The structure
of global governance will not experience substantial reform by 2020, nor will
we witness an international, unanimous agreement for targeted action to combat
climate change and promote environmental sustainability with binding
legislation. The state, private sphere
and civil society, representing the traditional three sectors of governance,
will do little but maintain the status quo of delayed action and unproductive
rhetoric towards environmental health while the earth slowly loses the ability
to provide its most fundamental ecological service: the sustenance of
life.
The United
Nations will continue to provide an inconsistently effective forum for
multilateral discussion and debate, albeit with a different constituency as
developing countries strengthen and gain dominance within the international
community; China, India and Brazil are such examples. With economic systems largely intact and
increasingly interrelated, the private sector will continue to exploit
comparative advantages, encourage unregulated trade and report record
earnings. At the state level, nations
will uphold their sovereign right to extricate themselves from any international
agreement relating to environmental stewardship with minor consequences, if
any. And finally, civil society
organizations will continue to increase in numbers and pursue their individual
visions of environmental conservation, marked by many successes, many failures,
and little coordination. Overall, little
will change in the structure of global governance.
However, the planet will change. Scientists predict that the ancient glaciers
of Kilimanjaro will melt by 2020.
Brazil's Amazonia has the potential to lose 42% of its tropical rainforest
by 2020. The Maldives will be noticeably
submerged and displaced peoples will become increasingly marginalized and
disadvantaged. Urban pollution over
developing megacities will intensify as Kyoto Protocol negotiations continue to
dawdle. The construction of more wind
turbines, development of more cost-effective and efficient photovoltaics and
growth of higher-yielding biofuel crops will ease the ecological burden and
offer some sense of hope for a salvageable earth. But the predicted ecological deterioration
will come true, and scientists should unabashedly say, "I told you so." So marks the rise of science in global
governance.
As 2020
approaches, the international community will witness the bittersweet validation
of years of scientific research and rigor, which fell by the way side as
economic growth and political convenience ruled the global roost and
effectively ignored the prolific body of evidence pointing to the need for
decisive action and change. Trust in
government will falter and the scientist will join the international discussion
on an equal, if not elevated, platform.
The reason for this will be unanimous; everyone will feel the effects of
global environmental degradation and climate change. As a result, politicians should increasingly
rely on research, data and scientific discourse to design legislation with
environmental integrity at its core.
Scientists from government, industry, non-governmental organizations,
academia and civil society should collectively create the fourth sector of
global governance, the Science Sector, and ensure that local, regional and
international decision-making incorporates the voice of the scientific method
and protects the earth from further damage.
This fourth
sector will not exclude the poor in favor of the wealthy, privilege the
industrialized over the developing, or appeal to the secular but not the
religious. On the contrary, science can
adapt to this planet's diversity, which has rendered the current framework of
global governance largely ineffective in the twenty-first century. Of greater significance is the ability for
individuals and communities, through the extension of science by means of
education, to participate in the global discourse of governance relating to
environmental sustainability. Scientific
pursuits, initiated by the community itself, will broaden understanding of the
local natural environment, increase capacity to alleviate stress and engender
success in securing ecological integrity.
The
restructuring of the international governance paradigm to welcome the
pre-eminent role of the scientist from Northern, Southern, urban and rural
communities will require universal education.
Development funds must make long-term commitments to school
construction, teacher training and community access their first priority with
Southern recipients. Information
technologies to enhance communication and to facilitate data sharing, both
locally and globally, must be installed and maintained. Science, adapted to each culture, must form
the curriculum's foundation. An educated
planet is a confident planet. And the
confident scientist will ensure the planet's sustainable future.
Noah Chutz is an MA candidate at American University studying Natural Resource Management and Sustainable Development
Related materials from the Atlantic Community:
- Marek Kubista: Copenhagen Summit: The Key to Success Is to Include the BRICS
- Jens F. Laurson & George A. Pieler: Europe Has to Get Serious About Energy
- Memo 13: A New Climate Regime: Top-Down Change
- 15
March 16, 2009
Patrick Edwin Moran, Wake Forest University, Platinum Contributor (207)
In his recently published book, Brave New War, John Robb has indicated very clearly how the 21st Century playing field has made possible the emergence of transnational organizations of great power. He has concentrated on the negative roles that such organizations play. The possibility to exist as a parasite with tentacles sunk into many nations and a loose form of hive leadership that is diffuse and not confined geographically has been made by improvements in the transmission of information and the transportation of men and materials. Drug organizations and other forms of organized crime, insurgent political organizations such as Al Qaida, and so forth can use the resources of the nations parasitized, and also withdraw resources by irregular forms of taxation -- drug sales, kidnapping and extortion, etc.
The Fourth Sector proposed by Mr. Chutz must fit into the Robb model of transnational organizations. It must be symbiotic with all nations (except, perhaps, for the most vile among them). It must be a nurturer of all the people of the world. Membership in this Fourth Sector organization will necessarily be voluntary, and individuals will contribute to it as they are willing and able. However, the organization must take responsibility for supporting its members too. There are currently some models for such groups, primarily among human rights organizations, but also among organizations like Kiva and Wikipedia. To start such an organization would require leadership and money.