1

Lecture for January 30

Readings: Guns Germs and Steel pp. 13-32, 85-92, 176-191, 195-214, 405-425Optional: 265-292

The prologue to Guns Germs and Steel raises sensitivities with respect to Yali’s question whyWestern societies have emerged as dominant today. The same sensitivities apply to the questionof managing the planet as we move into the future. Like Jared Diamond my goal in this lectureis not to justify one belief or another, but rather to try to understand the basic features of ourrelationship to the planet. In the rest of the course I hope you will apply that understanding tothe case studies.In order to help understand our relationship to the planet I want to give you avery quick view of how we got to where Guns Germs and Steel begins.

The following are significant events in the formation of our planet and the evolution of life on it:

+ Big Bang-13,700mya(million years ago) + Solar System and our Planet formed from exploding star/nebula- 4,550mya + First Life( prokaryote fossil with genetic code)-3,465mya + Oxygen Atmosphere created by Cyanobacteria- ~2,000mya + Sexual Reproduction ( developed by eukaryote microbe)- ~1,100mya + First non microbe/ vertebrate- 500mya + Fish-475mya, plants 400mya- mammals-225mya + Apes-35mya, common ancestor-7mya + Homo sapiens-.15mya

2

The evolution of life has not been a smooth process of continued increase in diversity but ratherhas punctuated by major extinction eventsFigure 1.2 Shows data about five major extinctions and diversity changes in the past

A major extinction event can vary in severity and the time its impact lasts but it has a generalform

Figure 1.6 shows the general stages of extinction

Extinction—rapid loss of speciesSurvival—hold over taxa—disaster taxaRecovery—progenitor taxadominate in new phase

The cycle of disaster giving birth to new taxa shows the resilience of the ecosystem in spite ofthe lack of sustainability of specific taxa. Only one in a thousand of the species that ever existedstill exist today. The ability of life to regenerate itself is viewed as indicating both the many wayslife can form and the supportive conditions for life on our planet.

This cycle of destruction leading to creation and the distinction between sustainability andresilience is important to consider. Looking back from our perspective and with awe for thepower of our brain, it looks like the cycle of destruction and creation has had a positive outcomethus suggesting that for living systems sustainability (avoiding an extinction phase) may not bethe best way to produce a system resilient to shock but rather that adaptation to change isenhanced by previous ‘learnings’ from earlier changes. This is a very contentious issue thatleading scholars continue to debate to this day. It is connected to the intense debate which islargely pushed by Stephen Jay Gould and others that Darwinian evolution may not be the majorcause of new species because during major extinctions ones adaptation to the previous conditionsmay or may not (e.g., luck) have prepared one for a dramatic change in the environment.

Causes of Extinction

3

- Asteroid Impact – this includes only the one example found –extinction of dinosaurs65mya(not a general example as speculated by Raup)

- Volcanism – recently suggested as cause of biggest (Permian)extinction event 251mya- Climate – cooling has been involved for most extinctions- Marine Regression – Change in sea level which changes range and connectivity of land

masses- Marine Anoxia – depletion of oxygen in shallow waters

Climate change is probably the major cause of extinctions in the past and will occur again in thefuture (New York will be under a glacier). Of course asteroid impacts will also occur in thefuture. Thus we cannot avoid major extinction threats even if we eliminate all human impact onthe planet. Furthermore, from a species long term perspective resilience as opposed tosustainability is the key issue

Becoming Human

- Six to seven million years ago the Homo family evolved from the apes- What makes us distinctive? Symbolic reasoning/logic – added to intuitive reasoning- How did we evolve to get to the current form of Humans – Homo Sapien

Human Evolution – Tattersall and Schwartz

- Human evolution is not different than the evolution of other species even if the result inour capabilities are extraordinary – allowing us to become the dominant species in anamazingly short time

- However a belief emerged that we ascended to our position as a dominant species in alinear manner – evidence indicates that like other species our evolution involved failedexperiments (see figure 124)

- Like the larger process of evolution, the evolution of the human species included gradualspecies adaptation (probably language or more generally symbolic intelligence) thatenabled the brain to demonstrate superior performance that enabled that adaptation towipe out all the other species of human

- Genetic studies using mitochondrial DNA from current living members around the worldusing dating technologies based on the diversity of the mitochondrial DNA suggest thatAfrica has the oldest species, that we are all related to an African Eve and that the processstarted around 200,000 years ago – the beginning of Homo Sapiens (or maybe thetransition to symbolic reasoning occurred later)

4

Some milestones in our evolution include

- 7 mya humans evolve from African apes – Gorillas, two classes of chimpanzees –Gorillas split off – humans evolved from chimpanzee line

- Vegetarians – driven out by climate change provided first major example ofenvironmental impact- lack of resilience

- Succeeded by a generalist (ate both animal protein and vegetable) + protein/more energy increased brain size

- Homo Erectus (1-2 mya) increased brain size but still _ ours – hindbrain mostprimitive/first to develop – limbic (mid-brain) emotions next to develop – cerebral(reasoning, planning) last to develop

- As brain increasedAge of ToolsSocial SkillsLanguage

- .8mya evolution leveled offSame toolsNo innovationMoves to Europe

- Climate Change threatens extinction (ice age)Brain grows

- Leads to Neanderthal – king of ice age in EuropeBrain size same as humans

- Great Leap Forward (.05mya)

5

Cro Magnon wipes out Neanderthal (superior weapons) in EuropeTheory is that dominance was associated with changes in brain organization –growth of cerebral cortex connects the brain (it is the Internet)New hunting toolsCave art workPossible also more sophisticated language

- Modern HumanFrontal Lobes 200% larger than primatesEnable us to anticipate future events and plan to work towards goals (all impairedwith frontal lobe disease)

Main Conclusion

- Climate change associated with major adaptive changes and extinctions have contributedto our evolution that are now perceived by us as a positive result – we exist

- The brain is our distinctive feature and our ability to plan and anticipate our future is ourmost distinctive skill

13,000 years ago – end of ice age until today – Again climate change shapes future events asdescribed in Peter deMenocal’s lecture.

In Guns, Germs, and Steel Jared Diamond puts many factors together to explain the success ofthe human species

Basic idea – Figure 4.1 (p. 87)

- Ice age extinctions left domesticatable plants and animals in certain places (Figure 5.1;Table 5.1)

- Domesticatable plants and animals leads to enhanced food production- Geography impacts diffusion of ideas (Figure 10.1)

o Favors Eurasia – only place without North-South mountainso Fertile crescent (Figure 8.1)

- Food Production economically and socially complex societies (Table 14.1)o More innovatorso Develop disease resistance to epidemics (table 11.1)

- Progress mostly by applying innovations of otherso Early innovations climate sensitiveo Propagate best East-West

- Increased size of population and areas more innovators

6

7

A “candidate” is defined as a species of terrestrial, herbivores or carnivorous, wild mammalweighing on the average over 100 pounds.

CONTINENTEurasia Sub-Saharan

AfricaThe Americas Australia

Candidates 72 51 24 1Domesticated

Species13 0 1 0

Percentage ofcandidates

domesticated

18% 0% 4% 0%

8

9

10

11

Major Conclusions- Climate shaped our evolution/ geography influenced where- Brain distinguishes us from other species (ability to invent/predict)- THE MAIN THESIS OF JARED DIAMOND IS THAT THE SYSTEM WHICH

SUPPORTS THE LARGEST NUMBER OF INNOVATIONS AND IS OPEN TOTHE INNOVATIONS OF OTHERS DOMINATES

Next level of Complexity

Why Europe and not Fertile Crescent?

- Since it is desert today either environmental change or destruction/speculate it wasdestruction

- Destruction possible because region was ecologically fragile (again raises issue of long-term resilience vs. efficiency in the short term)

- Why Europe and not China?o Diversity (disconnected) cultures in Europe made it possible for Columbus to get

support

12

o Uniformity (connected) of culture in China could lead to uniform shutting downof innovation

As we think about how to use our brains to anticipate the future of our planet and how ouractions will influence what happens we need to consider

- Difference in strategy between when environment impacted our evolution (past) andwhen our actions impacted the environment which will then have a feedback on our ownevolution – we are now the dominant species

- Difference in strategy to achieve resilience (survive shocks in the future) than to obtainsuccess in the present

Within those major issues other themes include- Role of connectedness

o Increases diffusiono Decreases resilience

- Role of Diversityo Increases innovationo Decreases effectiveness

- Role of Humanso Humans are source of problemo Humans need to provide solutiono Impact of our own brain structure and function

- Role of Knowledgeo Key to strategyo Uncertainty/unpredictability of the future

Readings: Earth Systems Analysis pp. 5-25 (mathematics not required)

Grand Challenge – managing global change caused and not caused by human actions usingknowledge of the Earth System and tools to impact it to secure an acceptable long-term co-evolution of nature and human civilization

Some issues raised by the Grand Challenge

- Philosophical/fundamentalo Are Humans the end point of evolution?o Would the Earth System manage itself? GAIAo Can it be managed? Or will the outcome be worse

- Ethicalo Is managing our planet for our purposes at the expense of the biosphere proper?o When solutions have winners and losers who decides?

13

o What does acceptable mean? (Is the goal to have as many humans as possiblewith some acceptable quality of life or future people with a higher quality of life)

- Tacticalo Which technocratic approach is best?o How long is long term?o How do we deal with uncertainty?o What new institutions do we need to manage the planet?

What are the major threats?

- Nature driven changeso Asteroidso Ice Ages (climate change)o Ecosystem Instabilityo Disease

[We, (our planet) has evolved in the presence of these threats]

• Human (also part of nature) driven changeso Changing the atmosphereo Physical, chemical, and biological pollutantso Biodiversity losso Ecological function losso Climate changeo New viruseso Depletion of key resources (e.g., fresh water)o Technical disasters

Major distinction

Sustainable development – humans can sustain current system or something similar to it

Resilient - humans can survive changes – continue to evolve

[My view – Change is “natural” sustaining requires we deal with both change and threats tooverall system which is too difficult and too restrictive – also change can be good and has beenin the past. I would adopt resilience as the primary goal, but constrained by the need to dealeffectively (e.g., sustainability) with today’s needs. The future character of the challenge ofresilience makes it difficult to address but it is humans with their brain that is uniquely able toaddress it]

In the past human impacts were local

- Deforestation of the states of the Roman Empire for Shipbuilding- Environmental crisis of western Europe where forest disappeared through charcoal

production for the iron and steel industry and overfarming of the land

14

+ Note: Innovation solved both problems; coal replaced wood and synthetic nitrogen fertilizerfor agriculture

[All these changes were inherently local – did not alter any other major system (atmosphere,lithosphere, and biosphere) on a planetary scale]

+ Note: The recovery time was beyond the planning horizon of the affected communities so they

were extinguished or left and in some cases the change has been nearly irreversible. Of coursenatural changes in climate have also brought major changes that have destroyed local ecosystemsand civilizations. So in the past the ecosphere could be impacted by global changes which in turnimpacted human evolution (anthroposphere) but humans could not alter ecosphere globally.

Globally

N(t) = dN(t)/dt = Fo(N,t)

A(t) = dA(t)/dt = Go(N,t)

T = time Need a t=0N = macro state of ecosphere N (atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere, and biosphere)dN(t)/dt = change of ecosphere with time which only depends on its own internal components(not humans)

A = macro state of the anthroposphere A

dA(t)/dt = change of anthroposphere depends on both its own state and the state of the ecosphere

The division between N and A is artificial at many levels (Though useful in some cases)

15

- We are as natural as other parts of the biosphere- The changes we create are as natural as changes created by other components in the

ecosphere- Distinction can be arbitrary (cultivated ecosystems N, stone house A)

Factors suggesting global influence of Humans

- Changing of the atmosphere- Disappearance of stratospheric ozone layer over the Antarctic- 8% of freshwater is used by humans- 11 % of surface area- 30% of fertile soils have been lost- Minerals are moved more by humans than by nature- Humanity controls more than 50% of the Net Primary Production NPP of green plants- Loss of forests at 1% per year- Loss of Biodiversity- Global Pollution- Emerging genetic impact on other species and ourselves

Assuming that it is plausible that we can alter our planet globally then the present daydynamic relationship between the anthroposphere and ecosphere should be modified toinclude the possibility that humans can alter the ecosphere on a global scale.

The new equations are:

dN(t)/dt = Fl (N, A, t)

dA(t)/dt = G l (N, A)

Thus N and A are symmetrical each can influence the other we are in a state of coevolution because of our dominance as a species we can alter the ecosphere at a global scale.

Makes possible outcomes more complex in case of co evolution of humans and nature asopposed to just the planetary systems.

Why is this possible?

All these changes can combine to produce "Global Change"

[Change the "operating mode" of our planet]

• They are coupled to one anotherLoss of forests change atmosphere, changes climate that can change species

16

Or

Change of atmosphere, can change climate, and can change ecosphere(best example iscyanobacteria creating oxygen which made many anaerobic bacteria extinct

• The Earth System is non linear (e.g., a small change can, via coupling, produce afeedback that grows and causes a big change)

• Raises critical question of whether there are critical thresholds of disturbances that willshift the operating mode of our planet into a new one (destructive to humans) for which thereis no return. This is probably the most important question whose answer should shape ouractions. Many when confronted with our lack of ability to answer the question definitivelyargue we should adopt the `precautionary principle" (to avoid the possibility of crossing athreshold by minimizing our disturbance).

Examples of critical thresholds include temperature 27°C to freeze all water, 15°C formicrobial production

A way of demonstrating the system behavior is to think about a double pendulum as shown inFigure 2. In a single mass pendulum you get a very regular oscillating behavior. Consider thelarge mass m1 to be the Earth Systems and m2 to be the human influence. In the past m1 >> m2

and the earth carried out its oscillating behavior driven largely by the variation in energy fromthe sun as shown in figure 3 below

17

Now if one makes m1 about equal to m2 one gets into chaotic regimes as shown in figure 5. This

transition can occur at some threshold value for m2 and more importantly when in the chaoticstate one can shift from one “chaotic attractor” to another changing the environment greatly inthe process. This is a major concern and in the regime we appear to be in m1 ≈ m2 we are in avery complex regime where we have no real past experience to guide us.

18

Will it switch back if humans dominate? A major question for the long term is whether wehumans can increase our influence to the point that we become m1 and the Earth systems have arelatively minor impact returning to a well behaved but different Earth/Human system. In fact isnot our brain the only way nature can anticipate future events and design the system tosurvive/be resilient. There are of course many difficulties.

The human caused changes can proceed by

- Diffusion e.g., change the balance of emissions of gases in one place they willdiffuse throughout the planet this is "nature's" way

- Induction humans can accelerate changes by learning from one another and puttinginto practice in a disconnected area an environmentally destructive proceduredeveloped in another area

This raises the danger of the increased connectivity of the modern world where both goodand bad ideas propagate quickly before their impact is determined. This will be a major issue.

- Most of the factors causing global change are poised to increase as the populationincreases though moderated by increased efficiency

- This has led some to define a "master equation" to describe the competition betweengrowing human population and increased efficiency to reduce environmental impact.

19

Environmental impact = population X productivity/person X environmentalimpact/productivity

Productivity can be measured by the GDP (Gross Domestic Product)

The question of sustainability is framed by many to be to reduce the environmental impactper unit of productivity so that you can produce enough to provide for our population withouta global impact.

• This reasoning while helpful is flawed in many ways

o Efficiency can cause lack of resilience (e.g., we all use the most effective approaches)o The factors are all coupled to one another e.g., greater efficiency in the past has resultedin increase in population though recently the trend has reversed most advanced societies areleveling off. [An example of a threat which 20 years ago was viewed as the most importantand which appears to have resolved itself through feedback within the human system is theadaptation of humans to improved quality of life is to have fewer children. Thus, in this caseit looks like the threat of our population is somewhat self limited by feedback (e.g., JoelCohen)]

Summary of Major Conclusions• Grand Challenge - issues it raises (philosophical, ethical, tactical)• Sustainable vs. resilient• New state created by human dominance (influence)• Danger caused by coupled nonlinear nature of the Earth/Human system

o Uncertaintyo Minimize impact (Precautionary principle)-o But as we know even minimizing impact is no guarantee about the final state of

our planet (e.g., asteroid)

The basic characteristics of the Earth/Human System are:

1) Changes with time (“good” can turn to “bad” and “bad” can turn to “good”2) Extinction threats to be expected (resilience is main issue)3) Predictions into the future are difficult and limited in time4) Using our brain to turn knowledge into innovation has been the key to our success5) Danger is that human impact will shift system into a different state which destroys

ecosphere6) Challenge is how can we successfully co-evolve with our home (planet)

All these factors suggest we humans need to follow both a design and adaptive managementapproach to co-evolve. This approach is outlined in the figure.

20

When we get all the knowledge and data we can at a given time we can analyze it and attempt toextend our understanding into the future using models and simulations. As we get moreknowledge we can design solutions to prevent future impacts. An example at the local levelis the building of a dam to prevent flooding, use the water for power, and use the water forirrigation, and possible even allow controlled flooding for ecosystems. Though we mustremember that it is natural for dominating species to impact other species. Remember that thecyanobacteria destroyed many anaerobic microbes when they achieved dominance. We want topreserve other species and the current ecosystems because it is very supportive for us-we becamedominant, but some change in thee ecosystem as a result of our dominance is “natural”.

With our dominance human decisions made by the human brain becomes the critical part of thefeedback loop in the Earth/Human system. Using brain imaging techniques we are gaining a lotof insight into how we make decisions. In summary some relevant recent learnings are

- fear is a dominating response- causes the brain to focus on source of danger- if there is uncertainty or too much complexity we stop reasoning and make

intuitive/emotional decisions- the brain is designed to incorporate external tools-We are Natural Born

Cyborgs/Clark-we can merge with machines if we make the input/output easy- the brain is designed to make decisions in the presence of uncertainty- The Oxford

Ducks find the Nash equilibrium solution

We are in a transition from genetic driven evolution to knowledge driven evolution. Whileevolution, with microbes as the designers, has produced truly remarkable ways to use energy todo work and to reproduce, life, it did take about 2,500mya or 100,000, 000 human generations to

Earth (Biological &

Physical systems)

Sensors (Measure)

Humans (Analyze,

Model, Simulate)

Social/Political (decisions)

Humans (implement Decisions)

Impact (Earth/Human System

Continued Changes driven by changes in Earth Systems (past) plus the impact on the Earth Systems caused by our actions (current human dominance case) both in pursuit of our own quality of life and in adapting to changes imposed by the Earth system.

21

develop them. Furthermore their designs caused serious extinctions on other species. Mostimportantly since the major issue is resilience the evolutionary designs cannot anticipate thethreats that they have not experienced so they are not resilient. If you look what humans haveaccomplished in the last 6 generations(25 years per generation), the concern we have for ourimpact, and our ability to understand the threats we face even though we have not experiencedthem, then maybe we can be optimistic that in much less time and with much less harm we cancome up with a resilient solution- at least until our sun burns out and expands destroying theplanet and all life. In the roughly one billion years available for us on this planet we will need tofind a new home-we have 40,000,000 generations to find an answer.

In general terms humans will be found in situations in which there is a range in the amount weknow and how far we can predict and therefore a range in how much of our decisions(designs)are based upon knowledge and how much on values. In your case studies you should try andkeep clear what aspects of the issue can be resolved in knowledge and which are value questions.This will be useful both for your own understanding but also in the interaction with others whomight be advocating a different approach. This changing balance in decision making andresulting strategy of using adaptation or design for an issue is depicted in the final figure.

22

During this course you will study various cases.

In general terms they fall into the following categories:

Climate Change – Both Earth system and Human caused – limited knowledge and limitedcapacity to predict impacts into the future- But can we aspire to control the climate?

Ozone Hole – Human caused – cause understood remedy suggested based upon knowledge –successfully being addressed by adaptive change caused by feedback to humans and theirsystems (economic/political)

Role of Knowledge

Today Time (t)

50%

100%

Some we can partially predict

Some issues we can predict well now but not

well into the future

Percentage of correct predictions of the f uture at time t

Role of Values

Time (t)

Value based Decision for best adaptive strategy

Knowledge based decision for best knowable issue

23

El-Nino – Earth system caused – knowledge and predictive capability is limited – increasinglysuccessful adaptive response, using sensors, modeling, and simulations.

Asteroid Impact- Can design today the equivalent of the dam to prevent asteroid impact fromextinguishing life in the future