We live on a human-dominated planet, putting unprecedented pressure on the systems on Earth. This is bad news, but perhaps surprising to you, it's also part of the good news. We're the first generation -- thanks to science -- to be informed that we may be undermining the stability and the ability of planet Earth to support human development as we know it. It's also good news, because the planetary risks we're facing are so large, that business as usual is not an option. In fact, we're in a phase where transformative change is necessary, which opens the window for innovation, for new ideas and new paradigms. This is a scientific journey on the challenges facing humanity in the global phase of sustainability.
我們住在一個人類宰制著的星球上 而人類給予了地球上的系統前所未有的壓力。 而人類給予了地球上的系統前所未有的壓力。 這是個負面的事實,但出其意料的是 這同時也是個正面的事實。 幸於科學的進步,我們是第一個世代能夠瞭解 我們行為可能對地球的生產力以及穩定性 我們行為可能對地球的生產力以及穩定性 與對於人類發展的負面影響。 與對於人類發展的負面影響。 這也是正面的事實,因為我們目前所面對的危機 大到平日正常運作的標準也無法紓緩。 大到平日正常運作的標準也無法紓緩。 事實上,我們處在一個 必須要尋求創新概念及典範的時期。 必須要尋求創新概念及典範的時期。 必須要尋求創新概念及典範的時期。 我今天的演講是則是一趟針對全球永續發展時期 的一個科學旅程。
On this journey, I'd like to bring, apart from yourselves, a good friend, a stakeholder, who's always absent when we deal with the negotiations on environmental issues, a stakeholder who refuses to compromise -- planet Earth. So I thought I'd bring her with me today on stage, to have her as a witness of a remarkable journey, which humbly reminds us of the period of grace we've had over the past 10,000 years. This is the living conditions on the planet over the last 100,000 years. It's a very important period -- it's roughly half the period when we've been fully modern humans on the planet. We've had the same, roughly, abilities that developed civilizations as we know it. This is the environmental conditions on the planet.
在這趟旅程中,除了各位以外,我還想要帶一位朋友, 在這趟旅程中,除了各位以外,我還想要帶一位朋友, 它是一位利益相關者, 但在大家討論到環境問題時,它總是不在現場, 因為它總是不願為了人類發展而妥協: 它就是我們的地球。 今天我終有機會帶它上台與各位見面, 它將作為這趟奇妙旅程 的見證人, 這趟旅程將會提醒我們人類在過去一萬年中享有的美好時期。 這趟旅程將會提醒我們人類在過去一萬年中享有的美好時期。 這趟旅程將會提醒我們人類在過去一萬年中享有的美好時期。 這張圖顯示了人類在過去十萬年中的居住條件。 這是一段非常重要的時期, 這時段約略是現代人類時期的一半左右。 這段時期的人類 (包括我們在內) 擁有約略同樣的文明發展能力。 這張圖也顯示了過去地球上的環境條件。
Here, used as a proxy, temperature variability. It was a jumpy ride. 80,000 years back in a crisis, we leave Africa, we colonize Australia in another crisis, 60,000 years back, we leave Asia for Europe in another crisis, 40,000 years back, and then we enter the remarkably stable Holocene phase, the only period in the whole history of the planet, that we know of, that can support human development. A thousand years into this period, we abandon our hunting and gathering patterns. We go from a couple of million people to the seven billion people we are today. The Mesopotamian culture: we invent agriculture, we domesticate animals and plants. You have the Roman, the Greek and the story as you know it. The only phase, as we know it that can support humanity.
圖中以溫度作為居住條件的指標。 這其實是一段充滿巨變的旅程。八萬年前曾出現一次危機, 人類離開了非洲大陸並殖民了澳大利亞。 在六萬年前的另一個危機中,人類離開了亞洲前往歐洲。 在六萬年前的另一個危機中,人類離開了亞洲前往歐洲。 而在四萬年前的危機後, 人類進入了穩定的"全新世"(holocene) 人類進入了穩定的"全新世"(holocene) 那是歷史上唯一一段能夠支持人類發展的世代。 那是歷史上唯一一段能夠支持人類發展的世代。 在進入這世代的一千年後,人類轉變了狩獵集居住的模式。 在進入這世代的一千年後,人類轉變了狩獵集居住的模式。 從當時的幾百萬人繁衍成現今的七十億人口。 從當時的幾百萬人繁衍成現今的七十億人口。 人類在美索不達米亞文明中創造了農業, 並養馴牲畜及植物。 在那之後又出現了眾所皆知的羅馬和希臘文明。 那是唯一適合人類生存及發展文明的時期。 那是唯一適合人類生存及發展文明的時期。
The trouble is we're putting a quadruple sqeeze on this poor planet, a quadruple sqeeze, which, as its first squeeze, has population growth of course. Now, this is not only about numbers; this is not only about the fact that we're seven billion people committed to nine billion people, it's an equity issue as well. The majority of the environmental impacts on the planet have been caused by the rich minority, the 20 percent that jumped onto the industrial bandwagon in the mid-18th century. The majority of the planet, aspiring for development, having the right for development, are in large aspiring for an unsustainable lifestyle, a momentous pressure.
但問題是,我們卻四度地擠壓這可憐的星球。 但問題是,我們卻四度地擠壓這可憐的星球。 第一度壓力當然是人口成長。 第一度壓力當然是人口成長。 這不只是數字上的問題, 也不只是現今七十億的人口 可能在未來發展成九十億的事實,更是一個平等性的問題。 地球上大多數的環境影響是由富裕的少數的人造成的, 地球上大多數的環境影響是由富裕的少數的人造成的, 就是那些在十八世紀中葉投身於工業革命的百分之二十人口。 就是那些在十八世紀中葉投身於工業革命的百分之二十人口。 絕大多數的人口都想要爭取發展的機會, 絕大多數的人口都想要爭取發展的機會, 但都被迫於陷入非永續的生活模式, 那是個極巨大的壓力。
The second pressure on the planet is, of course the climate agenda -- the big issue -- where the policy interpretation of science is that it would be enough to stabilize greenhouse gases at 450 ppm to avoid average temperatures exceeding two degrees, to avoid the risk that we may be destabilizing the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, holding six meters -- level rising, the risk of destabilizing the Greenland Ice Sheet, holding another seven meters -- sea level rising. Now, you would have wished the climate pressure to hit a strong planet, a resilient planet, but unfortunately, the third pressure is the ecosystem decline. Never have we seen, in the past 50 years, such a sharp decline of ecosystem functions and services on the planet, one of them being the ability to regulate climate on the long term, in our forests, land and biodiversity.
第二度壓力則是氣候議題, 這是個很大的問題 -- 政策上認為科學指出將溫室氣體維持在450ppm則可維持穩定, 政策上認為科學指出將溫室氣體維持在450ppm則可維持穩定, 並且避免全球平均溫度上升兩度, 並且避免全球平均溫度上升兩度, 進而避免動搖到西南極的冰層, 進而避免動搖到西南極的冰層, 有可能造成全球海平面上升六公尺 也可避免動搖到格陵蘭的冰層, 有可能造成海平面上升七公尺。 你可能期望氣候變遷襲擊了是一顆極具抗壓性的星球, 你可能期望氣候變遷襲擊了是一顆極具抗壓性的星球, 但不幸的是,第三度的擠壓 造成了生態系統的衰退。 在過去的五十年中 我們從未見過如此劇烈的生態功能衰退 我們從未見過如此劇烈的生態功能衰退 而其中之一就是生態長期調節森林、陸地、 維持生物多樣性和調節氣候的能力。
The forth pressure is surprise, the notion and the evidence that we need to abandon our old paradigm, that ecosystems behave linearly, predictably, controllably in our -- so to say -- linear systems, and that in fact, surprise is universal, as systems tip over very rapidly, abruptly and often irreversibly. This, dear friends, poses a human pressure on the planet of momentous scale. We may, in fact, have entered a new geological era -- the Anthropocene, where humans are the predominant driver of change at a planetary level.
第四度的壓力則是出其預料的 - 依據現有的主張和證據 我們必須改變現在的想法, 我們不能夠再認為生態系只不過是線性系統 它並不像一般的系統俱有預測性及控管性, 事實上,出乎我們預料的事會不斷的出現 因為系統有可能很快速、突然、並不可扭轉地崩解。 因為系統有可能很快速、突然、並不可扭轉地崩解。 這些人類帶給生態的壓力也會轉為人類自身的巨大壓力。 這些人類帶給生態的壓力也會轉為人類自身的巨大壓力。 其實我們人類已經進入了一個新的地質時代 -- 叫做「人類世」, 在這世代中人類是主導星球改變的力量。 在這世代中人類是主導星球改變的力量。
Now, as a scientist, what's the evidence for this? Well, the evidence is, unfortunately, ample. It's not only carbon dioxide that has this hockey stick pattern of accelerated change. You can take virtually any parameter that matters for human well-being -- nitrous oxide, methane, deforestation, overfishing land degredation, loss of species -- they all show the same pattern over the past 200 years. Simultaneously, they branch off in the mid-50s, 10 years after the Second World War, showing very clearly that the great acceleration of the human enterprise starts in the mid-50s. You see, for the first time, an imprint on the global level. And I can tell you, you enter the disciplinary research in each of these, you find something remarkably important, the conclusion that we may have come to the point where we have to bend the curves, that we may have entered the most challenging and exciting decade in the history humanity on the planet, the decade when we have to bend the curves.
現在,你們可能會問道: 我身為一位科學家,那我的證據在哪? 不幸的是,有非常多的證據 能夠證明我所說的一切。 並不是只有二氧化碳加速了整個生態變遷。 並不是只有二氧化碳加速了整個生態變遷。 幾乎所有影響著人類的健康的因素 - 幾乎所有影響著人類的健康的因素 - 一氧化二氮、甲烷 森林毀壞、過度捕魚 土地退化,物種的喪失 -- 種種的因素於過去兩百年 都顯示相同的趨勢。 這些因素一起在二次世界大戰後十年的 1950 年代明顯化, 這些因素一起在二次世界大戰後十年的 1950 年代明顯化, 清楚顯示了人類由50年代開始的加速發展。 清楚顯示了人類由50年代開始的加速發展。 由那時開始,第一次看到了種種的全球性的演變。 而我可以告訴你們, 在你們的自身研究領域當中, 都可以發現一些異乎尋常的結論, 那就是我們可能處於 必須挽回現在的趨勢的時刻, 我門已經進入了有史以來最具挑戰性和令人興奮的時代, 我門已經進入了有史以來最具挑戰性和令人興奮的時代, 必須要「改變的時代」。
Now, as if this was not enough -- to just bend the curves and understanding the accelerated pressure on the planet -- we also have to recognize the fact that systems do have multiple stable states, separated by thresholds -- illustrated here by this ball and cup diagram, where the depth of the cup is the resilience of the system. Now, the system may gradually -- under pressure of climate change, erosion, biodiversity loss -- lose the depth of the cup, the resilience, but appear to be healthy and appear to suddenly, under a threshold, be tipping over. Upff. Sorry. Changing state and literally ending up in an undesired situation, where new biophysical logic takes over, new species take over, and the system gets locked.
現在,改變趨勢和瞭解到地球正承受著巨大壓力之事實還不夠 現在,改變趨勢和瞭解到地球正承受著巨大壓力之事實還不夠 我們還得瞭解 所有的系統都有多重穩定的時期 被幾個門檻所區隔 -- 由上圖所示, 而各位看到的凹陷區塊顯示著系統的抗壓性。 但是呢,系統有可能在氣候變遷、 但是呢,系統有可能在氣候變遷、 土質侵蝕,生物多樣性的喪失,等等因素下 逐漸失去圖中凹陷地區 (代表抗壓性) 的深度, 地球可能還是顯得健康, 但有可能在某一門檻中突然地崩解。誒! 但有可能在某一門檻中突然地崩解。誒! 系統就會改變狀態 並可能進入我們所不希望的形勢, 並可能進入我們所不希望的形勢, 一個由新的生物物理邏輯接管的系統, 新的物種勝出,而系統也被封鎖了。
Do we have evidence of this? Yes, coral reef systems. Biodiverse, low-nutrient, hard coral systems under multiple pressures of overfishing, unsustainable tourism, climate change. A trigger and the system tips over, loses its resilience, soft corals take over, and we get undesired systems that cannot support economic and social development. The Arctic -- a beautiful system -- a regulating biome at the planetary level, taking the knock after knock on climate change, appearing to be in a good state. No scientist could predict that in 2007, suddenly, what could be crossing a threshold. The system suddenly, very surprisingly, loses 30 to 40 percent of its summer ice cover. And the drama is, of course, that when the system does this, the logic may change. It may get locked in an undesired state, because it changes color, absorbs more energy, and the system may get stuck. In my mind, the largest red flag warning for humanity that we are in a precarious situation. As a sideline, you know that the only red flag that popped up here was a submarine from an unnamed country that planted a red flag at the bottom of the Arctic to be able to control the oil resources.
那我又有什麼證據?有的,珊瑚系統。 多樣化的,營養需求低的硬態珊瑚系統 在多重壓力下:過度捕魚、 非永續性的觀光、氣候變遷等等... 可能都會造成珊瑚系統的崩解, 可能都會造成珊瑚系統的崩解, 那麼軟性珊瑚就在這情況下勝出, 而後果就是我們不希望的新系統, 因為它不能扶助經濟和社會的發展。 美麗的北極圈是個調節地球的生物群落, 美麗的北極圈是個調節地球的生物群落, 在不斷地承受打擊後似乎依然處於良好的狀態。 在不斷地承受打擊後似乎依然處於良好的狀態。 但沒有一位科學家能夠預測, 於 2007 年,北極圈系統忽然越過了門檻。 北極圈系統突然地、並出乎預料地 少了三到四成的夏季冰層面積。 戲劇性的當然是 此時系統邏輯有可能改變。 系統有可能被封鎖於一個不良的狀態, 因為它改變了顏色,吸收了更多的能量, 然後系統就陷住了。 依我看來,目前人類最大的危機紅旗就是 我們處於一個危險的形勢當中。 你們大概知道,北極唯一的紅旗 是被某個國家的濳水艇隊 於海底插上的, 因為那個國家想要擁有北極圈裡的石油資源。
Now, if we have evidence, which we now have, that wetlands, forests, [unclear] monsoon system, the rainforests, behave in this nonlinear way. 30 or so scientists around the world gathered and asked a question for the first time, "Do we have to put the planet into the the pot?" So we have to ask ourselves: are we threatening this extraordinarily stable Holocene state? Are we in fact putting ourselves in a situation where we're coming too close to thresholds that could lead to deleterious and very undesired, if now catastrophic, change for human development? You know, you don't want to stand there. In fact, you're not even allowed to stand where this gentleman is standing, at the foaming, slippery waters at the threshold. In fact, there's a fence quite upstream of this threshold, beyond which you are in a danger zone. And this is the new paradigm, which we gathered two, three years back, recognizing that our old paradigm of just analyzing and pushing and predicting parameters into the future, aiming at minimalizing environmental impacts, is of the past.
那麼,現在我們有了證據顯示 濕地、森林、 梅雨系統、熱帶雨林等... 不會一貫的線性發展。 全世界共三十多位科學家同聚一堂,並詢問道: 全世界共三十多位科學家同聚一堂,並詢問道: 「我門非得將地球置於不可挽回的形式嗎?」 我們必須捫心自問: 「人類是否威脅到了這段極為穩定的全新世?」 我們是否將自身至於一個 太接近門檻, 已至於越過後的狀態 是一個有害,惡劣, 甚至對人類發展造成 災難性的變化? 各位都知道,我們並不想發展到那樣的階段。 事實上,各位都不會想站在 如圖中的人所站的地方, 那就像是個對人類來說危機四伏的門檻。 其實,在人類發展的上游就有一座欄杆, 其實,在人類發展的上游就有一座欄杆, 能夠防止我們進入危險的時期。 這就是全新的典範及想法, 我們兩、三年前就認知道了尋求舊的模式, 我們兩、三年前就認知道了尋求舊的模式, 一味的分析、預測、並將種種的因素推向未來, 一味的分析、預測、並將種種的因素推向未來, 只是緣木求魚的做法。
Now we to ask ourselves: which are the large environmental processes that we have to be stewards of to keep ourselves safe in the Holocene? And could we even, thanks to major advancements in Earth systems science, identify the thresholds, the points where we may expect nonlinear change? And could we even define a planetary boundary, a fence, within which we then have a safe operating space for humanity? This work, which was published in "Nature," late 2009, after a number of years of analysis, led to the final proposition that we can only find nine planetary boundaries with which, under active stewardship, would allow ourselves to have a safe operating space. These include, of course, climate. It may surprise you that it's not only climate. But it shows that we are interconnected, among many systems on the planet, with the three big systems, climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion and ocean acidification being the three big systems, where the scientific evidence of large-scale thresholds in the paleo-record of the history of the planet.
現在,我們自問道: 到底有哪些主要的環境過程是我們必須要關切的, 到底有哪些主要的環境過程是我們必須要關切的, 以確保人類自身的安危? 而我們是否有辦法 利用地球科學的進步, 進一步地指出非線性發展的分岔點? 進一步地指出非線性發展的分岔點? 我們也是否能夠針對地球承載界限 我們也是否能夠針對地球承載界限 界定出人類發展而不破壞的安全邊界? 這個著作在 2009 年發表於「自然 (Nature)」雜誌中 這個著作在 2009 年發表於「自然 (Nature)」雜誌中 在多年的分析後,科學家最終指出了九個「地球範疇」, 在多年的分析後,科學家最終指出了九個「地球範疇」, 在多年的分析後,科學家最終指出了九個「地球範疇」, 在多年的分析後,科學家最終指出了九個「地球範疇」, 在這些範疇內,人類能夠得到安全的發展空間。 在這些邊界內,人類能夠得到安全的發展空間。 這些範疇理所當然地包括了氣候。 出乎意料的是,不只是氣候而已。 我們的人類系統與地球上眾多的系統是息息相關的, 其中的三大系統為:氣候變遷、臭氧耗損和海水酸化 其中的三大系統為:氣候變遷、臭氧耗損和海水酸化 其中的三大系統為:氣候變遷、臭氧耗損和海水酸化 這些都是地球古歷史中經過科學佐證的重要範疇。 這些都是地球古歷史中經過科學佐證的重要範疇。
But we also include, what we call, the slow variables, the systems that, under the hood, regulate and buffer the capacity of the resilience of the planet -- the interference of the big nitrogen and phosphorus cycles on the planet, land use change, rate of biodiversity loss, freshwater use, functions which regulate biomass on the planet, carbon sequestration, diversity. And then we have two parameters which we were not able to quantify -- air pollution, including warming gases and air-polluting sulfates and nitrates, but also chemical pollution. Together, these form an integrated whole for guiding human development in the Anthropocene, understanding that the planet is a complex self-regulating system. In fact, most evidence indicates that these nine may behave as three Musketeers, "One for all. All for one." You degrade forests, you go beyond the boundary on land, you undermine the ability of the climate system to stay stable. The drama here is, in fact, that it may show that the climate challenge is the easy one, if you consider the whole challenge of sustainable development.
但我們也收錄了所謂的「緩慢變量質」, 這些是系統表層下調節和緩衝地球抗壓性的因素 -- 這些是系統表層下調節和緩衝地球抗壓性的因素 -- 大型的氮和磷的循環影響著地球, 土地用量,生物多樣性的喪失速率,淡水用量等... 土地用量,生物多樣性的喪失速率,淡水用量等... 這些功能都會調節地球的生物質能、碳封存量、多樣性。 這些功能都會調節地球的生物質能、碳封存量、多樣性。 我們也發現兩類無法量化的因素質 -- 空氣污染,包括了溫室氣體、硫酸鹽、硝酸鹽, 空氣污染,包括了溫室氣體、硫酸鹽、硝酸鹽, 還有化學汙染。 這些因素共同形成了人類發展的指標, 這些因素共同集成了人類發展的指標, 並使我們瞭解到地球本身 也是一個非常複雜的自我調節系統。 其實,多數的佐證顯示這九個範疇就像三劍客一般, 其實,多數的佐證顯示這九個範疇就像三劍客一般, 「我為人人,人人為我。」 若人類破壞森林,我們就越過了陸地上的範疇, 進一步的也破壞了氣候系統的穩定性。 進一步的也破壞了氣候系統的穩定性。 出乎預料的是,氣候變遷造成的挑戰 出乎預料的是,氣候變遷造成的挑戰 在整體的永續性發展之中只是極小的一環。 在整體的永續性發展之中只是極小的一環。 在整體的永續性發展之中只是極小的一環。
Now this is the Big Bang equivalent then of human development within the safe operating space of the planetary boundaries. What you see here in black line is the safe operating space, the quantified boundaries, as suggested by this analysis. The yellow dot in the middle here is our starting point, the pre-industrial point, where we're very safely in the safe operating space. In the '50s, we start branching out. In the '60s already, through the green revolution and the Haber-Bosch process of fixing nitrogen from the atmosphere -- you know, human's today take out more nitrogen from the atmosphere than the whole biosphere does naturally as a whole. We don't transgress the climate boundary until the early '90s, actually, right after Rio. And today, we are in a situation where we estimate that we've transgressed three boundaries, the rate of biodiversity loss, which is the sixth extinction period in the history of humanity -- one of them being the extinctions of the dinosaurs -- nitrogen and climate change. But we still have some degrees of freedom on the others, but we are approaching fast on land, water, phosphorus and oceans. But this gives a new paradigm to guide humanity, to put the light on our, so far overpowered industrial vehicle, which operates as if we're only on a dark, straight highway.
現在圖中顯示的是對於人類安全發展範疇的重要資訊。 現在圖中顯示的是對於人類安全發展範疇的重要資訊。 黑線所圍的界限就是經過量化分析的「安全發展空間」。 黑線所圍的界限就是經過量化分析的「安全發展空間」。 黑線所圍的界限就是經過量化分析的「安全發展空間」。 在中央的黃點是工業時代前的起始點, 在中央的黃點是工業時代前的起始點, 人類在那時仍處於非常安全的發展範疇界內。 在 1950 年代中,人類開始加速發展, 在 1960 年中的「綠色革命」 和「哈伯製胺法」由大氣中的固氮的功能 -- 和「哈伯製胺法」由大氣中的固氮的功能 -- 人類於大氣中所消耗的氮氣大於所有生物圈的消耗總值。 人類於大氣中所消耗的氮氣大於所有生物圈的消耗總值。 人類直到 1990 年代前並未逾越氣候的範疇, 直到 1992 年的「里約熱內盧地球高峰會」。 直到今日,我門大約已經逾越了三個範疇, 直到今日,我門大約已經逾越了三個範疇: 生物多樣性喪失率為其一, 同時也是人類史上第六個滅絕期 -- 其中一個造成了恐龍的滅絕 -- 其他兩的逾越範疇則為「氮氣流量」和「氣候變遷」。 我們在其餘的範疇上還有足夠的空間, 但也快速地接近了界限: 土地使用量、磷流量、和海洋酸度。 但這分析也提供了領導我們的新範例, 但這分析也提供了領導我們的新範例, 促使我們減慢現今壓迫性工業 促使我們減慢現今壓迫性工業 如在高速公路上一般的成長。 如在高速公路上一般的成長。
Now the question then is: how gloomy is this? Is then sustainable development utopia? Well, there's no science to suggest. In fact, there is ample science to indicate that we can do this transformative change, that we have the ability to now move into a new innovative, a transformative gear, across scales. The drama is, of course, is that 200 countries on this planet have to simultaneously start moving in the same direction. But it changes fundamentally our governance and management paradigm, from the current linear, command and control thinking, looking at efficiencies and optimization towards a much more flexible, a much more adaptive approach, where we recognize that redundancy, both in social and environmental systems, is key to be able to deal with a turbulent era of global change. We have to invest in persistence, in the ability of social systems and ecological systems to withstand shocks and still remain in that desired cup. We have to invest in transformations capability, moving from crisis into innovation and the ability to rise after a crisis, and of course to adapt to unavoidable change. This is a new paradigm. We're not doing that at any scale on governance.
現在的問題是:我們的處境到底有多糟? 現在的問題是:我們的處境到底有多糟? 「永續性發展」真的會把地球變成烏托邦嗎? 這目前沒有科學內容可以提議。 其實,有數多科學指證出人類有能力可以創造轉變, 其實,有數多科學指證出人類有能力可以創造轉變, 我們更有能力去創造一個新穎、變革的發展形勢。 我們更有能力去創造一個新穎、變革的發展形勢。 我們更有能力去創造一個新穎、變革的發展形勢。 我們更有能力去創造一個新穎、變革的發展形勢。 較難的是, 世界上兩百多個國家必須同時向著同一目的去進行。 世界上兩百多個國家必須同時向著同一目的去進行。 世界上兩百多個國家必須同時向著同一目的去進行。 但這也會從根本上改變我們的國家的治理和管理模式, 由目前的線性趨勢、指令、和控制化的思想, 由目前的線性趨勢、指令、和控制化的思想, 轉為更具彈性和適應性的效率和效能最大化。 轉為更具彈性和適應性的效率和效能最大化。 轉為更具彈性和適應性的效率和效能最大化。 由此我們就能瞭解到解決社會和環境系統中的冗餘, 由此我們就能瞭解到解決社會和環境系統中的冗餘, 是使我們面對動盪的全球轉變的關鍵點。 是使我們面對動盪的全球轉變的關鍵點。 我們必須針對社會和生態系統的抗壓性 去做出有效的投資和花費, 來抵擋未來的震撼。 我們也必須投資於轉變和改革的能力, 由危機進轉入創新 並由危機中重新振作而起, 去適應無可避免的變遷。 這就是一個全新的典範。 現今仍沒有任何的政府有如此的行動。
But is it happening anywhere? Do we have any examples of success on this mind shift being applied at the local level? Well, yes, in fact we do and the list can start becoming longer and longer. There's good news here, for example, from Latin America, where plow-based farming systems of the '50s and '60s led farming basically to a dead-end, with lower and lower yields, degrading the organic matter and fundamental problems at the livelihood levels in Paraguay, Uruguay and a number of countries, Brazil, leading to innovation and entrepreneurship among farmers in partnership with scientists into an agricultural revolution of zero tillage systems combined with mulch farming with locally adapted technologies, which today, for example, in some countries, have led to a tremendous increase in area under mulch, zero till farming which, not only produces more food, but also sequesters carbon.
但這真的從未發生過嗎? 我們有沒有任何成功的地區性的範例? 我們有沒有任何成功的地區性的範例? 事實上是有的, 而且會愈來愈多。 這是好消息, 例如在拉丁美洲, 1950-60 年代的耕犁式農法已將農業帶入末路, 1950-60 年代的耕犁式農法已將農業帶入末路, 1950-60 年代的耕犁式農法已將農業帶入末路, 產量不斷地減少,並破壞了有機物 如此造成的生活危機,例如在巴拉圭、烏拉圭和巴西, 如此造成的生活危機,例如在巴拉圭、烏拉圭和巴西, 促成了創新和創業的機會, 農人於是和科學家們合作, 創造了農業改革和免耕系統、 覆蓋農業,以及一些地區性的適性科技, 覆蓋農業,以及一些地區性的適性科技。 這些改變大幅增加了免耕區和覆蓋式農法的面積 這些改變大幅增加了免耕區和覆蓋式農法的面積, 這些改變大幅增加了免耕區和覆蓋式農法的面積, 這不止生產出更多糧食, 也吸收了多餘的二氧化碳。
The Australian Great Barrier Reef is another success story. Under the realization from tourist operators, fishermen, the Australian Great Barrier Reef Authority and scientists that the Great Barrier Reef is doomed under the current governance regime. Global change, beautification rack culture, overfishing and unsustainable tourism, all together placing this system in the realization of crisis. But the window of opportunity was innovation and new mindset, which today has led to a completely new governance strategy to build resilience, acknowledge redundancy and invest in the whole system as an integrated whole, and then allow for much more redundancy in the system.
澳大利亞大堡礁也是另一則成功的案例。 旅遊業者、漁民、大堡礁管理委員會、和科學家們 旅遊業者、漁民、大堡礁管理委員會、和科學家們 旅遊業者、漁民、大堡礁管理委員會、和科學家們 認定了大堡礁在現今的管理下必會死亡。 認定了大堡礁在現今的管理下必會死亡。 全球變遷、人工美化機架、 過度捕魚、和非永續性的旅遊, 都促成了大堡礁的危機。 都促成了大堡礁的危機。 但是創新的機會和心態, 促使全新的政府策略, 建立彈性、了解冗餘、和對系統作出整體化的投資, 建立彈性、了解冗餘、和對系統作出整體化的投資, 建立彈性、了解冗餘、和對系統作出整體化的投資, 並且再使系統有有更多的多餘空間。
Sweden, the country I come from, has other examples, where wetlands in southern Sweden were seen as -- as in many countries -- as flood-prone polluted nuisance in the peri-urban regions. But again, a crisis, new partnerships, actors locally, transforming these into a key component of sustainable urban planning. So crisis leading into opportunities.
我來自的瑞典也有幾則案例, 南瑞典的濕地 曾經被認為是易發洪水的城郊滋擾區。 曾經被認為是易發洪水的城郊滋擾區。 但又一次地,新的危機造成了新的合作關係, 將那地區轉變為永續城市的中心規劃。 將那地區轉變為永續城市的中心規劃。 將那地區轉變為永續城市的中心規劃。 所以我們可以看到:危機形成了轉機。
Now, what about the future? Well, the future, of course, has one massive challenge, which is feeding a world of nine billion people. We need nothing less than a new green revolution, and the planet boundaries shows that agriculture has to go from a source of greenhouse gases to a sink. It has to basically do this on current land. We cannot expand anymore, because it erodes the planetary boundaries. We cannot continue consuming water as we do today, with 25 percent of world rivers not even reaching the ocean. And we need a transformation. Well, interestingly, and based on my work and others in Africa, for example, we've shown that even the most vulnerable small-scale rainfall farming systems, with innovations and supplementary irrigation to bridge dry spells and droughts, sustainable sanitation systems to close the loop on nutrients from toilets back to farmers' fields, and innovations in tillage systems, we can triple, quadruple, yield levels on current land.
所以未來呢? 未來有個極大的考驗, 就是要餵飽全世界的九十億人口。 我們需要一個新的「綠色革命」, 這些「發展範疇」顯示出農業必須由減低溫室氣體的排放。 這些「發展範疇」顯示出農業必須由減低溫室氣體的排放。 農業必須在現有的土地上運作。 我們無法再擴張耕地,因為會影響到這些發展範疇。 我們無法再擴張耕地,因為會影響到這些發展範疇。 我們不能再像現在一樣地使用水資源, 世界上有兩成五的河流無法通達海洋。 我們需要改革。 有趣的是,依據我的個人還有其它在非洲的研究, 有趣的是,依據我的個人還有其它在非洲的研究, 我們顯示了就算最脆弱的小型降雨耕作制度, 都能由創新和補充灌溉去緩和乾季和乾旱, 都能由創新和補充灌溉去緩和乾季和乾旱, 永續衛生系統可以維持肥料的補充, 將馬桶的排泄物運送至農民的田野, 耕作系統的創新 能夠使產量在現有土地上增加三至四倍。 能夠使產量在現有土地上增加三至四倍。
Elinor Ostrom, the latest Nobel laureate of economics, clearly shows empirically across the world that we can govern the commons if we invest in trust, local, action-based partnerships and cross-scale institutional innovations, where local actors, together, can deal with the global commons at a large scale. But even on the hard policy area we have innovations. We know that we have to move from our fossil dependence very quickly into a low-carbon economy in record time. And what shall we do? Everybody talks about carbon taxes -- it won't work -- emission schemes, but for example, one policy measure, feed-in tariffs on the energy system, which is already applied, from China doing it on offshore wind systems, all the way to the U.S. where you give the guaranteed price for investment in renewable energy, but you can subsidize electricity to poor people. You get people out of poverty. You solve the climate issue with regards to the energy sector, while at the same time, stimulating innovation -- examples of things that can be out scaled quickly at the planetary level.
埃莉諾·奧斯特羅姆, 上一位諾貝爾經濟學獎得主, 清楚地表示以基於實驗的研究發現, 我們有辦法治理共同問題, 只要我們投資於信任、地區性合作關係、 若我們投資於信任、地區性合作關係、 和跨尺度的體制創新, 那麼地區性的行動者 就能夠處理全球的大型問題。 就能夠處理全球的大型問題。 就算是嚴格政策上也能夠有所創新。 我們都知道必須及早遠離對化石燃料的依賴, 轉變為低碳的經濟體系。 那我們應該怎麼做? 所有人都在談論徵碳稅的無用, 但是有個範例,一個政策措施 像是能源的「上網電價」系統,已經開始實施了, 像是能源的「上網電價」系統,已經開始實施了, 中國在海上風力發電系統實施了, 美國也已經開始了。 固定可再生能源的投資額, 並同時貼補窮困人家的電費。 這樣可以解決貧困問題。 也可以解決氣候對於能源的議題, 更同時激發創新 -- 這些都是可迅速在全球擴展的範例。 這些都是可迅速在全球擴展的範例。
So there is -- no doubt -- opportunity here, and we can list many, many examples of transformative opportunities around the planet. The key though in all of these, the red thread, is the shift in mindset, moving away from a situation where we simply are pushing ourselves into a dark future, where we instead backcast our future, and we say, "What is the playing field on the planet? What are the planetary boundaries within which we can safely operate?" and then backtrack innovations within that. But of course, the drama is, it clearly shows that incremental change is not an option.
所以,毋庸置疑的,我們是有轉機的, 我們可以提出更多地球上的變革機會。 我們可以提出更多地球上的變革機會。 在這所有改變的關鍵中, 最重要的還是心態的轉變, 最重要的還是心態的轉變, 我們必須避免將自己推向黑暗的未來, 我們必須避免將自己推向黑暗的未來, 我們若投向未來, 並詢問到:「地球上到底有哪些地是可供人類發展的?」 有哪些範疇是我們可以在有效範圍內安全發展的? 有哪些範疇是我們可以在有效範圍內安全發展的? 並由這些問題回頭啟發創新。 戲劇性的是,遞增改革並不是一種選擇。 戲劇性的是,遞增改革並不是一種選擇。
So, there is scientific evidence. They sort of say the harsh news, that we are facing the largest transformative development since the industrialization. In fact, what we have to do over the next 40 years is much more dramatic and more exciting than what we did when we moved into the situation we're in today. Now, science indicates that, yes, we can achieve a prosperous future within the safe operating space, if we move simultaneously, collaborating on a global level, from local to global scale, in transformative options, which build resilience on a finite planet.
有科學證據說明嚴峻的事實。 有科學證據說明嚴峻的事實。 我們正面對在工業革命之後最重要的轉型發展。 我們正面對在工業革命之後最重要的轉型發展。 我們正面對在工業革命之後最重要的轉型發展。 其實,在未來的四十年中我們要面對的, 絕對是比起過去更戲劇化和更令人振奮的。 絕對是比起過去更戲劇化和更令人振奮的。 絕對是比起過去更戲劇化和更令人振奮的。 科學指出, 我們能夠實現一個繁榮的未來, 只要我們同時在地區性和全球性 只要我們同時在地區性和全球性 協作創造變革機會, 就能將我們有限的地球上建立起復原力。
Thank you.
謝謝各位!
(Applause)
(掌聲)