Outline: Systems Thinking basics Water system Soil System Forest system Biodiversity (with Fisheries as sub-example) Resources Pollution Global Warming Population Poverty Summary

Questions to ask What flows (material, energy, information)? Where does it flow and in what quantity? How does flow affect parts? What do the parts do to other flows? Where do those flows go? Do things pile up (stock) somewhere? What do stocks mean to flows? What could be a good balance & how to get there?

Model parts Model inputs & outputs Model goals Model Causal Links Model same/opposite directions Model speed of links Model loops, balance/re-inforcements

Name the phenomenon (center process) Find the most important processes Find how they feed back to each other (think adding/reducing quantities) Define the boundary – name the environment Find problems, limitations and delays Ask how what causes the problems Fix the processes with something better that affects the whole system (go through the loops and see what happens with your fix)

Tragedy of the Commons A common resource is shared by few and they enjoy it. They tell about this to others who come to enjoy it (reinforcing loop), but all this use diminishes the common resource, until it is destroyed, because nobody takes care of it and thus, tragedy ensues. Often 2*reinforcing + 2*balancing with a delay to the use of the resource. Shifting the Burden 2*balancing loops + 1 reinforcing loop that ties the balancing loops together => balancing loop effects become reinforcing Balancing the Delay Accidental Adversaries Success to the Successful The more successful you are the more success you get, the more successful you are, etc… Two reinforcing loops Accidental Adversaries Two reinforcing loops compete. Both reinforce their own success, but reinforcing self slows down the other, which causes the other to try to fight harder to reinforce self, causing more slowdown to the first, etc. 3*reinforcing loops + 2*balancing loops. Drifting Goals One balancing loop tries to retain status quo of a system, while another one tries to re-balance the same system to a new state. With different goals, these balancing loops end up fighting. 2*balancing loop (different direction, in regards to the system state) Escalation Two balancing loops end up as one big reinforcing loop, loosing the balance and escalating the situation. 2*balancing loop in the same direction (in regards to the system state).

Some othe archetypal examples explained: Shifting the burden: fixing the wrong problem (symptom) while reducing fixes on the actual root cause, and eventually worsening the initial problem and creating new problems of their own Tragedy of the commons : too many use up shared resource, until it's useful capacity is used up and the resource is destroyed or severely damaged (think public lawns that nobody takes care of) Accidental adversaries: two parties keep 'fighting' over their respective actions, spending much of their energy in dispute, rather than creating common good for both and hurting their own and the other parties performance

For more, see: McLuhan's Tetrad Systems resist change, even if they are out of balance Inverse U growth response curve: first you get a desired response, then you up the feedback and you get reverse response Beware of what you design… Systemic things emerge, they are beyond our imagination to control 100%

- We start with a resource here in the center (in the oval). Will be same in other examples. The rest of the images are human activities that affect other activities or the resource through feedbacks Farmers losing water to cities City dwellers using more and more water We consume 4L daily in drinking, 150L in washing, 2000 L in our food (that requires the water to be produced and delivered). Example bottled water is up to 2000 times as resource wasteful as tap water Tar sands (an example of unconventional heavy oil to replace dwindling conventional oil) uses 4 barrels of water for each 1 barrel of oil Irrigation is depleting groundwater resources at the rate of 1% to 2% per year in many parts of Asia (they'll be gone in 30-70yrs at this rate, if nothing is done) Some places are already depleted and esp. farmers in parts of India as an example are being hit hard by water shortages Water shortage in farming then eventually influences food production, that nutrition, poverty, stability, etc Glacier melting stores about 75% of world's freshwater resources. This is naturally replenished in stable conditions by rainfall and sub-zero temps However increased global temperatures are causing some glaciers to run dry, causing water issue problems in rivers downstream Also, if all glaciers were to melt, the water level would rise c. 70 meters, which would flood all pretty much of the world's big cities and all coastal areas (however, this being a slow atmospheric process, would take a long-long time to be fully completed and it's not guaranteed it would happen at all)

World total irrigation is going down, because groundwater resources (and rivers) are running down More than 3billion people depend partially or in whole on food produced via artificial irrigation Much of the energy rich Middle East is hitting the wall already or in c. 5 years China, India, Pakistan, etc. are hitting a groundwater depletion issues in some parts, much more to follow if practices are not changed

Once water becomes scarce and surrounding forests (which tie moisture) are cut, soil runs the risk of depleting This is especially so in heavy and industrial agriculture The soil is kept producing by pouring energy into the soil in forms of fertilizers (and *cides) All this reduced the natural quality of the soil, makes it thinner and along with dryness and lack of trees & other protective vegetation risks the soil to dust storms Dust storms can blow away the still producing – even if dry – soil in winds and leave the earth very barren and hard to grow stuff on This can result in more river deltas being taken into fertilization, more cutting down of trees, more drying up…

Grain production is shrinking Total World grain stocks peaked – for now - 10 years ago This at the time when we are producing historical record crops almost each year It is just a matter of time before we get a really harsh winter or a bad dry year and don't get a record crop (this always happens, it's a matter of natural occurences and basic statistical probability) Drought is increasingly more common (US, AUS, AFR) Arable land is shrinking and in increasing demand Soil is depleting – kept producing with fossil fuels Food grains are being turned in to biofuels Prices are going up We are eating out of stock piles, that is we are consuming more grain for several years, than we are growing new. This can only continue as long as there is stock left

Forests are a natural source of wide biodiversity, water cycles, moisture capture and soil regeneration We are cutting down more woods for farming, cattle, biofuels, urban development, etc Once forest is gone, the land is more susceptible to drying Burning the forests releases CO2 cultivating and burning (current generation) biofuels also releases more CO2 throughout their lifecycle Loss of woods as a ground stabilizer causes more mud slides, flash floods and flooding in general Cattle farming (increasing meat production due to growing consumption) is one big driver of de-forestation

In the short span of 10 years both Arctic forests and many rainforests were under stress In fact, of the remaining c. 2.7 billion hectares of existing forest that could be used for other purposes, 68% is 'under threat' now or in the near future We will need at the very least 1.7 Bha of more cultivable land (that is cut down forests) to ensure food production for the growing population – even if we run record high crops each year cattle farming, biofuels and urban development also take their share However, if we were to cut down +60% of the remaining forests, much of it rainforests, the destruction to biodiversity, increases to CO2 emissions and human suffering would probably be unimaginable. We have to find another way

Reduction in forests drives much (not all) of the loss in biodiversity Biodiversity is the source of our carrying capacity. When biodiversity is reduced, so is our carrying capacity Further, we run risk of higher systemic failures (unexpected) if biodiversity is reduced a lot (think disappearing bees example) So carrying capacity is the source of systems resilience, that is it's ability to weather and recover from shocks industrial use of our natural resources often leads to reduction of biodiversity. This does not be so. Industrial Ecology is a field which deals with these issues also in sustainable manner, but it's not yet as popular as it perhaps should be

Extinction rate is growing at an exponential rate This means that we are losing much more species each day than yesterday The current loss of biodiversity has been compared to the late Triassic extinction period, during which the then dominant species (dinosaurs) died out

Fisheries should respond to natural balacing cycle: the more we fish, the less fisheries we have, so the less we can fish However, we are still responding to reduction in fisheries through more intensive fishing More intensive fishing means more indiscriminate and deeper fishing We are catching (for our industrial use) completely useless fish and fish that are not yet sexually reproductive This further reduces the ability of fisheries to replenish and runs the risk of population collapse in fisheries

Fisheries are collapsing Several big fish populations have collapsed Biggest edible industrial fished fish are at the verge of extinction Farmed fish is expensive, mono-cultured and prone to collapses from diseases, pollutes the water around the farms

Resources could be any natural resources, but here we deal with industrially useful minable resources The more resources we have, the more we can mine The more we mine, the more energy (fossil resources) we use The more we use fossil fuels and mine, the more economic activity it creates The more economy grows, the more it needs mined natural resources This can lead to nasty reinforcing cycles, until the resources start to become increasingly scarce Scarcity of highly important resources (minable or otherwise) can often lead to fighting over them, even to total war (over oil, gas, water, land, etc)

All finite depleting natural resources follow a production curve This production curve shows daily production volume as a function of time The shape of the curve is roughly like a normal (Gaussian) curve (although more exactly usually a logistic function) Once c. 50%-60% of a minable depleting resource has been produced, the dialy production volume starts to go down This is regardless of increased efforts, money and energy spent to mine the remaining resource (in fact it would fall faster with no additional increase in efforts) So, money cannot break physics: it takes more energy/time/technology/manpower to get out each remaining unit of mineral after each day The point of maximum daily production is called the peak All minable resources are found, their production accelerates, slows down, peaks, decline kicks in, accelerates, goes down rapidly and then slows down No amount of "innovation" or "technology" can solve this, it can only slightly change the shape of the peak and decline after the peak (this is due to basic physics) So, we have to start transferring from mineral mining of fresh sources (land) to re-mining used up resources (waste). That means re-cycling

This is a very rough overview Economic growth requires ever increasing consumption Increasing consumption means increasing waste (other things being equal) Increasing consumption requires more production, which has so far lead mostly to increasing production More waste and more pollution quite often (not always) lead to more toxins More waste/pollution/toxins offer new business opportunities to companies that are given the job of cleaning up This increased activity drives more economic growth The cycles are self-perpetuating and reinforcing There are balancing cycles here as well - can you find them?

OECD countries account for most waste & pollution, even if they have outsourced some of it to resource extracting countries Finland as example: CO2 emissions have grown steadily as income has grown In many cases, without additional regulation/intervetion (and often regardless of it), waste/pollution grows steadily as a function of income (consumption)

Very short illustration to some of the feedbacks between Global warming and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other environmental issues Deforestation and fossil fuel burning drive GHG Industrial farming along with it's fossil fuel based fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and fungicides drive GHG Meat production and livestock in general produce a lot of GHG emissions and drive deforestation Depleting soil (and desertification) reduce vegetation's ability to bind CO2 -> GHG increase Melting of glaciers lose their albedo effect, turning more of the incoming solar radiation to heat, thus increasing the effect of warming

Meat production Meat consumption per person is growing as is the number of meat eaters Energy consumption: 1 kg cow meat ~ 450 kg soy protein Meat production greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalent) bigger than all of transport Soy (from Africa) for cattle (in Latin America) to beef (in Europe) => Highly energy intensive chain and prone to break down risks

A Sankey Diagram (flow diagram) of GHG emissions Heating (buildings), Industry, transport and food production cause most of the emissions Waste per se is but a miniscule part (<5%) 99% of mechanized transport is fossil fuel based (almost all oil based) Almost all of industrial agriculture is oil based All of global trade is oil based (shipping, airplanes, trucking, trains, etc)

Population growth is the key driver to environmental resource overusage Second part is of course increased consumption per capita Eventually all depleting resources will balance the population growth cycle downwards However, this balancing is a slow feedback and takes time

World population still growing near exponentially, but showing initial signs of slowing down (past 10 years or so) The lowest scenarios on the graph imply a collapse in population due to humanity catastrophes We are in carrying capacity overshoot since mid 80s In effect, we are consuming resources of our future selves and those of the future generations (because they won't be replenished by their time) So we are consuming from the future, but doing it now All systems that go into an overshoot, eventually come back down to a more sustainable level The important question for us is: how will that happen. We can influence that ourselves To understand the importance of exponential growth in any system, including population growth, google: dr Albert Bartlett population growth

Poverty and economic growth link to all of the previous environmental challenges Soil depletion and lack of food & water drive people into poverty Having to work all day for food/water, leaves very little time/effort/energy for education or running welfare socities Poverty and lack of education usually means also higher birth rates Even countries that are rich in natural resources can become really poor (google: The Dutch Disease or Resource Curse – to find out more) Poverty, incoming foreign aid, lack of education and many other issues often combine together into increased corruption If resource scarcity is severe enough and especially if fossil fuels or other highly important minerals (gold, diamonds, etc) are involved, this can lead to resource wars

Pretty much all consumption and resource usage has been accelerating at exponential rate for the past 100 years. This cannot go on in a finite, limited system like earth We are starting to hit limits to growth and actually are above carrying capacity of many sub-systems (in terms of their sustainability into future) We will have to come down from this increased exponential growth curve Either we crash hard, or we manage an ordered transition The choice is up to us

Environmental Challenges A Systems Overview Systems Thinking ABC Resources Water Biodiversity Soil Deforestation Pollution Climate Population Poverty Summary

Systems Thinking ABC

What is a System? Simply defined, a system is a complex whole the functioning of which depends on its parts and the interactions between those parts: physical, such as river systems biological, such as living organisms designed, such as automobiles abstract, such as philosophical systems social, such as families human activity, such as systems to ensure the quality of products From: Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers, M.C. Jackson, Wiley, 2003 “System means a grouping of parts that operate together for a common purpose.” – Jay W. Forrester

Example: CO2 Circulation "The Tao begot one, one begot two, two begot three. The three begot the ten thousand things. The ten thousand things embrace Yin and express Yang. Harmony is achieved by combining these forces." – from Tao Te Ching

Systems are about Connectedness “If you wish to understand a system, and so be in a position to predict its behavior, it is necessary to study the system as a whole. Cutting it up into bits for study is likely to destroy the system’s connectedness, and hence the system itself.” “If you wish to influence or control the behavior of a system, you must act on the system as a whole. Tweaking it in one place in the hope that nothing will happen in another is doomed to failure—that’s what connectedness is all about.” – Dennis Sherwood "The purpose of a system is what it does." – Stafford Beer From: Seeing the Forest from the Trees—A Manager's Guide to Applying Systems Thinking, Dennis Sherwood, 2002.

Simple Causal Loop Diagrams Eat Have Energy Eat Hunger Eat Sugar Feel energetic Eat Fiber Feel energetic Eat Have Energy + – Eat Hunger + + – + R e-inforcing cycle B alancing cycle Same direction Opposite direction Fast link Slow link

External Environment How to Think Systems "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" – Upton Sinclair Process 2 Process 3 Process 1 Boundary Goal Input Output Input Output Output + + - + -

System Archetypes Fixes that Fail Limits to Growth Economic Growth Consumption Natural Resources + + + - + Tragedy of the Commons, Shifting the Burden, Success to the Succesful, Accidental Adversaries, Drifting Goals, Escalation, etc. “When one plays with archetypes one should know what the archetypes are one is playing with.” – Neil Gaiman

Systems Archetypes 15.1.2010 How to Change the World - Environment 9 From: Whole System Design, Stasinopoulos et al., 2009.

Yesterday's solutions => Today's problems Harder you push => Harder the system pushes back Behavior grows better before it grows worse Easy way out => Leads back in ('fixes that fail') Cure can be worse than the disease Faster is slower Cause & effect not closely related in time and space Small changes => big results … But highest leverage often the least obvious Have your cake and eat it too – but not at once Dividing the elephant ≠ two small elephants There is no one to blame From: The Fifth Discipline, Peter M. Senge, Doubleday, 1990. "We shape our tools and they in turn shape us" — Marshall McLuhan Laws of the Systems Thinking

Water

Water 15.1.2010 12 How to Change the World - Environment + + 2000x 2000 L 4x 4 L -1% - -2%/yr 75% 60 M/yr

Water Depletion 15.1.2010 How to Change the World - Environment 13 Countries Overpumping Aquifers Country Year Grain Ppl affected Israel – past – ALL – 7M Yemen – 2015 – 24 Mt – 23M Saudi – 2016 – 15Mt – 30M China – 201? – 40Mt – 130M India – 20?? – 36Mt – 170M … Overusing popul. total: 3 300M

Soil

Soil 15.1.2010 15 How to Change the World - Environment

Grain Production Peak “The world has produced less grain than it consumes for several years now." – NFU, 2008 fas.usda.gov

Deforestation

Forests 15.1.2010 18 How to Change the World - Environment

Deforestation 15.1.2010 How to Change the World - Environment 19 Source: The Nature Conservancy Pressure for Forest : Next 20yrs Available cultivable forest : 2.7 Bha - Future grain production : 1.7 Bha - Cattle / feedstock : ~ 100 Mha Biofuel production : 54 Mha Forests under threat : 68% => CO2 emissions: 5Gt/yr*50yr (currently 8Gt/yr, should be 2Gt)

Biodiversity

Biodiversity 15.1.2010 21 How to Change the World - Environment - + + + - + +

Extinction 15.1.2010 How to Change the World - Environment 22 NB! Log plot "The extinctions ongoing worldwide promise to be at least as great as the mass extinction that occurred at the end of the age of dinosaurs." — Edward O. Wilson

Fisheries 15.1.2010 23 How to Change the World - Environment

Fisheries collapse "You overlap all of this and you see you're potentially putting a death nail in the coffin of world fisheries." – UNEP Overexploitation of Fisheries increasing Yet catch has not gone up in 20+ yrs

Resources

Resources 15.1.2010 26 How to Change the World - Environment

Resource Depletion 15.1.2010 How to Change the World - Environment 27 " I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use our natural resources, but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob by wasteful use, the generations that come after us. " – Theodore Roosevelt

Pollution

Waste / Pollution / Toxins 15.1.2010 29 How to Change the World - Environment

Environmental Pollution 15.1.2010 How to Change the World - Environment 30 “Pollution is nothing but the resources we are not harvesting. We allow them to disperse because we've been ignorant of their value.” – Buckminster Fuller

Climate

Global Warming 15.1.2010 32 How to Change the World - Environment

“Livestock's greenhouse emissions are bigger than all of transport." – LEAD FAO livestock’s long shadow Food Industry CO2 Emissions ≈ 450 x

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Population

Population Growth 15.1.2010 36 How to Change the World - Environment

"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." - Dr. Albert Bartlett Population growth drives all

Poverty

Poverty 15.1.2010 39 How to Change the World - Environment

Summary

1750 1900 2010 1950 1850 1800 Temp GDP CO2 Population Cars Water use Investments Fishery loss Species loss Deforestation © New Scientist, 2008 Paper use Environment Summary

Thank you & Good speed! “There are no passengers on spaceship Earth" - Buckminster Fuller