Jaber Our Historic Moment

Purpose, Planet, And Places to Intervene
1. Auflage 2017
ISBN: 978-0-9986420-1-7
Verlag: David Jaber
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: PC/MAC/eReader/Tablet/DL/kein Kopierschutz

E-Book, Englisch, 96 Seiten

How do we create the world that works for all? What do we understand that means? And how do politicians, business leaders and non-profits best work together on this front? Our Historic Moment articulates the vision for our activity across the globe and dives into a rich exploration of the root causes that block us from achieving our vision. Whether simply inertia, lack of information reaching the right people, or other factors, pitfalls abound. We then put the focus where it should be - on the solutions - offering paths forward toward the vision and stressing that our time to act is now. Whether looking to science, religion or other wisdom, many sources hold lessons that we can draw on in this quest. Moving forward has real implications for: - political leaders - business managers - policy makers - ecology advocates - those working for social justice Those in these roles have a real opportunity to maintain what's working as well as drive positive change. Critical to this work is understanding the best leverage points for intervention, so we are as effective as we can possibly be. Without understanding those leverage points, our efforts can be wasted. With vision defined, leverage points clear and mindset properly attuned, our actions naturally flow from there. All can contribute toward the many solutions that are articulated here, and even more importantly, define their own solutions using the Our Historic Moment framework. At less than 100 pages, Our Historic Moment is a manageable read to help you see the path forward. No matter whether you're new to tackling solutions for your community, country and planet; feel frustrated by the state of affairs, but are not seeing how to proceed; or already consider yourself an actively engaged change agent, welcome.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Jaber, David

Leseproben

Surveying the Landscape
  In embarking on the quest to meaningfully move forward in the right ways, let’s return to the central question of the Preface, detailing it out further: - Where do we need to be? Where would we like our political, economic, organizational and ecological systems to go? - Where are we currently? What’s worked well? What hasn’t worked well? - What’s keeping us from getting from where we are to where we need to be?   Where do we need to be?   Regarding where we need to be, the practices of indigenous peoples embody one answer, as indigenous people live in concert with the land and use local resources. Their lives are powered by biodegradable resources (plant fibers and animal hides) and bio-based energy (like firewood). The indigenous directly feel the impacts of land mismanagement in many cases, allowing them to take appropriate action. Over the millennia in which all were indigenous, we had a world that was sustainable, verdant, and healthy – at least, as far as we can tell. The rituals and guidance that arose out different indigenous groups help to keep their societies on track, and interrelationship with the land is a key aspect of those rituals and guidance. Indigenous wisdom has informed our best understanding of how to live on the planet and relate to our surroundings.   The challenge is that very many of us have far outstripped our indigenous roots, and we have developed industrial-scale supply chains that reach widely beyond our local carrying capacity. We don’t see all or even most of the impacts of these systems that gather, process, and redistribute minerals, fibers and crops from around the globe. Yet, we have become accustomed to lives that depend on creating those impacts, at least those of us in more resource-intensive nations. The vast bulk of those of us who benefit from these systems would like to maintain our advances in technology and science, and make those advances available to more people should they wish to engage in them – while mitigating, if not eliminating, the negative repercussions. Yet, making advances available to more people only increases the prospect of scaling negative impacts. The Vision
With this as the backdrop, in steps R. Buckminster “Bucky” Fuller. Bucky was a widely acclaimed designer, educator and thought leader of the twentieth-century. In the early 1960s, as the goal for the “World Game”, he concisely framed the goal(s) to which we should strive as:   “To make the world work for 100% of humanity in the shortest possible time through spontaneous cooperation without ecological offense or the disadvantage of anyone.”   The World Game was an exercise Bucky developed for his students to craft solutions to world problems. You might think of it as SimWorld meets social conscience. Rather than merely a game, though, it was intended as a tool to systemically approach world problems through a design lens1. Under the assumption that we respect all life on the planet and its ability to thrive into the indefinite future, Bucky’s quote encapsulates our real world challenge brilliantly. What it lacks, understandably, is how to get there, and those details, it seems, pend the playing of the game. Further defining these goals is The Natural Step (TNS) movement of the late 1980s and 1990s. Born in Northern Europe, TNS served as an international network of stakeholders, charting out how human society can best align with the interests and needs of the planet, constructively working with the processes of geology, hydrology, ecology, sociology, and atmospheric science. After several iterations, TNS came up with four clear principles that are essentially this2: We must strive to use 100% renewable resources (energy and materials) We must strive to use 100% non-toxic materials (life-friendly) We must maintain the productivity of the earth’s living systems (habitat regeneration) Resources must be used fairly and efficiently to meet human needs (social equity) Between Bucky’s maxim and TNS’s four principles, we have the framework that our communities and nations need to follow.   Renewable: If resources are non-renewable, then by definition, they won’t be available for the future. By using non-renewables at an unsustainable rate, we set up a situation where future generations won’t be able to undertake the same activities as our generation, and we set false expectations.   Non-Toxic: If materials are toxic, then by definition they are hurting life.   Abundant: If we are hindering the ability of living systems to be productive, we’re increasing the risk that their yield won’t be available to sustain life.   Equitable: If we exacerbate inequity, we risk immigration pressures, unrest, rebellion, and invasion where peoples aren’t able to meet their basic needs.   As a validation of this framework, on September 25, 2015, the United Nations adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to “end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all”, with targets to achieve by 20303, building on the eight Millennium Development Goals that were set for 2015.     Goals like No Poverty and Zero Hunger are largely self-explanatory. Other goals take additional interpretation and distillation into metrics and targets. The SDGs reinforce the need for healthy conditions for all life on land, healthy seas, and sustainable cities and communities. The SDGs also flesh out social equity into its multiple dimensions: - Good Health (maternal survival, epidemic reduction, road traffic safety) - Quality Education (access to primary, secondary, and university education; vocational and technical skills) - Decent Work and Economy (Economic growth in least developed countries, improved global resource efficiency) - Reduced Inequality Within and Among Countries (relatively high income growth in the bottom 40%, reduced discriminatory policy, orderly migration) - Gender Equality - Access to Clean Water - Access to Affordable and Clean Energy - Peace and Justice   The above in sum is where we need to be. If you accept that life on the planet has value, this is your charge. Our task is to make into reality the combined vision of Bucky’s maxim, the TNS principles and the SDGs.   What’s Working and What’s Not Working?
This vision illustrates that we’ve had an understanding of where we need to be for 25-50 years, which is the timeframe in which The Natural Step and Bucky respectively articulated the above. To understand how close we are to this vision, let’s address two primary questions as they relate to our global issues and principles:   “What’s working?” “What’s not working?”   To assess trends in the pursuit of the 100% renewable, 100% non-toxic, ecologically abundant and equitable world, we need to look at real-world outcomes and impacts, such as those represented by ecological health indicators, public health indicators, and other quality of life measures. Intermediate economic indicators certainly have value, but they are less helpful, since they can go in a direction considered positive, and yet have negative impacts on ecology, health, and quality of life. Renewable The renewable goal is ultimately about having needed resources in perpetuity from which to draw on to maintain life. The renewables goal reflects the basic logic that if you’re using resources and wish to do so into the future, you need to make sure that what you take gets replenished.   What’s Working? One indicator moving in the right direction is the energy revolution. In 2015, renewable energies comprised over half of new energy installation for the first time4. In 2014, wind power was the #1 new energy source in terms of MW installed as well as the fastest growing source of electricity5. And the price of solar has fallen dramatically since 2010. What used to cost $10 per watt can now be $1-$3, depending on size of system, incentives, and other factors. This cost shift itself is the result of several investments: China subsidizing factory development, more efficient installation practices reducing labor requirements, and more creative financing to reduce or eliminate upfront costs.6   Related to renewable resource use is climate change. The scientific community has been warning us for years that, based on their screening of the facts, climate change is very real and existential threat. Stanford University has been tracking public opinion on climate change for twenty years. In 2013, they found the opinions as shown, by state, in the following maps.   The results show that Americans are in strong agreement with scientists. In 47 of 48 states surveyed, >70% of citizens believe global warming will be a serious U.S. problem.                 What’s Not Working? What hasn’t...