magic: moving towards adaptive governance in complexity ... · magic has basic ingredients - (i)...

Moving Towards Adaptive Governance in Complexity: Informing Nexus Security

1. What is special about this project?

2. Quantitative Story-Telling in action – the link between

WP2, WP3 and WP4 and then to WP5 and WP6

3. The role of MuSIASEM in MAGIC

CONTENT OF THE TWO PRESENTATIONS

1. What is special about MAGIC?


It is not the conventional international EU research project in which

each one of the partners recycles, more or less, what it has already

being doing so far, under a common umbrella that vaguely establishes

a relation among the activities of different Work Packages

It is a heterodox international EU research project in which the

partners will have to do things that they never did before (including

the coordinator!) in a way that was never done before. This is not only

a transdisciplinary project (= pieces from different disciplines have to

be patched into new analytical tools) but it is a “transcientific” project:

it is about producing and using science outside the “conventional

paradigms”. It is inspired by the concept of Post-Normal Science.


It is not about the quality of the results but it is about the quality

of the process we develop to obtain them. What will be produced

and transferred are not indications about “optimal solutions” or “the

right price of tons of CO2” but a methodological approach to be

used to guarantee the quality of “a process of production and use of

quantitative information for governance”. The process has to be

flexible in order to be tailored on different problems and contexts.

It is about taming the complexity of impredicativity (chicken-egg

predicaments): you must know “the how” to study “the what”, but at

the same time you must know “the what” to decide about “the how”.

When dealing with complexity you have to learn how to integrate

semantic and syntax, because semantic cannot be replaced by syntax.

As a matter of fact, when dealing with complex situation the more

complicated are the models the less they make sense.

What are the implications of working in a

heterodox project like this one?

A serious responsibility for the partners . . .

The impredicative relation (chicken-egg effect) over the activities of

the different WPs implies that the teams working in any WP depend

on the teams working in any other WP and vice versa. This means

that we have to agree on a program of work and then execute it:

= WP2, WP3, WP4, WP5, WP6, WP7 cannot live without each other,

and WP1 is the life support systems of all of them . . .

In fact we have all to learn and to teach to each other how to integrate

different pieces of transdisciplinarity knowledge and how to do science

in a different way. And we have to “learn from” and “to teach to” other

social actors how to check the quality (usefulness and fairness) of the

story-telling used to frame the issue of sustainability for governance

Not as risky as continuing to work on obsolete projects . . .

How risky is working in a heterodox project?

Research is called research because we do not know what we will find.

Nobody would say that when writing conventional proposals fearing that

research funds will not awarded . . . But in this case we got the money.

And we got the money exactly because we said that we want to try to do

something different!

So we should not be scared to be heterodox, because it seems that the

conventional paradigm adopted so far for generating quantitative

analysis and for framing the issue of sustainability is losing credibility.

In this situation it pays to explore alternative approaches to quantitative

analysis.

This project can really make a difference

And this is an additional responsibility for the partners . . .

MAGIC has basic ingredients - (i) the right mix of expertise in the

consortium; (ii) a set of innovative analytical tools; (iii) a clear vision in

relation to science for governance; (iv) an effective interface with the

EU commission; (v) a strategic plan; (vi) economic resources to be used

to give visibility to its activities. HOWEVER, to make the difference

we need also “commitment” and “hard work” from all of us.

After almost ten years of economic stagnation, with environmental

and social problems exploding out of control all over the planet, for

the first time in decades both the establishment and the general public

are considering the possibility that the actual system of controls is no

longer capable of interpreting the signals coming from the external world.

Probably this may explain why we got the money for MAGIC.

What has to be achieved in this meeting?

We have to start to know and understand better each other. This

is essential to form, as soon as possible, an effective team made of

people with shared goals and a common vision of what to do

Building both a structural organization (by expertise) and a flexible

functional organization (by issue to be tackled) making it possible

to work together after the kick-off meeting

An agreement on a road map for the first 100 days of MAGIC:

(i) due to the fact that WP2, WP3 and WP4 can neither start

nor operate without the inputs of the other two WPs it is essential

to jump-start the process;

(ii) due to the fact that WP4 will later on feed into WP5 and WP6

it is important to decide together the issues to be addressed in WP4

A last special characteristics of MAGIC . . .

At the kick-off meeting there is not a general understanding of

what will be done in the projecy and how. This situation is due to

two main reasons: (i) the concept of “co-production” entails that

the decisions on the case studies and how to apply Quantitative

Story-Telling to them has to be decided together with EU staff

during the project (= now we cannot know exactly what we will do);

(ii) for the special history of the preparation of the proposal (with a

limited involvement of some of the partners);

The fact, that at the kick-off meeting we do not know yet what we will

do, and the fact that we will have to decide together what to do as a

Team, in my view, is a positive one. On the other hand we should

get into this discussion as soon as possible . . . No time to waste.

2. Quantitative Story-Telling in action – the link between

WP2, WP3 and WP4 and then to WP5 and WP6

Call Text - Scope WATER-2b-2015 - Integrated approaches to food security, low-carbon energy, sustainable water management and climate change mitigation

Proposals should aim to: • develop tools and methodologies for

integrating • agriculture, • forestry, • climate change impacts and • adaptation

• with • climate-energy-economic models

and • land-use models,

• using a multi-disciplinary approach; -----------------------^---------------------------------- • consider the potential role, contributions

and limitations of low-carbon options with respect to land and water resources;

• develop a better scientific understanding of the land-water-energy-climate nexus;

• develop integrated strategies and approaches, • at different spatial scales (regional,

national, continental, global), • integrating

• resource efficient land use, • agricultural productivity

improvements, • sustainable water management

and • low carbon energy transition and

• analysing • interactions with the existing

regulatory frameworks and • the potential barriers to

implementation.

Call Text - Impact

Increased understanding of how

water management,

food and

biodiversity

policies are linked together and

to climate

and sustainability goals.

Reduction of the uncertainties about the opportunities

and limitations of low-carbon options, such as

bioenergy technologies and

resource efficiency measures,

in view of relevant near-term policy initiatives.

Contribution to future assessments, including those of the

IPCC, with multidisciplinary and integrated tools.

Sustainable Development goals as the overarching

objectives – but how do the individual goals interact?

Paris+ processes – IPCC or UNFCC – EU inputs?

IPBES looking for new

ways to analyse

MAGIC concept

* Existing narratives – don’t address nexus issues

* Dealing with Hypocognition: models stem

from reductionist analysis their quality depends on the

quality of the choice of narrative

Scale of narratives

* EU scale?

(Commission/Parliament/Co)

* National/Regional?

(CAP regions)

* Global Scale

(planetary boundaries)

* Better analysis addressing the complex, interlinked, multi-

scale character of the nexus (technical incommensurability)

* Better research process in closer partnership with

policymakers, relevant officers, regulators, etc.

Key Challenges:

Quantitative Story-Telling

If it is complex, then you cannot compress its representation

without losing valuable information - Kolmogorov-Chaitin

The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski

All models are wrong, but some are useful - E. Box

Make it as simple as possible, but not simpler - A. Einstein

The truth is in the eyes of the beholder - old saying

When we had all the answers they changed the questions

- Anonymous

Expected Impacts

WHY

Increased understanding of how water management food and biodiversity policies are linked together and to climate and sustainability goals

Contribute to future assessments (including IPCC) with multidisciplinarity and Integrated tools

Reduction of the uncertainties about the opportunities and limitations of low-carbon options such as bioenergy technologies and resource efficiency measures, in view of relevant near-term policy initiatives

Quantitative Nexus Story Telling

Interactions

BY

Raise awareness of the capabilities of research tools & utility of outputs

Identify key contacts within the commission to act as direct stakeholders In the mixed teams

Scenarios/options analysis co-constructed in mixed teams

Share the results with a wider policy peer-review group

Reshape the tools, methods and outputs in the light of the interaction

Contribute directly to a robust quantitative information being used by the Commission

WP4

WP2

WP6

WP5

WP7

WP7

WP3

WP4

WP7

WHAT

Analysis

Multi-Level Integrated Check on the quality of assessment

OPTION SPACE How to define Feasibility, Viability and Desirability

DIAGNOSTIC State-of-play analysis

SIMULATOR Trade-offs and synergy

generated by policy options

Global Drivers and Planetary Boundaries

Key external constraint on EU

EXTERNALIZATION EU effects on others

WP4 WP5 Quality check on narratives

WP6 Quality check on Innovation assessments

Checking the compatibility across directives

Co-production/Beneficiary

WITH/FOR WHOM

* DG ENV * DG RTD * DG ECFIN * DG CLIMA * DG GROWTH * DG ENERGY

* DG Parliamentary Research Services * Impact Assessment European Added Value * STOA Secretariat)

* JRC * EUROSTAT * European Political Strategy Centre (Ex BEPA)

Policy issues

APPLIED TO INFRASTRUCTURES Processes

EU Commission

EU Parliament

Others

Non EU

* IPCC * Local Government * EU society

NEXUS DIALOGUE SPACE Create and maintain the interaction generating mutual learning WP2

QUANTITATIVE NEXUS STORY-TELLING Creating a framework making possible to analyze the implications of the nexus across scales and dimensions

WP4

NEXUS KNOWLEDGE HUB Interactive Website Hotline Science for governance Infographism/material Training WP7

NEXUS INFORMATION SYSTEM Transactional databases Combination of methods MuSIASEM, Water footprint Discourse and policy analysis Multi-level actor Mapping

WP3

Biofuels – potentiality for increasing energy security in a region

Desalination – potentiality for increasing water and food security in a region

Fracking – how low carbon? How important for energy security within WFD? Social and environmental constraints?

Tradable permits – their performance in reducing GHG emissions

GMOs – potentiality for increasing food security in a region

ADAPTATION: water SUPPLY/REQUIREMENT in rural and urban areas – NEXUS implications

ADAPTATION: energy SUPPLY/REQUIREMENT with alternative sources – NEXUS implications

ADAPTATION: food SUPPLY/REQUIREMENT in self-sufficiency (CAP)– NEXUS implications

How CIRCULAR is the economy and how circular can it be?

The NEXUS and the protection of habitats and soil – incompatibilities among directives?

WP5

WP6

NEXUS Dialogue Space

WP4

Quantitative

Story-Telling

about Nexus

Security

WP3

EU

administration WP1

interactions

during the

project

permanent

platform of

interaction

WP7

NEXUS

Knowledge

Hub Quality check on the

assessment of innovations WP6

Quality check on the

narratives behind policies WP5

CASE STUDIES

WP2

NEXUS Information Space

Jump starting this

in the first 100 days

Dialogue/co-production

with EU staff/institutions

Dialogue/co-production

with other social actors

Defining a road map to “jump start” the process

of interaction across the WPs in the next 100 days

One of the most important objectives

of this kick-off meeting . . .

What are the issues to be addressed in the initial

QST? At which scales? In relation to which aspects

that will become relevant in WP5 and WP6?

Even though the decisions on the co-produced QST will

be taken together with EU staff in WP5 and WP6, we can

still identify in the jump-starting phase a few examples of

“elephants in the room” related to problems of

FEASIBILITY, VIABILITY and DESIRABILITY

Expected Impacts

WHY

Increased understanding of how water management food and biodiversity policies are linked together and to climate and sustainability goals

Contribute to future assessments (including IPCC) with multidisciplinarity and Integrated tools

Reduction of the uncertainties about the opportunities and limitations of low-carbon options such as bioenergy technologies and resource efficiency measures, in view of relevant near-term policy initiatives

Quantitative Nexus Story Telling

Interactions

BY

Raise awareness of the capabilities of research tools & utility of outputs

Identify key contacts within the commission to act as direct stakeholders In the mixed teams

Scenarios/options analysis co-constructed in mixed teams

Share the results with a wider policy peer-review group

Reshape the tools, methods and outputs in the light of the interaction

Contribute directly to a robust quantitative information being used by the Commission

WP4

WP2

WP6

WP5

WP7

WP7

WP3

WP4

WP7

WHAT

Analysis

Multi-Level Integrated Check on the quality of assessment

OPTION SPACE How to define Feasibility, Viability and Desirability

DIAGNOSTIC State-of-play analysis

SIMULATOR Trade-offs and synergy

generated by policy options

Global Drivers and Planetary Boundaries

Key external constraint on EU

EXTERNALIZATION EU effects on others

WP4 WP5 Quality check on narratives

WP6 Quality check on Innovation assessments

Checking the compatibility across directives

Looking at the story-telling actually in use to frame sustainability

issues and to determine the choice of quantitative models used to

generate “evidence based policies” we have to decide “which

QST” we want to do and “how we will do it”:

VIDEOS – Bizarre situations – explaning PPTs - documents

WP4

WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE STORY TELLING

THAT WE WANT TO PROPOSE IN RELATION

TO THE CHOSEN ISSUE?

WP2

With Whom?

WP3

How?

HOW TO DO THE QUANTITATIVE CHECKS?

Using MuSIASEM to integrate analytical models and data

HOW TO GENERATE A ROBUST CO-PRODUCTION?

Who to contact within the EU? How? How to better tailor

the story-telling on their concerns?

what

issues

what

checks

what

interactions WP2

WP4

WP3

100 days

jump start

1. What issues should be considered in the jump-start phase?

2. How could they be better framed in a process of QST?

3. What other alternative issues should be considered?

WP5

WP6

Critical overview of the actual

processes generating the choice of:

Narratives behind directives

Narratives behind innovations

implications for the

interaction between

EU policies

implications for the

interaction between

EU policies institutions

100 working days – 20 weeks

kick-off

meeting

summer

school

training

session

15 June 15 Oct 15 Sept 15 Jul 15 Aug

First inputs

of QST

Individuation of NIS applications at different

scales: global, EU, national level, and local WP3

Individuation of NDS actions for the chosen

applications: who to contact,? how?, getting

preliminary feedbacks about the initial QST WP2

WP3 -NIS

Should we focus on

Feasibility, Viability,

or Desirability for

falsification?

What grammars is

needed?

How to generate the

data needed from

available sources?

How to visualize

the results?

WP2 - NDS

Which DG could be

interested?

Whom to contact in the

DG?

What about Eurostat?

How to contact them?

Can we already talk to

someone we know to

get feedbacks?

How to use institutional

leverage (JRC)?

WP4-QST

What is the message

we want to give?

What is an effective

communication?

Deciding about the

content of the folder:

* Videos

* Interactive PPTs

* Short documents

* List of web material

* Additional Reading

Impredicative Decisions Loop

Silvio’s corner – Post-Normal Twitting

The sobering wisdom of Vaclav Smil

Skeptical Energetics – Charlie Hall

Climatic Monitoring – by C.A.

Water level logger – by ?

Andrea’s corner – evidence based or policy based?

THESE ARE JUST IDEAS . . . To be discussed

Fracking observer – by Cristina Madrid (Yale)

We need a

“The Nexus Time

Task Force”!

Teams by expertise

OTHERS . . .

WATER

ENERGY

POLICY

DATA ANALYSIS

# of people

# of people

# of people

# of people

Tasks forces

QST in WP4 Tasks forces QST

in WP5 and WP6

Tasks forces

in WP7 Knowledge

Hub

Website

The Nexus Time

Planet/EU

EU/National

National/Local

MAGIC general objective

• New paradigm on Nexus science for governance

Nexus analysis? Nexus Security? Nexus Consistency?

• Translate new ideas into the Commission

How does the Strategy 2020 tackle the Nexus?

How does Quantitative Story Telling work (1)

* Oh My God - the emperor has no clothes!

* Oh My God - there is an elephant in the room!

EPISTEMOLOGICAL BREAKDOWN

Using a video or some hard evidence to show

that we are dealing with a case of

“Socially Constructed Ignorance”

“To make sense of the complexity of the world so that they can act,

individuals and institutions need to develop simplified, self-consistent

versions of that world. The process of doing so means that much of

what is known about the world needs to be excluded from those

versions, and in particular that knowledge which is in tension or

outright contradiction with those versions must be expunged . . .”

dysfunctional cases of uncomfortable knowledge

have to be ignored in the official story-telling

“socially constructed ignorance”

Rayner, S., 2012. “Uncomfortable knowledge:

the social construction of ignorance in science

and environmental policy discourses”, Economy

and Society, 41(1): 107-125.

Video US Presidents on energy


Using common sense and simple examples to

suggest that an alternative story-telling may be used

to complement and provide additional insights

in relation to the chosen issue

PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE STORY TELLING

Using quantitative analysis capable of checking the:


to compare the robustness, usefulness and fairness

of the story-telling considered

The owner of a bakery in the center of Paris

make good profit because he transforms grains

(flour) – a commodity – into fresh bread

and pastries – high value products

A farmer producing wheat does not

make good profit because he produces a

commodity (redundant in its function),

he competes on the market by keeping

low the price, operating at a low return

on the investment of production factors

Large landowners in colonial times

(thousands and thousands of hectares) Small farmer ploughing his land

(less than 1 hectare)

Oil Minister of Saudi Arabia

(297 Billion Barrels reserves)

Solar PV to power a rural house

(10 kW capacity)

WHAT MAKES THEM RICH

IS THE SIZE OF THE FUND

WHAT MAKES THEM RICH

IS THE SIZE OF THE STOCK

WHAT MAKES THEM POOR

IS THE FLOW/FUND RATIO

WHAT MAKES THEM POOR

IS THE FLOW/FUND RATIO

Fuente: Hall C.A.S., Lambert, J.G., Balogh, S.B. (2014) EROI of different fuels and

the implications for society. Energy Policy 64 141–152

DEPLETION OF STOCKS 100 MJ

This is what

makes you

rich!

Labor Technical

capital Energy Materials

$ costs

$ Revenues BUYING FROM

THE MARKET

$ costs

Economic

Return

Too Low!

Subsidies!

* The product of the total volume of fossil fuels consumed in 2012 (excluding

electricity production) and the average spot prices (import prices) of coal, oil and natural

gas PLUS the product of the volume of electricity consumed in 2012 times and the

average wholesale price of electricity in Europe (without any taxes, transmission and

distribution costs or costs of conversions).

Alberici et al. 2014 Subsidies and costs of EU energy Ecofys by order of the EC, 11/2014

Energy subsidies vs. Expenditures on energy*

in EU28 in 2012

•Energy subsidies: 122 billion €2012 - 0.9% GDP

•Expenditure on energy: 335 billion €2012 - 2.5% GDP

• Subsidies/Expenditures: 36.4%

Egypt (2011)

Energy subsidies 8.5 % GDP

Food subsidies 2.0% GDP

Expenditures in education 3.5% GDP

* IEA/OECD 2015 - IEA Fossil-fuel Subsidies Database – Data from the IEA’s World Energy

Outlook 2015 – IEA:Paris

* Commoner 2012 - A guide to the Political Economy of Reforming Energy Subsidies, IZA Policy

Paper 52 – 12/2012


BACKING-UP THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE

STORY TELLING WITH QUANTITATIVE

ANALYSIS

Using quantitative analysis capable of checking the:


to compare the robustness, usefulness and fairness

of the story-telling considered

Making available this information presented in different

forms [(i) for the general public; (ii) for experienced users;

(iii) adopting scientific standards] using the Knowlege

Hub and covering both technical and social aspects

Quantitative Story Telling uses MuSIASEM to keep

coherence in an integrated assessment of FEASIBILITY,

VIABILITY and DESIRABILITY, requiring different

disciplinary approaches and different scales

the following slides are presented to illustrate WHAT

QST does, and not HOW to do it ( training workshop)

Total

Human

Activity

8,760 hours/year

per capita

100% of THA

POPULATION

SIZE

8-10% (700 – 880 h/year)

Workforce in

Paid Work

Disposable

Human

Activity

Education, Leisure

Cultural-Religion

Unpaid work

Household Chores

Commuting

20-25%

(1,760 – 2,190 h/year)

(700 – 900 h/year) 8 - 10%

(360 – 410 h/year) 4 - 5%

(i)

(ii)

(iii)

Unemployment 5-10% work force

SERVICES &

GOVERNMENT BUILDING &

MANUFACTURING

ENERGY &

MINING

AGRICULTURE &

FISHERY

62% of PW

> 500 h/year p.c.

35% of PW

< 300 h/year p.c.

3% of PW

< 25 h/year p.c.

< 1% of PW

< 10 h/year p.c.

Active

Population Physiological

Overhead

50%

Dependent

Population

Physiological

Overhead

100% 50-60%

40-50%

75-80% (6,570 – 7,000 h/year)

Reproduction & maintenance of individuals

SPAIN 2007

Product.-Consum. Factors (Flow and Fund elements)

Energy (GJ p.c./y)

Human Activity (hrs p.c./y)

Power Capactity (kW p.c./y)

Metabolic Characteristics (Flow/Fund ratios)

Intensity Power Capactity (MJ/kW)

Exosomatic Metabolic Rate (MJ/hour

Level n-1 Household sector

44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6

Level n-2 Service & Government

56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1

Level n-3 Building & Manufacturing

41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3

Level n-3 Energy & Mining

13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1

Level n-3 Agriculture 4.5 48 1.5 92 3.0

Level n whole society

159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2

Level n Whole society 159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2

Level n-1 Household

sector

44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6


work force

Population structure of Japan

In China there is 1 hr

of work out of 5 hrs

of human activity!

In Italy there is 1 hr

of work out of 13 hrs

of human activity!


Energy (GJ p.c./y)







44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6

Labor time in the Household

from 6 hrs/day to 40 minutes!

commuting shopping leisure

from 6 hrs/week to 2 hrs/week

SPAIN 2007


Energy (GJ p.c./y)







44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6


56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1


41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3


13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1



159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2


Labor time in Agriculture

Productivity of labor: 1 kg of grain per hour

Productivity of labor: 700 kg of grain per hour

If the work force of a society is just producing

its own food that society will never become rich . . .

40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 0

20

40

60

80

100

% lab in AG % GNP in AG

Percentage of labor force and GDP in agriculture

versus GDP per capita (US$ - 1991)

GDP per capita

% l

ab

or

forc

e i

n a

gri

cult

ure

%

GD

P i

n a

gric

ult

ure

All developed countries have less than 5% of their work force in agriculture

SPAIN 2007


Energy (GJ p.c./y)







44.5 7,825 27.0 6 1.6


56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1


41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3


13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1



159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2

Level n-3 Energy &

Mining 13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1

Labor time in Energy and Mining

Productivity of labor: 0.01 truck of coal-equivalent needing two workers . . .

Productivity of labor:

1,400 trucks of coal

per worker per day

96% 89% 63%

SPAIN 2007


Energy (GJ p.c./y)






Level n-1 6 1.6 Household sector

44.5 7,825 27.0


56.5 598 7.0 94 8.1


41.0 280 1.5 146 27.3


13.0 8 1.0 1611 13.1



159.0 8,760 38.0 18 4.2

Bio-Economic

Pressure

8% < 0.1% 2.5%

3. The role of MuSIASEM in MAGIC

Chosen Story-Telling (Nexus Security)

Nexus Information Space (Quantitative Analysis)

Nexus Dialogue Space (Validation)

Quantitative Story-Telling Checking the Option Space

(Desirability, Viability, Feasibility)

Knowledge Co-Production

There is nothing “magic” about MuSIASEM, it is just an

organized accounting method (e.g. excel spreadsheet)

It is how we use MuSIASEM that should generate the

MAGIC that we want in QST

The falsification of a narrative does not require an

exhaustive information about all the details of the

territory. What we need is a map telling us that there

are no bridges to go there (VIABILITY CHECK) or

that there is not enough land for doing what we want

to do (FEASIBILITY CHECK)

We have to look for those characteristics that make the

chosen narrative: unfeasible or unviable or undesirable . . .

MuSIASEM helps in making possible a a coherent

accounting across non-equivalent descriptive domains

(1) The metabolic pattern of social-ecological systems


MuSIASEM does, and not HOW ( training workshop)

FUNDS FUNDS

Agro-ecosystem

FLOWS metabolized by ecosystems

sink supply

A.

B. C.

D.

FLOWS metabolized by society

wastes inputs

PATTERN ECOSYSTEM

ACTIVITY

PATTERN SOCIETAL ACTIVITY

• Solar radiation • Water cycle • Nitrogen cycle • Carbon cycle • Other cycles

FAVORABLE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

imports

exports

$

$

COMPATIBLE

SIZE

POPULATION Extensive variables

1,000,000 people (needing food for a year)

FLOW-FUND RATIOS Intensive variables

300 kg p.c./year (food requirement)

300,000,000 kg/year (food consumed)

300,000,000 kg/year (food supplied)

Land uses Extensive variables

500,000 hectares (producing food for a year)

FLOW-FUND RATIOS Intensive variables

600 kg/ha/year (food yield)

Rural Urban

Funds of the ecosystems

FLOWS metabolized by ecosystems

sink supply

A.

B. C.

D.


wastes inputs

PATTERN ECOSYSTEM

ACTIVITY

PATTERN SOCIETAL ACTIVITY

• Solar radiation • Water cycle • Nitrogen cycle • Carbon cycle • Other cycles

FAVORABLE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

1,000,000 people (needing food for a year)

1,000 kg p.c./year (food requirement)

1,000,000,000 kg/year (food consumed)


50,000 hectares (producing food for a year)

8,000 kg/ha/year (food yield)

Fossil Energy STOCKS

Technical inputs Emissions

$

imports

exports

$


(i)

(ii)

(iii)

Urban

SIZES ARE NOT

COMPATIBLE DEPLETION

DEGRADATION

EXTERNALIZATION

A.

B. C.

D.

Funds of the society


wastes inputs

STOCKS

HOW MUCH SOCIETAL ACTIVITY

IMPORTS

$

FLOW/FLOW SECURITY

Metabolic Pattern of Socio-Ecological System

in the “Delirium of Urban Elites”

Ma

kin

g

Deb

ts

Prin

tin

g

Mo

ne

y PONZI

SCHEME

POPULATION SIZE (independent variable)

CONSUMPTION PER CAPITA (independent variable)

GROWING UNEQUITY

TRANSITIONAL STATE

Global debt has increased by $57 trillion since 2007, outpacing world GDP growth

246 269 286

Gloobal stock of debt outstanding by type

US$ trillion, constant 2013 exchange rate

February 2015

Total debt

as % of GDP

+ 57 trillion

87

142

199

2000 2007 2Q 2014

http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/economic_studies/debt_and_not_much_deleveraging

199 trillion =

286% world GDP


MuSIASEM does, and not HOW ( training workshop)

MuSIASEM helps in making possible a a coherent

accounting across non-equivalent descriptive domains

(2) The NEXUS security Tool-kit

People THA

HH

Primary Energy Sources

Energy Carriers

Mines

EM

Minerals

Aquifers blue water

WS

PW

Post-Harvest

Transport

Healthcare Education

SG

Government

Media Leisure

Financial

Tourism

Distribution AG

Managed Agroecological Funds

Food

Internal View

External View

Manufacturing

Industry Post-Harvest

Construction

BM

PC

THE PROCESSOR

An epistemic tool to explore the complex organization of functional

and structural elements across levels and scales

Internal fund

elements

Internal flow

elements

Resources Waste, Emissions

Pollutants

Internal Secondary Inputs

External Primary Inputs

INTERNAL

VIEW

EXTERNAL

VIEW

It provides the external

referent of the expected

values of benchmarks at

each hierarchical level

It makes it possible to do

the scaling of metabolic

characteristics across levels

Result

AG

WS

EM

BM

Processes outside

human control

Primary Sectors Secondary Sector SG

Tertiary Sector

HH

Final Consumers

institutions

institutions

know-how

know-how

language

values

identity

BEP

SEH

know-how

Soils Aquifers Terrestrial

Ecosystems Aquatic

Ecosystems Local

Atmosphere

Globl

Atmosphere

Flows Funds

AG

EM WS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 8

Gross Requirement

of INTERNAL inputs

WHOLE

SOCIETY

ECOLOGICAL FUNDS

SG

Gross Requirement of EXTERNAL inputs

AG

WS

HA PC BW F2

AG

EM

WS

BM HH

Societal

Funds

External

Material

Flows

Internal

Material

Flows

F1 E2 E1 LU

SG VIABILITY

FEASIBILITY

DESIRABILITY

Natural Stocks

Ecological Funds

SUPPLY

SINK

energy

carriers

nutrient

carriers

blue

water

power

capacity

human

activity land

uses

Animal, fishes & crops

Primary Energy Sources

Aquifers & Green Water

EM

Enduses matrix

Sudoku

Environmental Impact Matrix

dSi

-dSe

Identity

Externalization Matrix

SG HH

BM WS

AG EM

Expected

benchmarks END USES

MATRIX

DESIRABILITY

2

4

5

6

7 ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT MATRIX

FEASIBILITY

DOMESTIC

EXTERNALIZATION MATRIX Primary External Inputs

RAW

MATERIALS

Secondary Internal Inputs GOODS &

SERVICES Boost given by

trade & credit EMBODIED

IMPORTS

SUDOKU

EFFECT

VIABILITY

HH

EM BM

WS

magic: moving towards adaptive governance in complexity ... · magic has basic ingredients - (i)...

Documents