AN ORGANIZATIONAL CHRYSTAL BALL ?ICSU´s EARTH SYSTEM VISIONING

Kari RaivioRector and Chancellor EmeritusUniversity of HelsinkiVice President, International Council of Science (ICSU)

GEC Research

WCRP (established in 1980) climate

IGBP (1987-) geosphere biosphere processes

IHDP (1996-) human dimensions

DIVERSITAS (2002-) biodiversity

Earth System Science Partnership (2001)

Earth System Science Partnership:Towards transdisciplinary integrative science

4

Synthesis of the Reviews

On the future of the ESSP, the ESSP and the IGBP reviews differed on the way forward. “There is a clear need for an internationally coordinated and holistic approach to Earth system science that integrates natural and social sciences from regional to the global scale. In principle, the ESSP should

be able to assume this role.” (ESSP review)

“Further detailed examination of the role and need for ESSP is

required” (IGBP review)

Common recommendations

•Priority setting

•Effectiveness

•Integrated research framework

“Under a flagship model, all GEC programmes share a

common vision.” –ESSP Review p. 31

“WCRP, in partnership with other global environmental change programmes, should develop a framework for future joint research operation”-WCRP Review, recommendation 10

“The vision should provide a framework extending 10 years into the future and be consistent with the overall evolution of GEC research”-IGBP Review, recommendation 1

Decision of the 29th GA of ICSU (Maputo, October 2008)

“to note that CSPR is planning to organize a consultation, including a high-level meeting, with relevant partners to outline options for an overall framework for global environmental change research and its policy relevance, once the reviews of IGBP and WCRP are completed.”

Visioning Sustainability Research

Task team: Anne Whyte, Elinor Ostrom, Hans Joachim (John) Schellnhuber, Heide Hackmann,

Johan Rockstrom (Chair), Kari Raivio, and Walt Reid (past Chair)

Contact: Leah Goldfarb (leah.goldfarb@icsu.org)

Three Step Process

Goal: to engage the scientific community to explore options and to propose implementation steps for a holistic strategy on the Earth system research. This strategy will both encourage scientific innovation and address policy needs.

8http://www.icsu-visioning.org/

9

Overview

• 7,227 “unique” visitors from 133 countries (unique = different IP addresses, excludes internet “bots”)

• 1,016 registered users from 85 countries

• 323 research questions posted

10

Sectors (self-declared)

Users by sector

Earth Sciences

Life Sciences (bio)

Space Science

Geography

Development

Civil Society/ NGOs

Other research sector

Private sector

Other sector

Policy

Physics

Engineering

Economics

Political Science

Psychology

Anthropology

Math and computational science

Chemistry

Ethnography

Atmospheric Science

11

Meeting to distil the research questions

•Early career scientist meeting [29 Sept]•Visioning Earth system research meeting [30 Sept – 1 Oct, 2009]

• Early career scientists & senior scientists• Science-policy experts• Funders• GEC programs• ICSU and ISSC

•Discussion focused on the research priorities

Outcome: “Grand Challenges in Global Sustainability Research: A Systems Approach to Research Priorities for the Decade”

12

Criteria for selection

•Scientific importance

•Relevance to decision-makers

•Broad support

•Global coordination

•Leverage

13

Draft Grand ChallengesChallenge #1: Improve the usefulness of forecasts of future environmental conditions and their consequences for people.

Challenge #2: Develop the observation systems needed to manage global and regional environmental change.

Challenge #3: Determine how to anticipate, avoid and cope with dangerous global environmental change.

Challenge #4: Determine what institutional and behavioural changes can best ensure global sustainability.

Challenge #5: Develop and evaluate innovative technological and social responses to achieve global sustainability.

14

3.1. Which aspects of the coupled social‐environmental system pose significant risks of runaway dynamics?

3.2. How can we identify, analyze and track our proximity to thresholds and discontinuities in coupled social‐environmental systems? When can thresholds not be determined?

3.3. What strategies for avoidance, adaptation and transformation are effective for coping with abrupt changes, including massive cascading environmental shocks?

3.4. How can the need to curb global environmental change be integrated with the demands of other inter‐connected global policy challenges, particularly those related to poverty, conflict, justice and human security?

3.5. How can improved scientific knowledge of the risks of global change and options for response most effectively catalyze and support appropriate actions by citizens and decision‐makers?

Challenge #3: Determine how to anticipate, avoid and cope with dangerous global environmental change.

15

Expected Deliverables

• Validated models of human-environment systems at global to local scales. (Challenge #1 and #2)

• Prioritized needs for Earth system observations of physical, chemical, biological and social variables and the design features of a system for delivering that information. (Challenge #2)

• A framework for forecasting the likelihood, location, drivers, severity and risk of abrupt or non-linear changes associated with global environmental change. (Challenge #3)

• Designs for practices and institutions that can take effective action in response to signals of impending dangerous changes or can be resilient to those changes. (Challenge #3 and #4)

• Increased human and social capital to create and use the knowledge base for managing human-environment systems. (Challenge #4)

• Policies and practices that accelerate social and technological innovation relevant to the needs of managing global change. (Challenge #5)

• Models for exploring the costs, benefits and risks of alternative geo-engineering strategies. (Challenge #5)

16

Visit http://www.icsu-visioning.org/ from 21 December – 21 February

to comment on the Research Priorities document and comment on future steps.

Institutional Framework for Global Sustainability Research - Meeting

Goal: to draft a proposal outlining the Institutional Framework to address the Grand Challenges in Global Sustainability Research.

Methodology: Propose several institutional framework models. Plus, specific examples of how to implement several priority research questions.

Approach: Consultative (Web survey; Discussion with funders, the

GEC and wider ICSU community and beyond; Open Forum, Meeting)

Invitees: Co-Sponsors [ICSU, ISSC, IOC, IUBS, SCOPE,

UNESCO, UNU, WMO + UNEP], Funders, GEC, institutional experts, …

17

18

Visioning Timetable2009

July-August; 30 September – 1 October

Online consultationScientific visioning meeting (Step 1)

October-November Consultation with the meeting participants and then the GEC programmes and ESSP on the research priorities document

21 December 2009 – 21 February 2010

Consultation with the wider community on the research priorities document

2010

22-24 June Meeting to examine the needed structure that will invigorate and facilitate the new Earth system research strategy. (Step 2) Open Forum 22 June in Paris.

December A meeting to determine how to transition from existing structures to the needed structure for the future. (Step 3) Date TBD.

The Belmont Challenge(seven main funders)

Regional Environmental Change: Human Action and Adaptation

• The following require regional and decadal prediction, advanced observing systems, and inclusion of social sciences. They involve synergy of multiple stressors, including extreme events.

• Coastal zone• Water cycle & resources• Ecosystem services – food security• Most vulnerable societies (geographic areas), with low capacity

and high societal impact

Belmont project

ICSU was commissioned to conduct an analysis of international research capability to respond to the Belmont Challenge.

Focus on

•Solvability of problems

•Infrastructure and personnel

ICSU represented in Belmont Group

20

Relationship between the visioning and Belmont Challenge

•The two processes were independently designed. Visioning process - ICSU members

Belmont Challenge - funders

•The two processes are complementary and provide support to each other.•Belmont project report will provide information to the Visioning, particularly the meeting in June.•IGFA to be reinvigorated (new chair)

21

Janaury, 2009 ICSU overview 22

ICSU’s role: the Global Change example

100%

0.5%

0.005%

Seeding and catalysis

Research

Planning andCoordination

Initialization

ICSU

US$2bn

US$10m

US$100k

EXPECTATIONS FROM WCRP

• Keep up the good work !!• See the total picture of sustainability research• Have an open mind to institutional development• Participate actively in the process

25

Visit http://www.icsu-visioning.org/ from 21 December – 21 February

to comment on the Research Priorities document and comment on future steps.

26

1.1. What significant environmental changes are likely to result from human actions, how would those changes affect human well‐being, and how are people likely to respond?

1.2. What threats does global environmental change pose for vulnerable communities and groups and what responses could be most effective in reducing harm to those communities?

Challenge #1: Improve the usefulness of forecasts of future environmental conditions and their consequences for people.

27

2.1. What do we need to observe in coupled social‐environmental systems, and at what scales, in order to respond to, adapt to, and influence global change?

2.2. What are the characteristics of an adequate system for observing and communicating this information?

Challenge #2: Develop the observation systems needed to manage global and regional environmental change.

28

3.1. Which aspects of the coupled social‐environmental system pose significant risks of runaway dynamics?

3.2. How can we identify, analyze and track our proximity to thresholds and discontinuities in coupled social‐environmental systems? When can thresholds not be determined?

3.3. What strategies for avoidance, adaptation and transformation are effective for coping with abrupt changes, including massive cascading environmental shocks?

3.4. How can the need to curb global environmental change be integrated with the demands of other inter‐connected global policy challenges, particularly those related to poverty, conflict, justice and human security?

3.5. How can improved scientific knowledge of the risks of global change and options for response most effectively catalyze and support appropriate actions by citizens and decision‐makers?

Challenge #3: Determine how to anticipate, avoid and cope with dangerous global environmental change.

29

4.1. What institutional structures are effective in balancing the trade‐offs inherent in social environmental systems at local, regional and global scales and how can they be achieved?

4.2. What changes in economic systems would contribute most to improving global sustainability and how could they be achieved?

4.3. What changes in behaviour or lifestyle, if adopted by a particular society, would contribute most to improving global sustainability and how could they be achieved?

4.4. How can institutional arrangements prioritize and direct resources to alleviate poverty and address social injustice under rapidly changing local environmental conditions and growing pressures on the global environment?

4.5. How can effective, legitimate, accountable and just collective environmental solutions be mobilized?

Challenge #4: Determine what institutional and behavioural changes can best ensure global sustainability.

30

5.1. What incentives are needed to strengthen national systems for science and technology innovation to respond to global environmental change and what good models exist?

5.2. What incentives are needed to strengthen policy and institutional innovation to respond to global environmental change?

5.3. How can global energy security be provided entirely by sources that are renewable and that have neutral impacts on other aspects of global sustainability, and in what time frame?

5.4. How can food production be increased to meet anticipated needs over the next half century while dramatically reducing land‐use greenhouse gas emissions, protecting biodiversity, and maintaining or enhancing ecosystem services?

5.5. What are the potentials and risks of technological strategies (e.g., geo‐engineering) to address global environmental change, and what local to global institutional arrangements would be needed to oversee them, if implemented?

Challenge #5: Develop and evaluate innovative technological and social responses to achieve global sustainability.