In 2015, we saw two fantastic, hopeful breakthroughs for humanity. First, the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals, the collective, universal plan for humanity to eradicate hunger, [promote] good economic development and good health, within global environmental targets. Secondly, after 21 years of negotiations, we adopted the legally binding Paris Agreement, all nations in the world keeping global warming under two degrees Celsius, aiming at 1.5 degrees Celsius. Today, three years down the line, we're still in the hand-waving business.
人類在 2015 年有 2 項 很棒且很有希望的突破。 第一,採用了永續發展目標, 它是人類的集體、全體計畫, 旨在根絕饑荒, 推動好的經濟發展以及健康的好處, 是在全球環境目標之下的計畫。 第二,在 21 年的協商之後, 我們採用了有法律約束力的巴黎協議, 全世界的所有國家要讓全球暖化 維持在攝氏 2 度之內, 目標是攝氏 1.5 度。 現今,已經 3 年過去了, 我們還談連邊都碰不著。
Now, I think it's time to step back one step and recognize that I wonder if the world leaders really knew what they signed at the General Assembly three years ago. These are universal, aspirational, transformational goals for inclusive, prosperous humanity on a stable earth system. But there are underlying problems. We have inherent contradictions between these goals, where there's the risk of pursuing one favored goal at the expense of others. Take, for example, Goal 8, on decent work and economic growth. If we continue doing that by exploiting natural resources and burning fossil fuels, it will be impossible to reach Goal 13. Three years down the line, we simply must admit we're seeing limited action to really, really address this as an inclusive, collective, universal package.
我認為,現在是該 退一步的時候了, 該承認我很納悶三年前 在聯合國大會上, 世界領導人們是否知道 自己簽了什麼。 這些是全體的、 有抱負的、轉型的目標, 在穩定的地球系統上, 讓人類能夠共榮。 但這背後有些問題。 在這些目標之間, 本來就有所矛盾, 追求一個目標時, 代價可能會是另一個目標。 比如,以第 8 項目標為例: 尊嚴工作帶動經濟成長。 若我們持續這麼做的方式 是使用自然資源和燃燒化石燃料, 就不可能達成第 13 項目標。 已經過了 3 年,我們必須要承認, 我們很少有看到任何行動 真正將這個議題 當作廣泛、集體、全體的 一組整體來處理。
Now, this requires us to step back one step. I think we have to ask ourselves some hard questions: Do we have any chance of accomplishing the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030? Are there actually inherent trade-offs that are not compatible with our current development paradigm? But are there, perhaps, synergies where we can really accelerate change? And is it really a people-planet agenda, really taking seriously the social and economic aspirational goals within the life-support systems on earth?
這就需要我們向後退一步。 我認為我們必須要問 我們自己一些困難的問題: 我們是否有機會在 2030 年 完成永續發展目標? 是否在本質上有一些取捨 和我們目前的發展範式不相容? 但,有沒有協同合作等等 可以讓我們真正加速改變? 它真的是一個 「人類—地球」議程, 真正有在地球的生命維持系統之下 嚴肅考量有抱負的 社會和經濟目標?
Now, citizens across the world have started to recognize that we're facing global rising environmental risks; in fact, that a stable planet is a prerequisite to have good human well-being on earth. We need to define a safe operating space on a stable earth system, and the planetary boundary framework was introduced by the scientific community in 2009 to do exactly that. It has now been widely embraced across the world in policy, business and communities as a framework for sustainable development in the Anthropocene.
全世界的公民都開始認知到 我們正面臨全球性的 環境風險都在上升; 事實上,穩定的星球 是必要的前提條件, 然後人類才有可能 在地球上安康樂利。 我們需要在穩定的地球系統上 定義出一個安全生存空間, 2009 年,科學界提出了 地球限度架構, 就是這個目的。 這個架構現在已 在全世界被廣為接受, 在政策、企業,以及社區內 被當作是人類世的永續發展架構。
This slide really shows the framework with the nine environmental processes that regulate the stability of the earth system, providing a safe operating space, where we'll have a high chance of having good human well-being and prosperity and equity. If we move into the yellow zone, we enter a dangerous uncertainty zone; and into the red, we have a high likelihood of crossing tipping points that could take us irreversibly away from the ability of the earth system to provide social and economic well-being for humanity.
這張投影片上的就是這個架構, 及 9 個環境過程, 用以調節地球系統的穩定度, 提供安全生存空間, 我們才能有很大的機會能達成 安康樂利、繁榮興盛,以及平等。 如果我們移入黃色地帶, 就是進入了危險的不確定地帶; 紅色地帶則表示 很有可能過了臨界點, 會讓地球系統越來越 無法為人類提供社會 和經濟的安康樂利, 而這是個不可逆的後果。
Now, we can today, scientifically, quantify these boundaries, providing us a stable earth system for humanity. But we have to go beyond this and recognize the Sustainable Development Goals -- if we really want to seriously accomplish them -- must now occur within this safe operating space. We need to achieve SDGs within PBs.
現今,我們可以用科學的方式 將這些限度給量化, 提供人類一個穩定的地球系統。 但我們必須要超越它, 要認知到永續發展目標—— 若我們真心想要認真達成它們—— 現在就必須要在這個 安全生存空間中發生。 我們需要在地球限度之內 達成永續發展目標。
But dear friends, not even this is enough. We need to recognize that the Sustainable Development Goals is 12 years away. It's only a milestone. It is the bull's-eye that we need to go through and zoom ourselves towards transformations where we can have a good future for all co-citizens on earth, nine billion plus, within a stable earth system in 2050 and beyond.
但,親愛的朋友們, 就算這樣也還不足夠。 我們必須要認知到, 要達到永續發展目標,只剩十二年。 它只是一個里程碑。 它是我們需要穿過的靶心, 將我們自己推向轉變, 才能為地球上的所有共同公民 創造出一個美好未來, 讓超過 90 億人 生活在穩定的地球系統中, 在 2050 年達成並持續下去。
This is a quest, and in order to really explore this and not have only opinions about it, we gathered the scientific community, the best thinkers and modelers and started to develop a completely new complex systems dynamic model, the Earth-3 model, building on models that have been around for the last 50 years. And here it is. This is a fantastic piece of work. This has a climate module, a biosphere module, a global economic model; it has algorithms, it has the whole room of fantastic accomplishments. This is what turns us scientists on.
這是一項追尋, 為了要真正去做探索, 而不只是有口頭意見, 我們集結了科學界, 最好的思想家和建模者, 開始發展一個全新的 複雜系統動態模型, 「地球 3 號」, 建基於這 50 年已有的模型。 就是它。 它是個很棒的傑作。 它有氣候模組、生物圈模組、 全球經濟模組; 它有演算法, 它有一大堆不凡的成果。 它能讓我們科學家動情。(笑聲)
(Laughter)
我的意思是,它是很美好的傑作。
I mean, this is just a beautiful piece of work? And I'd just love to spend the whole evening walking this through with you, but I'll make you disappointed. I cannot do that. In fact, the only thing I can do with you is just to assure you that this is the first time it's done. Nobody has ever tried to really analytically combine the Sustainable Development Goals with planetary boundaries. And we were able to find patterns and really convergent trends that gives us a lot of confidence in our ability to now project economic development, resources use from water, food and energy, population growth, income per person, yet along these consistent and systemic pathways. So, it's the first time we have a robust opportunity to really explore the futures of ability of attaining the SDGs within PBs.
我很想要用整晚的時間 帶各位了解它, 但我會讓你們失望。 我無法這麼做。 事實上,我唯一能為你們做的 就是向你們保證它是史無前例的。 從來沒有人試圖在分析面上 將永續發展目標和地球限度結合。 我們有辦法找到模式 和真正的收斂趨勢, 這讓我們很有信心, 相信我們現在有能力可以企劃 經濟發展、 水、食物,和能源的資源使用、 人口成長、人均收入, 而且還能維持一致性和系統性。 這是頭一次,我們有 穩定健全的機會, 能夠真正去探索未來在地球限度之內 達成永續發展目標的能力。
Now, how do we do this? Well, look at this. Here, you have the data coming from the real world, calibrated from 1970-2015: 100,000 data points around the world, building on seven regions' ability, of really picking on all these Sustainable Development Goals. Now, one example of how we calibrated this, here you have [data] for Sustainable Development Goals on eradicating poverty, health, education and food. And here you have in the bubbles the seven regions of the world, how they move up until 2015 in our empirical observations in relation to GDP per capita, giving these universal convergent trends, which enabled us to create regressions that could make us able to do simulations into the future, all the way until 2050, showing the ability along the lines here to attain the SDGs.
我們要如何做到?看看這個。 這裡,有來自真實世界的資料, 校正為 1970 年到 2015 年: 全世界的 10 萬個資料點, 表示 7 個地區真正能處理 所有這些永續發展目標的能力。 舉例來說明我們如何校正它, 這裡有永續發展目標的資料, 內容是關於根除貧窮、 健康、教育,以及食物。 這些泡泡是世界上的 7 個區域, 可以看見截至 2015 年, 隨著這些區域的人均 GDP 相關經驗觀察值如何向上爬升, 產生這些全球的收斂趨勢, 讓我們能建立迴歸模型, 這麼一來就可以做出 一直到 2050 的未來模擬, 呈現出用這裡的方式 來達成永續發展目標的能力。
Now, this gave us the opportunity of doing several scenarios, testing different possible futures: business as usual, global transformations, investment schemes in business, different governance options, policies, finance -- really, to explore what the future can look like in our ability to attain the SDGs within PBs. And the results, I can tell you, really surprised us. And this will be the first time it's shown. It should actually not even be referenced outside of this room.
這讓我們有機會可以做幾種情境, 測試不同的可能未來: 照常營運,全球轉型, 企業的投資計畫, 不同的治理選項, 政策,金融—— 去探究以我們在地球限度的範圍內 達成永續發展目標的能力, 未來可以變成什麼樣子。 我可以告訴各位的是, 結果讓我們很驚訝。 這將會是頭一次呈現出來。 甚至在這間房間以外的地方 都不應該提到它。
Now, it actually is presented along two axes. The y-axis here shows our ability to stay within planetary boundaries. The higher up, the closer you are to the safe operating space. On the x-axis are the Sustainable Development Goals; the further to the right, the more of the SDGs we fulfill. We all want to be in the upper right-hand corner, the safe and just world for the future. Now, the point you see there is 1980. We were in a situation where we actually were in a safe operating space but not meeting so many of the SDGs. Here's the trend up until 2015. So this is the conventional world, which is actually delivering on an increasing number of SDGs, lifting millions of people out of poverty, but doing it at the expense of the safe operating space on earth.
它其實是用兩個軸來呈現。 這裡的 Y 軸是我們保持 在地球限度內的能力。 越上面就表示你越接近 安全生存空間。 X 軸是永續發展目標; 越右邊表示我們能實現 越多永續發展目標。 我們都希望能落在右上角, 表示未來有安全且公平的世界。 各位看到的這個點,是 1980 年。 我們當時的情況是 處在安全生存空間中, 但還沒有實現很多永續發展目標。 這是一直到 2015 年的趨勢。 這是傳統的世界, 它真的能實現越來越多的 永續發展目標, 讓數百萬人脫離貧困, 但這麼做的代價卻是 地球上的安全生存空間。
Now, this is the scenario business as usual, into the future. If we just move on as today, we will be able to deliver on some of the SDGs, but we'll do it at the expense of the stability of the earth system. Now, what if we go faster on economic growth and really ally on one percent increase per year of income and an even tripling of the world economy by 2050? That would give us the following trajectory. We would, yes, go a little bit further on SDG accomplishments, but still at the expense of the risk of destabilizing the planet. But what if we really go harder? What if we increase our ability to deliver on our promises by 30 percent across all sectors in society, from climate to our trade agreements? A harder scenario would take us a little bit better, but still, we're failing on the SDGs, and we are not accomplishing a safe operating space for humanity.
這就是照常營運, 朝未來前進的情境。 如果我們就這樣走下去, 我們將能夠實現一些永續發展目標, 但我們會付出的代價是 地球系統的穩定度。 如果我們把經濟成長加速, 真正做到每年收入增加 1%, 甚至到了 2050 年 讓世界經濟變成 3 倍呢? 那就會產生下列的軌跡。 的確,我們在永續發展目標的 完成度上會有進步, 但代價仍然會是有讓地球 穩定度下降的風險。 但如果我們真的很努力呢? 如果把我們實現 諾言的能力增加 30%, 涵蓋社會上的各個部門, 從氣候到貿易協定? 這個比較努力的情境 會讓我們有更好一點的結果, 但我們仍然做不到永續發展目標, 且我們也沒有達成 人類的安全生存空間。
So this really led us to a quite disappointing conclusion, that we will actually, even if we go conventional futures, fail on the SDGs and transgress planetary boundaries. We need some radical thinking. We need to go into a transformative, disruptive future, where we start thinking outside of the box. The modeling and engagement and dialogues enable us to identify five transformations that could actually potentially take us there.
所以這其實會帶領我們 走向讓人失望的結論, 即:即使我們選擇傳統方式的未來, 還是做不到永續發展目標, 且會超過地球限度。 我們需要一些根本性思考。 我們必須要進入 一個轉型的、顛覆性的未來, 在這個未來, 我們可以跳出框框思考。 建模、參與、對話, 讓我們可以找出 5 種轉型, 真的有機會帶我們走向這樣的未來。
The first one is to cut emissions by half every decade along the scientific pathway to Paris, doubling investments in renewable energy, creating a global energy democracy, allowing us to meet several of the SDGs.
第 1 種是每 10 年 就讓排放量減半, 朝巴黎協議努力, 把對於再生能源的投資加倍, 創造出全球能源民主, 讓我們可以達成 好幾個永續發展模型。
The second is a rapid shift towards sustainable food systems, investing one percent per year in sustainable intensification and really moving towards implementing and investing in solutions that we already have available today.
第 2 種是快速轉換, 轉為永續食物系統, 每年投資 1% 做永續的強化, 真正邁向導入及投資我們現今 已經可取得的解決方案。
The third is really to shift our development paradigm and learn from many of the developing countries that have moved very fast. What if we could have an economic growth such as in China, while doing it within the environmental parameters of an ecological civilization?
第 3 種是真正轉換 我們的發展範式, 並向許多快速前進的 開發中國家學習。 如果我們能夠有 中國那樣的經濟成長, 而且是在生態文明的 環境參數之內辦到,如何?
Fourth, a redistribution of wealth. What if we could [agree] that the richest 10 percent could not allow themselves to amass more than 40 percent, maximum, of national incomes -- a drastic redistribution of wealth, reforming the ability of equity across regions?
第 4 種,財富重新分配。 如果我們能同意,最有錢的 10% 人 不能讓自己積聚的最大值超過 全國收入的 40% —— 財富的極端重新分配, 重新形成各區域 平等的能力,如何?
And finally, fifth, a radical increase in more education, health, access to work, contraception, investing largely in women across the world, allowing us to deliver on SDGs on gender, inequality, economics and urban development.
最後,第 5 種, 從根本上增加更多教育、 健康、工作機會、避孕、 在全世界大量投資女性, 讓我們能實現關於 性別、不平等、經濟, 和都市發展的永續發展目標。
Now, if we would push ourselves across all these five -- we tested this, and it would give us an amazing journey towards the safe and just operating space on earth. It shows us that even with a conservative, empirically based, complex system dynamics model, we are at a state where we can actually think of transformations over the next 12 years and beyond that can take us up into the safe operating space and deliver on aspirational social and economic goals. This is actually quite uplifting, despite the fact that we're not moving along this trajectory.
如果我們要在這 5 種 轉型上都加把勁—— 我們做過測試了,結果是會讓我們 踏上一段很了不起的旅程, 目標是地球上創造安全、 公平的生存空間。 我們可以看到, 即使是用一個保守、 以經驗為基礎的 複雜系統動態模型, 我們的狀態仍然是可以真正去思考 接下來 12 年及之後的轉變, 來帶我們進入安全生存空間, 實現很有抱負的社會和經濟目標。 這其實相當讓人振奮, 儘管我們現在並沒有 延著這個軌跡移動。
So, in summary: we now, three years into the operational delivery on the SDGs, must draw a line and conclude that we're not delivering on our promises, and not only that, we're running the risks of future generations having an even tougher ability, because of the risk of pushing the earth system beyond tipping points. In fact, we are facing even a risk of a hothouse earth, where we will undermine and create geopolitical instabilities that could actually make life even more tough for billions of people on earth. This, in all honesty, really, really scares me.
所以,總結一下: 在運作上去履行永續發展目標 已經有 3 年的時間, 我們必須要畫一條線, 斷定我們並沒有實現我們的諾言, 不僅如此,我們還冒著 讓未來世代更辛苦的風險, 因為有可能會把地球系統 推向臨界點之外。 事實上,我們甚至 要面對溫室地球的風險, 這樣我們會逐漸造成損害, 導致地理政治上的不穩定, 讓地球上數十億人的生活更困難。 老實說,這真的很讓我害怕。
But that's also why I'm standing here tonight, because the window of success is still open. The earth system is still resilient. She is still providing us with ecosystem services and functions that can allow us a transition back into a safe operating space. But we need radically different thinking. We need to see this as an incredible wake-up call but also an opportunity for transformative change, where we shift gears and really start thinking of the SDGs as a transformative agenda within a safe operating space on earth. In other words, we can build a safe and just world. We just have to really, really get on with it. And let's do it. Thank you.
但這也是為什麼 今天晚上我會站在這裡, 因為通往成功的窗戶仍然開著。 地球系統仍然有恢復力。 她仍然在提供我們 生態系統服務和功能, 讓我們可以做出轉型, 回到安全生存空間。 但我們需要從根本上 就不同的思考。 我們需要把它視為是 喚醒我們的警訊, 以及做出轉型式改變的機會, 讓我們換檔,真正開始 把永續發展目標想成是 地球上安全生存 空間中的轉變式議程。 換言之,我們能建立 安全、公平的世界。 我們只需要真正持續好好去做它。 我們來做吧。謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)