[Fis] Sustainability through multilevel research: The Lifel, Deep Society Build-A-Thon - 1
Dear All, The research presented here is focused on gleaning insights leading to new solutions to the economics vs ecosystem conflict. The roots of many of our problems in ecological sustainability lie in the fact that our socio-economic systems are largely focused on fulfilling only human needs and the needs of human organizations. In doing so, as pointed out by Pedro, Bob, Francesco and others in this group our economics largely ignores the productive value of our ecosystems and the true costs of our development on our life supporting living systems. I term such a society as a “shallow society”, a society that is focused on the development of a single species and largely ignores the value of its own life-supporting living systems. With global population predicted to grow to 9 billion people, the next level of human development requires a transition of human society from being a “shallow society” that is only focused on only human needs to what I call a “deep society”. A deep society is a society that includes all living systems in its development. In this view, a deep society is not only focused on needs of human beings and their organizations but its development models also include development of the entire gamut of life-supporting living systems. Such a society grows not by exploiting the resources of a living planet, but also it possesses the capability to nurture, grow and actively manage a “living planet” (and perhaps seed life on other planets as well). Human development in the future will require the creation of new capabilities to develop models leading to a deep society. The question then is- can we develop systems that will enable a fair-value reciprocity and exchange between living ecosystems and economic systems? While, the notion that economics does not adequately value natural systems has been highlighted by many researchers in the field of ecological economics. Ideas on how natural systems can be understood, valued and integrated into economics have remained elusive. A multilevel view (like the one presented here) allows one to compare socio-economic organizations with natural organizations and could also provide new insights into how the dynamics of natural ecosystems could be synergised with economic systems. The model presented in the kick-off session shows two levels of energetically and materially coupled exchange networks in ecosystems. At the first level of exchange networks geochemical molecules are organized into different autotrophic species, and modulated by Mycorrhiza (level 1). Different autotrophic species then become food for the different heterotrophic species hence giving rise to the next higher level of exchange networks in ecosystems, modulated by gut bacterial networks (Level 2). The question then is- how does nature organize to build-in synergies between these two levels? At level 1, Mycorrhiza networks are known to modulate growth rates across different autotrophic species by providing phosphorous to different autotrophic species in quantitative exchange for carbohydrates. Autotrophic species (or groups of autotrophic species) that provide more carbohydrate hence get more phosphorous. Hence carbohydrates play a role in influencing phosphorous allocation across different autotrophic species connected to a Mycorrhiza network. At the next higher level in the exchange networks between different autotrophic species and different heterotrophic species gut bacteria use carbohydrates to modulate growth rates in heterotrophic species. Hence carbohydrates seem to play a role both in influencing dynamics in exchange networks at level 1, as well as in influencing dynamics in exchange networks at level 2. Could such an organization where carbohydrates are a common influencing factor in exchanges at both levels serve to align both levels towards increasing overall carbohydrate production in ecosystems (hence increasing the overall primary production in ecosystems) by synergizing dynamics across both levels (and two different modulator networks)? Could this two-level role of carbohydrates provide new insights on aligning the third level of exchange networks (and our financial investment networks) with underling ecosystem exchange networks at level 1 and 2? At this stage, these and other ideas presented here require much further assessment and development. Nevertheless, at this early stage of development they seem to provide a different vantage to view multilevel living systems. Can multilevel research help in uncovering new ideas and insights to understand multilevel systems, and align economics and ecosystems? Your views, comments and feedback are much appreciated. Thanking you, Warm regards, Nikhil Joshi___ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Sustainability through multilevel research: The Lifel, Deep Society Build-A-Thon - 1
Interesting post, Nikhil. One of my PhD students is doing his thesis on egalitarian (living system) centred morality. He is not aiming to draw moral conclusions, but to lay out a coherent position based in complexity theory, especially in the work of Paul Cilliers (who he studied with for his MA) and myself. Extension to include the values of all living systems within economics is a natural extension of my student’s work, though he has enough on his plate right now. John Collier Professor Emeritus, UKZN http://web.ncf.ca/collier From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Nikhil Joshi Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2015 10:53 To: FIS Group Cc: Nikhil Joshi Subject: [Fis] Sustainability through multilevel research: The Lifel, Deep Society Build-A-Thon - 1 Dear All, The research presented here is focused on gleaning insights leading to new solutions to the economics vs ecosystem conflict. The roots of many of our problems in ecological sustainability lie in the fact that our socio-economic systems are largely focused on fulfilling only human needs and the needs of human organizations. In doing so, as pointed out by Pedro, Bob, Francesco and others in this group our economics largely ignores the productive value of our ecosystems and the true costs of our development on our life supporting living systems. I term such a society as a “shallow society”, a society that is focused on the development of a single species and largely ignores the value of its own life-supporting living systems. With global population predicted to grow to 9 billion people, the next level of human development requires a transition of human society from being a “shallow society” that is only focused on only human needs to what I call a “deep society”. A deep society is a society that includes all living systems in its development. In this view, a deep society is not only focused on needs of human beings and their organizations but its development models also include development of the entire gamut of life-supporting living systems. Such a society grows not by exploiting the resources of a living planet, but also it possesses the capability to nurture, grow and actively manage a “living planet” (and perhaps seed life on other planets as well). Human development in the future will require the creation of new capabilities to develop models leading to a deep society. The question then is- can we develop systems that will enable a fair-value reciprocity and exchange between living ecosystems and economic systems? While, the notion that economics does not adequately value natural systems has been highlighted by many researchers in the field of ecological economics. Ideas on how natural systems can be understood, valued and integrated into economics have remained elusive. A multilevel view (like the one presented here) allows one to compare socio-economic organizations with natural organizations and could also provide new insights into how the dynamics of natural ecosystems could be synergised with economic systems. The model presented in the kick-off session shows two levels of energetically and materially coupled exchange networks in ecosystems. At the first level of exchange networks geochemical molecules are organized into different autotrophic species, and modulated by Mycorrhiza (level 1). Different autotrophic species then become food for the different heterotrophic species hence giving rise to the next higher level of exchange networks in ecosystems, modulated by gut bacterial networks (Level 2). The question then is- how does nature organize to build-in synergies between these two levels? At level 1, Mycorrhiza networks are known to modulate growth rates across different autotrophic species by providing phosphorous to different autotrophic species in quantitative exchange for carbohydrates. Autotrophic species (or groups of autotrophic species) that provide more carbohydrate hence get more phosphorous. Hence carbohydrates play a role in influencing phosphorous allocation across different autotrophic species connected to a Mycorrhiza network. At the next higher level in the exchange networks between different autotrophic species and different heterotrophic species gut bacteria use carbohydrates to modulate growth rates in heterotrophic species. Hence carbohydrates seem to play a role both in influencing dynamics in exchange networks at level 1, as well as in influencing dynamics in exchange networks at level 2. Could such an organization where carbohydrates are a common influencing factor in exchanges at both levels serve to align both levels towards increasing overall carbohydrate production in ecosystems (hence increasing the overall primary production in ecosystems) by synergizing dynamics across both levels (and two different modulator networks)? Could this two-level role of carbohydrates provide new insights on aligning the third level of exchange
