The Principles and Practices in Action

2021 ◽  
pp. 162-178
Author(s):  
Cynthia Rayner ◽  
François Bonnici
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Change ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Racial Justice ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Slow Pace ◽  
The Face ◽  
Strategic Conversation

This book asks a rather simple but bold question: “How do organizations create systemic social change?” This question is growing in importance, becoming part of the strategic conversation for all types of organizations, not just those specifically focused on social change. Business leaders, politicians, educators, employees, and parents are grappling with the realization that complex social change can rapidly impact their everyday lives. As frustration at the slow pace of change grows, and the world’s wicked problems—such as inequality, climate change and racial justice—proliferate, people are increasingly recognizing that we need to find ways to tackle the root causes of these issues rather than just addressing the symptoms. In the face of these challenges, it is easy to default to our more traditional views of leadership and problem-solving, which celebrate an us-versus-them mentality, top-down decision-making, and aggressive power stances. Systems work—with its focus on the process of change including our day-to-day actions and relationships—may feel counterintuitive in this rapidly emerging future. Yet, as the authors’ research has shown, the future is demanding a different kind of leadership, one that emphasizes the ways we work as much as the outcomes we pursue.

Megadrought and Collapse

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Agricultural Landscapes ◽  
15Th Century ◽  
Societal Collapse ◽  
The Face ◽  
Time Periods ◽  
Paleoclimate Proxy ◽  
Habitat Tracking

This is the first book to treat the major examples of megadrought and societal collapse, from the late Pleistocene end of hunter–gatherer culture and origins of cultivation to the 15th century AD fall of the Khmer Empire capital at Angkor, and ranging from the Near East to South America. Previous enquiries have stressed the possible multiple and internal causes of collapse, such overpopulation, overexploitation of resources, warfare, and poor leadership and decision-making. In contrast, Megadrought and Collapse presents case studies of nine major episodes of societal collapse in which megadrought was the major and independent cause of societal collapse. In each case the most recent paleoclimatic evidence for megadroughts, multiple decades to multiple centuries in duration, is presented alongside the archaeological records for synchronous societal collapse. The megadrought data are derived from paleoclimate proxy sources (lake, marine, and glacial cores; speleothems, or cave stalagmites; and tree-rings) and are explained by researchers directly engaged in their analysis. Researchers directly responsible for them discuss the relevant current archaeological records. Two arguments are developed through these case studies. The first is that societal collapse in different time periods and regions and at levels of social complexity ranging from simple foragers to complex empires would not have occurred without megadrought. The second is that similar responses to megadrought extend across these historical episodes: societal collapse in the face of insurmountable climate change, abandonment of settlements and regions, and habitat tracking to sustainable agricultural landscapes. As we confront megadrought today, and in the likely future, Megadrought and Collapse brings together the latest contributions to our understanding of past societal responses to the crisis on an equally global and diverse scale.

scholarly journals The role of youth in the climate change debate

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
P Van Den Hazel
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Young People ◽  
Energy Transition ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Sustainable Lifestyles ◽  
Raising Awareness ◽  
The World ◽  
The Face ◽  
Indirect Impacts ◽  
Impacts Of Climate Change

Abstract The impacts of climate change are not distributed equally. Some people will experience natural disasters first hand, some will be affected more gradually over time, and some will experience only indirect impacts. There are data from the United nations that show the interest of youth on climate change. Close to half a million youth around the world have taken action on climate change through SGP [small grants programmes] projects in their homes, schools and communities. (UNDP, 2015). 84% of the surveyed young people agree that they need more information to prevent climate change. (UNEP, 2011). Furthermore, about 73% of surveyed youth say they currently feel the effects climate change. (UNEP, GlobeScan Survey, 2008). Some 89% of youth respondents say young people can make a difference on climate change. [UNEP, 2008]. But only 9% of youth are very confident the world will act quickly enough to address climate change. [UNEP, 2008]. Young people are key actors in raising awareness, running educational programmes, promoting sustainable lifestyles, conserving nature, supporting renewable energy, adopting environmentally-friendly practices and implementing adaptation and mitigation projects[UNFCCC]. Action by youth, as protest school strikes or speeches to the UN by Greta Thunberg, urge immediate action from governments, business leaders and school leaders. There are different reasons for this action by youth. The psycho-social impacts of a changing climate are generally under lighted in these reasons. Are the responses by society enough to minimize suffering and promote resilience of youth in the face of the challenging impacts of climate change? Or do governments and businesses enough while they increasingly seem to be moving toward action on climate change, as they proclaim to cut their own emissions or be active in their energy transition? It is not clear whether those actions are enough to satisfy the next generation of customers, employees and decision makers.

Compassionate Reasoning, the Mind, and Moral Choice

2021 ◽  
pp. 79-130
Author(s):  
Marc Gopin
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Change ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Choice ◽  
Extensive Training ◽  
Positive Social Change ◽  
Fierce Competition ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Obedience To Authority

The ethical schools of thought are essential to decision-making for peacebuilding and positive social change. The directives emerging from ethical schools often contradict each other, but Compassionate Reasoning can help resolve these contradictions and guide people in a more coherent direction of thinking and acting. The cultivation of compassion is shown to be a glue that bonds schools of ethics into one enterprise of moral reasoning as seen through several lenses. People who reason together are more adept at problem solving than when reasoning alone, but only if they have cultivated caring and compassionate relationships as a group. Moral reasoning in fierce competition with others, by contrast, retards the discovery of solutions to thorny problems. Compassionate Reasoning encourages collective reasoning rather than isolated and selfish reasoning. Excessive obedience to authority is also one of the most dangerous aspects of the human lower brain. A critical antidote is extensive training in taking the perspectives of others through Compassionate Reasoning.

Bringing women's livelihood and care perspectives into climate decision making.

2021 ◽  
pp. 196-210
Author(s):  
P. E. Perkins ◽  
B. Osman
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Scales ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Economic Systems ◽  
Social Resilience ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Address Climate Change ◽  
The Face ◽  
Climate Crisis

Abstract This chapter explores the livelihood and care implications of the climate crisis from a gendered viewpoint that includes the implications of this approach for climate decision making at multiple scales, from local to global. The focus is on grassroots political organizing, activism, and movements as well as women's community-based actions to (re)build social resilience in the face of climate chaos. Challenges and policy implications are discussed as governments struggle to meaningfully and equitably address climate change. Also highlighted are the transformational imperatives of care and livelihood priorities which cast into stark relief the unsustainability of the long-established gender inequities that serve as the foundation for economic systems everywhere.

scholarly journals Communicating about Climate Change with Corporate Leaders and Stakeholders

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Hoffman
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Market Demand ◽  
Strategic Responses ◽  
Corporate Leaders ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
The Face ◽  
Physical Effects

Within the corporate sector, climate change represents an unfolding market shift, one that is driven by policy but also by pressures from a variety of market constituents such as consumers, suppliers, buyers, insurance companies, banks, and others. The shift takes place in both mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to the physical effects of a changing climate. It is manifest in shifts in market demand, cost of capital, operational efficiency, energy efficiency, access to raw materials within supply chains, and other issues of business concern. In fact, when viewed in this way, business leaders and stakeholders can be agnostic about the science of climate change and still see it as a business issue. In the face of a market shift, successful companies must innovate. And as in any market shift, the implications of addressing climate change are not uniform; the burden will not fall evenly. There are both risks and opportunities; there will be both winners and losers. Certain companies, industries, and sectors will be impacted more than others. This article will discuss the ways in which climate change poses market risk and the strategic responses that companies might adopt to respond to and mitigate that risk. This focus is critically important as the solutions to climate change must come from the market. The market is the most powerful institution on earth, and business is the most powerful entity within it. The market compels business to make the goods and services we rely upon: the clothes we wear, the food we eat, the forms of mobility we use, and the buildings we live and work in. If the market does not lead the way toward solutions for a carbon-neutral world, there will be no solutions.

scholarly journals Making climate action meaningful: Communication practices in the New Zealand climate movement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Jonathan Oosterman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Change ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Behavioural Change ◽  
Social Consensus ◽  
Climate Action ◽  
The Face ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
The One ◽  
Climate Crisis

<p>The climate crisis requires urgent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; however, ‘business as usual’ continues to fuel further increases. Instead of the social change needed to safeguard the wellbeing of people and the planet, there has been an unpromising mix of active resistance, lukewarm concern, lack of engagement, and lack of hope. In the face of this, climate communicators seek to make climate action relevant and meaningful to people, thereby mobilising them to create a social consensus on climate action and the political will for change.  A core dynamic in climate communication is the balance between, on the one hand, speaking to the facts of the climate crisis and to what makes climate action meaningful to climate communicators themselves, and on the other, speaking in a way that is meaningful to those being communicated with. If the balance is right, climate communication will empower people, thereby helping translate belief in, and concern about, the climate crisis into behavioural change and political engagement, cumulatively creating social change. If the balance is wrong, however, communication efforts risk not connecting with people, emotionally overwhelming them with the weight of the climate crisis, or overly diluting the message, leading to no effect, or to a negative effect.  An important way in which this dynamic manifests is in the balance between moral and economic framing. Morality and economics are two fundamental elements of what gives a sense of meaningfulness to climate action, and therefore underlie decision-making around both climate action and climate communication. Combinations of moral and economic framing are of particular interest in the way they call for radical action while speaking to people’s desires for security and prosperity.  The climate movement is at the heart of efforts towards social change and the creation of a social consensus on climate action. It is therefore to the experiences of climate movement participants that I turn to explore these issues. I take a movement-centred activist scholarship approach to research on climate communication decision-making via interviews with fourteen members of the New Zealand climate movement. Highlighting the importance of knowledge development within social movements, I seek to contribute to activist and academic understanding of effective climate communication.</p>

Adaptive Governance

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald D. Brunner ◽  
Amanda H. Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Common Interest ◽  
Scientific Management ◽  
Adaptive Governance ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Decentralized Decision Making ◽  
Common Interests

Adaptive governance is defined by a focus on decentralized decision-making structures and procedurally rational policy, supported by intensive natural and social science. Decentralized decision-making structures allow a large, complex problem like global climate change to be factored into many smaller problems, each more tractable for policy and scientific purposes. Many smaller problems can be addressed separately and concurrently by smaller communities. Procedurally rational policy in each community is an adaptation to profound uncertainties, inherent in complex systems and cognitive constraints, that limit predictability. Hence planning to meet projected targets and timetables is secondary to continuing appraisal of incremental steps toward long-term goals: What has and hasn’t worked compared to a historical baseline, and why? Each step in such trial-and-error processes depends on politics to balance, if not integrate, the interests of multiple participants to advance their common interest—the point of governance in a free society. Intensive science recognizes that each community is unique because the interests, interactions, and environmental responses of its participants are multiple and coevolve. Hence, inquiry focuses on case studies of particular contexts considered comprehensively and in some detail.Varieties of adaptive governance emerged in response to the limitations of scientific management, the dominant pattern of governance in the 20th century. In scientific management, central authorities sought technically rational policies supported by predictive science to rise above politics and thereby realize policy goals more efficiently from the top down. This approach was manifest in the framing of climate change as an “irreducibly global” problem in the years around 1990. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established to assess science for the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The parties negotiated the Kyoto Protocol that attempted to prescribe legally binding targets and timetables for national reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. But progress under the protocol fell far short of realizing the ultimate objective in Article 1 of the UNFCCC, “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system.” As concentrations continued to increase, the COP recognized the limitations of this approach in Copenhagen in 2009 and authorized nationally determined contributions to greenhouse gas reductions in the Paris Agreement in 2015.Adaptive governance is a promising but underutilized approach to advancing common interests in response to climate impacts. The interests affected by climate, and their relative priorities, differ from one community to the next, but typically they include protecting life and limb, property and prosperity, other human artifacts, and ecosystem services, while minimizing costs. Adaptive governance is promising because some communities have made significant progress in reducing their losses and vulnerability to climate impacts in the course of advancing their common interests. In doing so, they provide field-tested models for similar communities to consider. Policies that have worked anywhere in a network tend to be diffused for possible adaptation elsewhere in that network. Policies that have worked consistently intensify and justify collective action from the bottom up to reallocate supporting resources from the top down. Researchers can help realize the potential of adaptive governance on larger scales by recognizing it as a complementary approach in climate policy—not a substitute for scientific management, the historical baseline.

scholarly journals Bottom-Up Assessment of Climate Risk and the Robustness of Proposed Flood Management Strategies in the American River, CA

Water ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 907
Author(s):  
Kara DiFrancesco ◽  
Alix Gitelman ◽  
David Purkey
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Flood Management ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
American River ◽  
The Face ◽  
System Robustness

The hydrologic nonstationarity and uncertainty associated with climate change requires new decision-making methods to incorporate climate change impacts into flood frequency and flood risk analyses. To aid decision-making under climate change, we developed a bottom-up approach for assessing the performance of flood management systems under climate uncertainty and nonstationarity. The developed bottom-up approach was applied to the American River, CA, USA flood management system by first identifying the sensitivity and vulnerability of the system to different climates. To do this, we developed a climate response surface by calculating and plotting Expected Annual Damages (EAD, $/year) under different flood regimes. Next, we determined a range of plausible future climate change and flood frequency scenarios by applying Bayesian statistical methods to projected future flows derived from a Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) model forced with Global Circulation Model (GCM) output. We measured system robustness as the portion of plausible future scenarios under which the current flood system could meet its performance goal. Using this approach, we then evaluated the robustness of four proposed management strategies in the 2012 Central Valley Flood Protection Plan in terms of both flood risk and cost-effectiveness, to assess the performance of the strategies in the face of climate risks. Results indicated that the high sensitivity of the expected damages to changes in flood regimes makes the system extremely vulnerable to a large portion of the plausible range of future flood conditions. The management strategy that includes a combination of nature-based flood management actions along with engineered structures yields the greatest potential to increase system robustness in terms of maintaining EAD below an acceptable risk threshold. However, this strategy still leaves the system vulnerable to a wide range of plausible future conditions. As flood frequency regimes increase in intensity from the current conditions, the cost-effectiveness of the management strategies increases, to a point, before decreasing. This bottom up analysis demonstrated a viable decision-making approach for water managers in the face of uncertain and changing future conditions. Neglecting to use such an approach and omitting climate considerations from water resource planning could lead to strategies that do not perform as expected or which actually lead to mal-adaptations, increasing vulnerability to climate change.

Conclusion: Technocracy at the End of the World

2020 ◽  
pp. 251-258
Author(s):  
Anders Esmark
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Current State ◽  
The World ◽  
The Face ◽  
Important Challenge ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Political Decision Making

Taking up the case of climate change, the conclusion considers the argument for moretechnocracy in the face of ‘the end world as we know it’. Climate change is probably the strongest case for a technocratic model of political decision-making. At the very least, insufficient political adherence to the scientific evidence on climate change is an almost commonsensical part of the problem of in the current state of affairs. While fully acknowledging this problem, the chapter argues that attention to the destructive and mutually reinforcing interplay of technocracy and populism is necessary also in to the all-important challenge of climate change.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document