The panel that has attracted me is the Panel on Informing Effective Decisions and Actions Related to Climate Change. Click on the Full Statement of Task link.
The Statement of Task emphasizes “effective decisions and actions” over and over. My analysis of the environmental sustainability problem concludes that the reason for poor problem solving effectiveness over the past 30 years is use of the wrong paradigm. Problem solvers see the environmental sustainability problem as a “proper coupling” problem and are oblivious to the very high change resistance. In other words, they are obsessed with the technical side of the problem and are ignoring the social side. See this paper in progress for my analysis. The paper is built around an SD model.
That high systemic change resistance is preventing effective decisions and actions is the insight I want to input, because it has the potential to make a large difference. But how to best make this input? I have no real experience here.
Looking over the document, the second page says:
The forth item is the one that interested me:The panel should also provide policy-relevant (but not policy-prescriptive) input to the committee on the following overarching questions:
The mention of “major impediments” seems like a good takeoff point to me. I could write a cover letter with these points:What are the major impediments (e.g., practical, institutional, economic, ethical, intergenerational, etc.) to effectively informing decisions and actions related to climate change, and what can be done to overcome these impediments?
- 1. THE major impediment appears to be high systemic change resistance. This would be supported by attaching the above paper in progress, with some explanation and linking to concepts the panel is familiar with.
2. Until this is overcome, all other actions will suffer from low effectiveness. Progress will be made, but it will probably not be as fast and aggressive as needed. For proof, look at how slowly the world has moved since the fourth IPCC report.
3. A possible problem is this is a social issue and may lie outside the problem boundary, since the National Academies tend to deal only in scientific, and hence technical issues. If so, then the panel faces the delicate task of internal lobbying to enlarge problem boundaries to include social issues like systemic change resistance.
What do SDS members think of this approach?
Would anyone like to participate in developing a serious input to this panel?