming. There is little evidence supporting assertions that: current greenhouse gas emissions reduction and removal methods can and will be ramped up in time to prevent dangerous climate change; overshoot of Paris Agreement targets will be temporary; net zero emissions will produce a safe, stable climate; the impacts of overshoot can be managed and reversed; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change models and assessments capture the full scope of prospective disastrous impacts; and the risks of climate interventions are greater than the risks of inaction. These largely unsupported presumptions distort risk assessments and discount the urgent need to develop a viable mitigation strategy. Due to political pressures, many critical scientific concerns are ignored or preemptively dismissed in international negotiations. As a result, the present and growing crisis and the level of effort and time that will be required to control and rebalance the climate are severely underestimated. 1 "Climate intervention" and "climate cooling" are used interchangeably throughout this paper and intended to encompass all methods and measures of technological and nature-based solar radiation management (SRM), albedo modification, sunlight reflection, and solar geoengineering. 2 As used in this paper "mitigation" encompasses all measures and actions designed to make climate change "less severe, dangerous, painful, harsh, or damaging" as defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Fact 5.2: While climate interventions will have risks, the risks and moral hazards of not intervening are not only much greater, but also existential. Fact 5.3: The risks and benefits of climate interventions can only be assessed in comparison to the risks and costs of all possible policy options, including continuing with the current strategy. Fact 5.4: Many potentially safe, viable geoengineering approaches merit attention. All options should be explored for their capacity to safely offset dangerous warming. Fact 5.5: Termination shock is inevitable if climate cooling is not used to keep temperatures at safe levels.
EarthArXiv, 2023
Although the 2015 Paris Agreement climate targets seem certain to be missed, only a few experts a... more Although the 2015 Paris Agreement climate targets seem certain to be missed, only a few experts are questioning the adequacy of the current approach to limiting climate change and suggesting that additional approaches are needed to avoid unacceptable catastrophes. This article posits that selective science communication and unrealistically optimistic assumptions are obscuring the reality that greenhouse gas emissions reduction and carbon dioxide removal will not curtail climate change in the 21st Century. It also explains how overly pessimistic and speculative criticisms are behind opposition to considering potential climate cooling interventions 1 as a complementary approach for mitigating 2 dangerous warming.
Climate Risk Management, 2021
The Paris targets are based on assumptions that a global temperature increase of 1.5 °C−2 °C abov... more The Paris targets are based on assumptions that a global temperature increase of 1.5 °C−2 °C above preindustrial levels will be safe, and that the climate can be stabilized at these higher temperatures. However, global average temperatures are already measurably impacting the Earth’s systems at 1.2 °C above preindustrial levels. Many human and environmental systems cannot adapt to higher temperatures, which may exceed critical tipping points in physical climate and ecological systems.
Compounding these risks is the likelihood that the international 2 °C limit will be overshot due to political obstacles and systemic inertia from existing greenhouse gases, warming oceans, and the decades required to replace existing infrastructure. Moreover, the Earth energy imbalance may have to be reduced to approximately zero to stabilize the global climate (i.e., CO2 concentrations lowered to around 350 ppm.)
Most IPCC mitigation scenarios assume that climate targets will be temporarily overshot, and require large-scale carbon dioxide removal [CDR] to subsequently lower temperatures. However, many CDR methods may not be politically and/or technologically feasible, and they will act too slowly to prevent dangerous overshoot.
These issues raise serious doubts about the ability of current mitigation polices to ensure safe outcomes. They also indicate the need to investigate whether rapid climate cooling measures may be required to reduce the risks associated with high temperatures during the long time it will take to decarbonize the global economy and stabilize the climate.
Given the uncertainty of future mitigation success, and the potentially existential costs of failure, there is now an urgent need to examine whether or not current efforts are credible, and if not, what mitigation measures will be required to prevent dangerous overshoot and ensure a safe, stable climate.
In order to develop a feasible mitigation strategy, it will be necessary to prioritize research both on climate overshoot risks, and on the relative effectiveness, risks, costs and timelines of potential mitigation and adaptation approaches. Since large scale climate interventions will be needed to prevent dangerous global warming, all plausible options need to be investigated, including carbon dioxide removal methods and technologies for rapidly cooling global temperatures. This research is a prerequisite for evaluating the comparative benefits, costs and risks of using, or not using, various forms of mitigation and adaptation, and then developing a realistic overshoot risk management plan.
Journal of Futures Studies, 2014
At present many researchers are exploring ways to improve the resilience of the global system, pr... more At present many researchers are exploring ways to improve the resilience of the global system, prevent catastrophic failure, and support the transition to a sustainable global system. This paper makes two interlinked proposals for developing better-and more credible-tools for modeling critical global issues and identifying and managing threats. First, proven risk management methods from other fields can be usefully applied to the assessment and mitigation of large, complex socio-ecological problems. Second, using viability as the priority criterion for the design of our models will not only highlight systemic threats, but also help us develop constructive interventions.
Journal of Futures Studies, 2014
Optimists point out that every year humanity becomes better educated, wealthier and more intercon... more Optimists point out that every year humanity becomes better educated, wealthier and more interconnected: the Gates Foundation predicts that if current trends continue there will be almost no poor countries by 2035. In contrast, more pessimistic analysts warn that business as usual is unsustainable: catastrophic climate change and increasing shortages of water, food and cheap energy could collapse human civilizations by mid-century. Is one forecast right and the other wrong? Or can we reconcile these opposing views? In this paper I suggest that the key to understanding future developments is recognising that the two major trends shaping global events—worsening problems and emerging solutions—are interconnected. Growing economic and environmental crises will soon reach tipping points that focus public attention on the existence of both dangerous threats and viable solutions. Then (and only then) will most leaders begin to make transformational decisions.
Journal of Futures Studies, 2007
The global economy is unsustainable because it promotes constant growth on a finite planet. Drivi... more The global economy is unsustainable because it promotes constant growth on a finite planet. Driving the expansionist economy is an unsustainable consumer culture. Because technological advances cannot solve social problems, within a few decades increasing resource shortages and degrading ecosystems will collapse the world system. Sustainability requires social and environmental resilience, health and wholeness. A consumer society cannot transform into a conserver society without cultural and structural change. The key factor for transformation is the emergence of an integral worldview capable of organizing sustainable social structures and economic processes.
Humanity now faces a dangerous dilemma: on one hand leading scientists predict that if we continu... more Humanity now faces a dangerous dilemma: on one hand leading scientists predict that if we continue to burn coal, gas and oil the environmental consequences are likely to be catastrophic (e.g. Hansen et al., 2013); on the other hand many economists argue that if we stop using fossil fuels our industrial civilization will run out of energy and collapse (e.g. Canes, 2015). Although renewable technologies are beginning to compete with fossil fuels in the production of electricity, electricity is only 20% of energy use (IEA, 2014). In other areas—e.g. most heating, industrial production and transport—renewable alternatives are either non-existent or not yet cost-competitive. Because the global economy still requires fossil fuels, any efforts to quickly cut carbon pollution will reduce output. This is an enormous problem as most people—especially those struggling to get by in developing countries— are not prepared to accept lower standards of living. In addition fossil fuel producing coun...
Because the 2015 Paris Agreement will not prevent dangerous climate change, there is an urgent ne... more Because the 2015 Paris Agreement will not prevent dangerous climate change, there is an urgent need to develop an alternative mitigation strategy. Even if all national commitments are met and technological breakthroughs accelerate the transition to emission-free technologies, the 2°C target will still be overshot due to systemic inertia from existing greenhouse gases, warming oceans, and the decades required to replace existing infrastructure. Compounding factors include: (a) Most policy-makers greatly underestimate the scale, severity and duration of climate change, and the non-linear impacts of lags, feedbacks and tipping points; (b) Although all IPCC mitigation scenarios require the large-scale deployment of climate geoengineering, many methods may not be politically and/or technologically feasible; (c) While most scenarios assume climate overshoot will occur before safe climates are re-established, many human and environmental systems cannot adapt to higher temperatures. Temperatures likely to cause catastrophic and/or irreversible damage pose unacceptable risks. Developing a viable mitigation strategy will require prioritising research both on climate overshoot risks, and on the relative effectiveness, risks, costs and timelines of potential mitigation methods. Since geoengineering is required to rapidly mitigate dangerous overshoot, the viability and risks of all potential geoengineering methods need to be investigated. This research is a prerequisite for evaluating the comparative benefits, costs and risks of using, or not using, various forms of mitigation. A risk management plan can then be developed containing mitigation targets that are precise, measurable and attainable, with clear constraints on the magnitude and duration of both climate overshoot risks and mitigation methods.
World Futures Review, 2016
At this time, most climate researchers are only using a limited range of futures approaches: for ... more At this time, most climate researchers are only using a limited range of futures approaches: for example, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) future scenarios have been developed primarily with empirical predictive methods that extrapolate trends. These seriously underestimate the risk of nonlinear developments and critical failures. This article examines the Paris Climate Conference (COP) 21 agreement on climate mitigation; explains why current efforts are based on false assumptions and likely to fail; argues that holistic, integrative methods are needed to avoid disaster; and uses these methods to develop a practical strategy for accelerating systemic transformation. Despite the impressive diplomatic achievements of the Paris Agreement, there is a dangerous lag between the pace of political, economic, and technological change and the rapid (nonnegotiable) rate of climate change. The challenge is to find ways to manage the conflict between the need to work within exist...
Social Alternatives, Jul 1, 2007
Living biological and social systems are sustainable as long as they are able to manage and adapt... more Living biological and social systems are sustainable as long as they are able to manage and adapt to change. Sustainability is a function of a system's ability to meet its needs and maintain health, wholeness and resilience. Because the global system is now environmentally and socially unsustainable, it will collapse in the coming decades. It is unsustainable because it is based on destructive views and values that promote competition, exploitation, inequality, fear, violence and waste. For a global system to be sustainable, it must be based on constructive values that enable environmental, social and individual needs to be fully met. Since societies are organized by culture, a sustainable system will require a paradigm shift to an integral (holistic) worldview capable of organizing a functional system with congruent values, social structures and economic processes. Global events are being shaped by two trends: the dominant trend towards collapse and the emerging trend towards societal transformation. While the key elements of a sustainable system have begun to emerge, they are still very fragmented. We need to support their development through presenting a clear and unifying vision of a sustainable alternative. The Earth Charter is the cornerstone of this vision.
Journal of Futures Studies, 2016
This Special Issue is focused on "Exploring paths to a viable future: obstacles and opportunities... more This Special Issue is focused on "Exploring paths to a viable future: obstacles and opportunities; requirements and strategies". In our invitation for submissions we said: "Today we find ourselves at a difficult crossroad: although we know that business as usual is unsustainable, the path to a viable future is not clear…. This call for papers asks for articles, reports and essays exploring the enormous challenge of how the global political economy can be rapidly transformed into a sustainable system." The current approach to major global issues-such as the interconnected problems of climate, water, food and energy-represents a massive failure to understand and manage critical risks. For example, although there is an international consensus that average global temperatures should not be allowed to increase more than 2°C, no practical plans have been made for staying within this limit (Heinberg, 2015). Moreover, 2°C is hardly a safe thresholdit is considered the point at which there is a 50% chance of dangerous outcomes (Anderson & Bows, 2011). Almost no-one would take a flight that had a 1% chance of having a dangerous outcome, let alone a 50% chance. Nevertheless, we-all of humanity-are taking this perilous trip because our leaders assure us (and we want to believe) that everything will work out fine. We can do much better. Our species is very good at managing risks-when we put our minds to it (e.g. ISO, 2015). It is safe to fly because airplanes are designed, built, operated and maintained to strict standards that ensure that there is less than a 1 in 4 million chance of a major accident occurring per flight (IATA, 2014). We need to apply similar risk management principles (e.g. Smith & Simpson, 2010) to our greatest problems: preventing the catastrophic collapse of nature and society and creating a safe, sustainable future. The first step is to determine unacceptable risks-the factors that could cause the failure of critical biophysical and social systems. Then we need to discover how the global system must be transformed to ensure safe outcomes. The next challenge is determining how it can be transformed. We then need to develop viable strategies-to decide how we will transform the global system. The final tasks will be building consensus around various strategies and implementing them. Of course this is easier said than done. While a CEO can order a company to develop and implement a business plan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations has no power to order
ISSS Journalss, 2009
While most people support sustainable development, many believe that its benefits must be weighed... more While most people support sustainable development, many believe that its benefits must be weighed against other objectives such as economic growth and consumer desires for recreation, comfort and status. However, sustainability is not an option but a requirement. Any economy that is not sustainable will go bankrupt: any biological system that is not sustainable will die. Human societies are living social systems that completely depend on their environments for the resources needed to survive. But evolution is a ruthless process: most of the species and human societies that have ever existed are extinct because they either destroyed their environments or could not adapt to changing conditions. Our industrial societal system is designed for constant expansion. While this model was viable in a world of few people and many resources, it is now obsolete because the global economy is consuming more resources and discarding more waste than our planet’s ecosystems can sustainably produce an...
EarthArXiv, 2020
Because the 2015 Paris Agreement will not prevent dangerous climate change, there is an urgent ne... more Because the 2015 Paris Agreement will not prevent dangerous climate change, there is an urgent need to develop an alternative mitigation strategy. Even if all national commitments are met and technological breakthroughs accelerate the transition to emission-free technologies, the 2°C target will still be overshot due to systemic inertia from existing greenhouse gases, warming oceans, and the decades required to replace existing infrastructure. Compounding factors include: (a) Most policy-makers greatly underestimate the scale, severity and duration of climate change, and the non-linear impacts of lags, feedbacks and tipping points; (b) Although all IPCC mitigation scenarios require the large-scale deployment of climate geoengineering, many methods may not be politically and/or technologically feasible; (c) While most scenarios assume climate overshoot will occur before safe climates are re-established, many human and environmental systems cannot adapt to higher temperatures. Temperatures likely to cause catastrophic and/or irreversible damage pose unacceptable risks. 2 Developing a viable mitigation strategy will require prioritising research both on climate overshoot risks, and on the relative effectiveness, risks, costs and timelines of potential mitigation methods. Since geoengineering is required to rapidly mitigate dangerous overshoot, the viability and risks of all potential geoengineering methods need to be investigated. This research is a prerequisite for evaluating the comparative benefits, costs and risks of using, or not using, various forms of mitigation. A risk management plan can then be developed containing mitigation targets that are precise, measurable and attainable, with clear constraints on the magnitude and duration of both climate overshoot risks and mitigation methods.
EarthArXiv, 2020
Because the 2015 Paris Agreement will not prevent dangerous climate change, there is an urgent ne... more Because the 2015 Paris Agreement will not prevent dangerous climate change, there is an urgent need to develop an alternative mitigation strategy. Even if all national commitments are met and technological breakthroughs accelerate the transition to emission-free technologies, the 2°C target will still be overshot due to systemic inertia from existing greenhouse gases, warming oceans, and the decades required to replace existing infrastructure. Compounding factors include: (a) Most policy-makers greatly underestimate the scale, severity and duration of climate change, and the non-linear impacts of lags, feedbacks and tipping points; (b) Although all IPCC mitigation scenarios require the large-scale deployment of climate geoengineering, many methods may not be politically and/or technologically feasible; (c) While most scenarios assume climate overshoot will occur before safe climates are re-established, many human and environmental systems cannot adapt to higher temperatures. Temperatures likely to cause catastrophic and/or irreversible damage pose unacceptable risks. 2 Developing a viable mitigation strategy will require prioritising research both on climate overshoot risks, and on the relative effectiveness, risks, costs and timelines of potential mitigation methods. Since geoengineering is required to rapidly mitigate dangerous overshoot, the viability and risks of all potential geoengineering methods need to be investigated. This research is a prerequisite for evaluating the comparative benefits, costs and risks of using, or not using, various forms of mitigation. A risk management plan can then be developed containing mitigation targets that are precise, measurable and attainable, with clear constraints on the magnitude and duration of both climate overshoot risks and mitigation methods.
This article reviews the COP 21 agreement on climate mitigation, explains why it is doomed to fai... more This article reviews the COP 21 agreement on climate mitigation, explains why it is doomed to fail without systemic transformation, and proposes a method for accelerating the evolution of a sustainable global system.
Despite the achievements of the Paris Agreement, the world is still racing towards disaster. This is because it will not be possible to preserve critical ecosystems without placing internationally enforceable limits on both pollution and consumption—tasks that are not possible within current economic and political frameworks.
This dichotomy—between the need to work within existing institutions and the reality that they are structurally incapable of preventing catastrophic outcomes—may be resolved by using a holistic, three-track approach. The first track will reframe and intensify climate mitigation efforts. The second track will challenge the ideological opposition to climate mitigation. The third track will help catalyse the global movement needed to empower structural transformation and the emergence of a sustainable global system.
Optimists point out that every year humanity becomes better educated, wealthier and more intercon... more Optimists point out that every year humanity becomes better educated, wealthier and more interconnected: the Gates Foundation predicts that if current trends continue there will be almost no poor countries by 2035. In contrast, more pessimistic analysts warn that business as usual is unsustainable: catastrophic climate change and increasing shortages of water, food and cheap energy could collapse human civilizations by mid-century.
Is one forecast right and the other wrong? Or can we reconcile these opposing views?
In this paper I suggest that the key to understanding future developments is recognising that the two major trends shaping global events—worsening problems and emerging solutions—are interconnected. Growing economic and environmental crises will soon reach tipping points that focus public attention on the existence of both dangerous threats and viable solutions. Then (and only then) will most leaders begin to make transformational decisions.
The global economy is unsustainable because it promotes constant growth on a finite planet. Drivi... more The global economy is unsustainable because it promotes constant growth on a finite planet. Driving the
expansionist economy is an unsustainable consumer culture. Because technological advances cannot solve
social problems, within a few decades increasing resource shortages and degrading ecosystems will collapse
the world system.
Sustainability requires social and environmental resilience, health and wholeness. A consumer society
cannot transform into a conserver society without cultural and structural change. The key factor for transformation
is the emergence of an integral worldview capable of organizing sustainable social structures and economic
processes.
At present many researchers are exploring ways to improve the resilience of the global system,
p... more At present many researchers are exploring ways to improve the resilience of the global system,
prevent catastrophic failure, and support the transition to a sustainable global system. This paper
makes two interlinked proposals for developing better—and more credible—tools for modeling
critical global issues and identifying and managing threats. First, proven risk management methods
from other fields can be usefully applied to the assessment and mitigation of large, complex socioecological
problems. Second, using viability as the priority criterion for the design of our models will
not only highlight systemic threats, but also help us develop constructive interventions.
Humanity now faces a dangerous dilemma: on one hand leading scientists predict that if we continu... more Humanity now faces a dangerous dilemma: on one hand leading scientists predict that if we continue to burn coal, gas and oil the environmental consequences are likely to be catastrophic; on the other hand many economists argue that if we stop using fossil fuels our industrial civilization will run out of energy and collapse. Although renewable technologies are beginning to compete with fossil fuels in the production of electricity, electricity is only 20% of energy use. In other areas—e.g. most heating, industrial production and transport—renewable alternatives are either non-existent or not yet cost-competitive. Because the global economy still requires fossil fuels, any efforts to quickly cut carbon pollution will reduce output. This is an enormous problem as most people—especially those struggling to get by in developing countries— are not prepared to accept lower standards of living. In addition fossil fuel producing countries and companies are not prepared to forgo coal, gas and oil revenues. This dilemma underlies the failure of international negotiations to agree to sharp reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. While most decision-makers accept that climate change poses growing threats, they are unwilling to enact policies likely to cripple their businesses and national economies. As a result it is hard to imagine any scenario in which action will be taken in time to prevent dangerous climate change. Yet time is of the essence: already glaciers are melting, coral reefs are bleaching, rainforests are burning, and many critical agricultural areas are becoming hotter and drier. We must find solutions, or doom our children to living on a dying planet. This essay proposes a win-win strategy to resolve the energy/climate change dilemma.
Uploads
Papers by Graeme M Taylor
Compounding these risks is the likelihood that the international 2 °C limit will be overshot due to political obstacles and systemic inertia from existing greenhouse gases, warming oceans, and the decades required to replace existing infrastructure. Moreover, the Earth energy imbalance may have to be reduced to approximately zero to stabilize the global climate (i.e., CO2 concentrations lowered to around 350 ppm.)
Most IPCC mitigation scenarios assume that climate targets will be temporarily overshot, and require large-scale carbon dioxide removal [CDR] to subsequently lower temperatures. However, many CDR methods may not be politically and/or technologically feasible, and they will act too slowly to prevent dangerous overshoot.
These issues raise serious doubts about the ability of current mitigation polices to ensure safe outcomes. They also indicate the need to investigate whether rapid climate cooling measures may be required to reduce the risks associated with high temperatures during the long time it will take to decarbonize the global economy and stabilize the climate.
Given the uncertainty of future mitigation success, and the potentially existential costs of failure, there is now an urgent need to examine whether or not current efforts are credible, and if not, what mitigation measures will be required to prevent dangerous overshoot and ensure a safe, stable climate.
In order to develop a feasible mitigation strategy, it will be necessary to prioritize research both on climate overshoot risks, and on the relative effectiveness, risks, costs and timelines of potential mitigation and adaptation approaches. Since large scale climate interventions will be needed to prevent dangerous global warming, all plausible options need to be investigated, including carbon dioxide removal methods and technologies for rapidly cooling global temperatures. This research is a prerequisite for evaluating the comparative benefits, costs and risks of using, or not using, various forms of mitigation and adaptation, and then developing a realistic overshoot risk management plan.
Despite the achievements of the Paris Agreement, the world is still racing towards disaster. This is because it will not be possible to preserve critical ecosystems without placing internationally enforceable limits on both pollution and consumption—tasks that are not possible within current economic and political frameworks.
This dichotomy—between the need to work within existing institutions and the reality that they are structurally incapable of preventing catastrophic outcomes—may be resolved by using a holistic, three-track approach. The first track will reframe and intensify climate mitigation efforts. The second track will challenge the ideological opposition to climate mitigation. The third track will help catalyse the global movement needed to empower structural transformation and the emergence of a sustainable global system.
Is one forecast right and the other wrong? Or can we reconcile these opposing views?
In this paper I suggest that the key to understanding future developments is recognising that the two major trends shaping global events—worsening problems and emerging solutions—are interconnected. Growing economic and environmental crises will soon reach tipping points that focus public attention on the existence of both dangerous threats and viable solutions. Then (and only then) will most leaders begin to make transformational decisions.
expansionist economy is an unsustainable consumer culture. Because technological advances cannot solve
social problems, within a few decades increasing resource shortages and degrading ecosystems will collapse
the world system.
Sustainability requires social and environmental resilience, health and wholeness. A consumer society
cannot transform into a conserver society without cultural and structural change. The key factor for transformation
is the emergence of an integral worldview capable of organizing sustainable social structures and economic
processes.
prevent catastrophic failure, and support the transition to a sustainable global system. This paper
makes two interlinked proposals for developing better—and more credible—tools for modeling
critical global issues and identifying and managing threats. First, proven risk management methods
from other fields can be usefully applied to the assessment and mitigation of large, complex socioecological
problems. Second, using viability as the priority criterion for the design of our models will
not only highlight systemic threats, but also help us develop constructive interventions.
Compounding these risks is the likelihood that the international 2 °C limit will be overshot due to political obstacles and systemic inertia from existing greenhouse gases, warming oceans, and the decades required to replace existing infrastructure. Moreover, the Earth energy imbalance may have to be reduced to approximately zero to stabilize the global climate (i.e., CO2 concentrations lowered to around 350 ppm.)
Most IPCC mitigation scenarios assume that climate targets will be temporarily overshot, and require large-scale carbon dioxide removal [CDR] to subsequently lower temperatures. However, many CDR methods may not be politically and/or technologically feasible, and they will act too slowly to prevent dangerous overshoot.
These issues raise serious doubts about the ability of current mitigation polices to ensure safe outcomes. They also indicate the need to investigate whether rapid climate cooling measures may be required to reduce the risks associated with high temperatures during the long time it will take to decarbonize the global economy and stabilize the climate.
Given the uncertainty of future mitigation success, and the potentially existential costs of failure, there is now an urgent need to examine whether or not current efforts are credible, and if not, what mitigation measures will be required to prevent dangerous overshoot and ensure a safe, stable climate.
In order to develop a feasible mitigation strategy, it will be necessary to prioritize research both on climate overshoot risks, and on the relative effectiveness, risks, costs and timelines of potential mitigation and adaptation approaches. Since large scale climate interventions will be needed to prevent dangerous global warming, all plausible options need to be investigated, including carbon dioxide removal methods and technologies for rapidly cooling global temperatures. This research is a prerequisite for evaluating the comparative benefits, costs and risks of using, or not using, various forms of mitigation and adaptation, and then developing a realistic overshoot risk management plan.
Despite the achievements of the Paris Agreement, the world is still racing towards disaster. This is because it will not be possible to preserve critical ecosystems without placing internationally enforceable limits on both pollution and consumption—tasks that are not possible within current economic and political frameworks.
This dichotomy—between the need to work within existing institutions and the reality that they are structurally incapable of preventing catastrophic outcomes—may be resolved by using a holistic, three-track approach. The first track will reframe and intensify climate mitigation efforts. The second track will challenge the ideological opposition to climate mitigation. The third track will help catalyse the global movement needed to empower structural transformation and the emergence of a sustainable global system.
Is one forecast right and the other wrong? Or can we reconcile these opposing views?
In this paper I suggest that the key to understanding future developments is recognising that the two major trends shaping global events—worsening problems and emerging solutions—are interconnected. Growing economic and environmental crises will soon reach tipping points that focus public attention on the existence of both dangerous threats and viable solutions. Then (and only then) will most leaders begin to make transformational decisions.
expansionist economy is an unsustainable consumer culture. Because technological advances cannot solve
social problems, within a few decades increasing resource shortages and degrading ecosystems will collapse
the world system.
Sustainability requires social and environmental resilience, health and wholeness. A consumer society
cannot transform into a conserver society without cultural and structural change. The key factor for transformation
is the emergence of an integral worldview capable of organizing sustainable social structures and economic
processes.
prevent catastrophic failure, and support the transition to a sustainable global system. This paper
makes two interlinked proposals for developing better—and more credible—tools for modeling
critical global issues and identifying and managing threats. First, proven risk management methods
from other fields can be usefully applied to the assessment and mitigation of large, complex socioecological
problems. Second, using viability as the priority criterion for the design of our models will
not only highlight systemic threats, but also help us develop constructive interventions.