Preparatory Reading. Daniel Aronson (1996) Overview of Systems Thinking :

Transcription

1 Please browse these texts and short videos in advance of our Teaching Florida s Climates workshop. They will introduce many our sessions and site visits, and provide context for our discussions. Preparatory Reading Pgs. 1-2 Pgs. 3-4 Pgs. 5-7 Pgs Pgs Pgs Pgs. 54 Pgs Table of Contents Reading Introductions Daniel Aronson (1996) Overview of Systems Thinking : Leslie Paul Thiele (1999) The Challenge of Coevolution: Interdependence and Sustainable Development in Environmentalism for a New Millennium. New York: Oxford University Press: Gary Synder (1995) Nets of Beads, Webs of Cells in A Place in Space: Ethics, Aesthetics, and Watersheds Pope Francis (2015, May 24) Laudato Si: On Care for Our Common Home (Papal Encyclical Excerpts) Margaret Atwood (2015) Time Capsule Found on the Dead Planet Loosed Upon the World: The Saga Anthology of Climate Fiction. (ed. John Joseph Adams). New York: Saga Press: Nelson Blake (1980) Land into Water- Water into Land. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Chapter 12 Water for the Future: Pgs Elizabeth Kolbert (2015, December 21) The Siege of Miami The New Yorker: Pgs Pgs Francis E. Jack Putz (2012) Florida Forests Retreat The Palmetto Florida Native Plant Society, 29 (1): Ken Sassaman (2016, May) What does Shell Mound Archaeological Site have to do with Water and Climate Change?

2 Supplementary Readings Pgs Pgs Paolo Bacigalupi (2015) The Tamarisk Hunter Loosed Upon the World: The Saga Anthology of Climate Fiction (ed. John Joseph Adams). New York: Saga Press: Steven Noll and David Tegeder (2011) The Wicked Ditch Will Never Die: The On- Going Controversy Over Rodman Reservoir Journal of Florida Studies. Pgs Lynn White (1967) The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis. Science, 155: Videos and Websites Introduction to Seahorse Key Marine Laboratory (which we will visit on Thursday June 22 nd ): Introduction to Systems and Next Generation Science Standards:

3 Reading Introductions Daniel Aronson: This short piece introduces the theme of systems thinking, a mode of analysis we will be using throughout the week to examine ecosystems and climate issues in Florida. How does this thought process allow us to examine Florida s ecosystems in different ways? How can we use this in our classrooms to encourage students to make broader connections among their studies? Leslie Paul Thiele: This book chapter introduces what Thiele calls the coevolutionary perspective and argues that this perspective is essential for a new environmentalism that approaches society and nature as an integrated system rather than as distinct, separate entities. Gary Snyder: This essay is a reflection on the first precept of Buddhism to commit no unnecessary harm and what actually counts as unnecessary harm in the modern food economy. Like Laudato Si, this piece is deeply concerned about the ethical relationships between humans, animals, and nature. The Holy See/Pope Francis: This public pronouncement, issued in 2015, examines human relationships to the planet around them. How does this ethical examination of our place on Earth tie into what we are discussing this week? Does it offer a bridge between the humanities and the sciences to offer solutions to social problems related to ecological issues? What other resources do we draw on in our daily lives to develop a sense of personal and shared environmental ethics? Margaret Atwood: This short work of fiction illustrates one possible narrative of climate change. How does this humanities-based intervention tie into the more scientific examinations that we have already viewed? How is the word desert a metaphor for what we are doing today and have done in the past? Is this piece hopeful or pessimistic? Can we use what we learned here this week to change this rather bleak vision or are our efforts simply re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? Elizabeth Kolbert: Published in December 2015, this piece from the New Yorker shows why South Florida is ground-zero for sea level rise. South Florida, and Miami in particular, is not designed to handle sea-level rise; its infrastructure was designed for a world that no longer exists. Without a guide book, South Floridians will have to make decisions about how to adapt to a new world shaped by a shifting climate and rising sea-levels. Nelson Blake: This classic book was written in 1980 and offers a snapshot into the issues related to Florida environmental policy of that time period. As you read this closing chapter, think about the following questions: What has changed in 30 years concerning Florida & public policy, especially regarding environmental and ecological issues? What has remained the same? Jack Putz: This piece introduces the very real changes happening to coastal flora, fauna, and life in Yankeetown, FL as linked to sea level rise. Look at how salt water intrusion changes and re-shapes existing ecosystems. What are some of the first indicators in an ecosystem of major change? What impact does this example from Yankeetown have on our responses to the problems associated with sea level rise? Ken Sassaman: This essay shows how human interaction with the environment (particularly a coastal environment) is fluid and ever-changing, not static and permanent. Native Americans in Florida lived a

4 life of perpetual adaptation to their climate. What does it tell us about the differences (and similarities) between how Native Americans viewed the coastline and how we see it and use it today? Paolo Bacigalupi: Tamarisks, a water-hungry plant, linger in the Colorado River basin. Hunters are paid to rip up these plants as a measure to preserve limited water resources since the arrival of Big Daddy Drought. Most of water from the Colorado River is fully controlled by the state of California while locals along the river basin struggle to bathe consistently. Ultimately, this unsettling story asks how water will be accessed and distributed in a world of perpetual drought. Steven Noll and David Tegeder: This essay examines the long-standing controversy over the continuing presence of the Rodman (Kirkpatrick) Dam on the Ocklawaha River. Built in the 1960s as part of the never-completed Cross-Florida Barge Canal, the dam s blockage of the river raises questions over human interaction with the natural environment. How do ecology, politics, and economics intersect in this complex problem? And the question remains: should the dam be removed? Lynn White: An introduction to the ecological crisis of the 21 st century (although this piece was written in 1967!) and its relationship to history, technology, economics, and religion. Though not specifically about climate, this piece forces the reader to think what forces shape the human relationship to the natural world.

5 _ Overview of Systems Oystems thinking has its foundation in the field of system dynamics, founded in 1956 by MIT professor Jay Forrester. Professor Forrester recognized the need for a better way of testing new ideas about social systems, in the same way we can test ideas in engineering! Systems thinking allows people'to make their understanding of social systems explicit and improve them in the same way that people can use engineering principles tojnake explicit and improve their understanding of mechanical systems. The Systems Thinking Approach The approach of systems thinking is fundamentally different from that of traditional forms of analysis. Traditional analysis focuses on the separating the individual pieces of what is being studied; in fact, the word "analysis" actually comes frbm the root meaning "to break into constituent parts." Systems thinking, in contrast, focuses on how the thing being studied interacts with the other "constituents of the system a set of elements that interact to produce behavior of which it is a part. This means that instead of isolating 'smaller and smaller parts of Jhe system being studied, systems thinking works by expanding its view to take into account larger and larger numbers of interactions qs an issue is being studied. This results in sometimes strikingly different conclusions than those generated by traditional forms of analysis, especially.when what is being studied is dynamically complex or has a great deal of feedback from other sources, internal or external. The character of systems thinking makes it extremely effective on the most difficult types of problems to solve: those involving complex issues, those that depend a great deal dependence on the past or on the actions of others, and those Daniel Aronson Thinking stemming from ineffective coordination among those involved. Examples of areas in which systems thinking has proven its value include: > Complex problems that involve helping many actors see the "big picture" and not just their part of it Recurring problems or those that have beeixmade worse by past attempts to fix-them > Issues where an action affects (or is affected by) the environment surrounding the issue, either the natural environment or the competitive environment > Problems whose solutions are not obvious Use of Systems Thinking An example that illustrates the difference between the systems thinking perspective and the perspeptiye taken by traditional forms of analysis is the action taken to reduce crop damage by insects. When an insect is eating a crop, the conventional response is to spray the crop with a pesticide designed to kill that insect. Putting aside the limited effectiveness of some pesticides and the water and soil pollution they can cause, imagine a perfect pesticide that kills all of the insects against which it is.used and which has no side effects on air, water, or soil. Is using this pesticide likely to make the farmer or company whose crops are being eaten better off? If we represent the thinking used by those applying the pesticides, it would look like this: - Pesticide.Application Insects Damaging Crops

6 (Reading the Diagram: The arrow indicates the direction of causation - that is, a change in the amount of pesticide applied causes a change in the numbers of insects damaging crops. The letter indicates how the two variables are related: an "s" means they change in the same direction - if one goes up then the other goes up, and an "o" means they change in the opposite direction - if one goes up then the other goes down (or vice versa). This diagram is read "a change in the amount of pesticide applied causes the number of insects damaging crops to change in the opposite direction." The belief being represented "here is that "as the amount of pesticide applied increases, the number of insects damaging crops decreases.") According to this way of thinking, the more ' pesticide is applied, the fewer insects there will be damaging crops, and the less total crop damage. The temptation is to say that eliminating the insects eating the crops will solve the problem; however that often turns out to not be the case. The problem of crop damage due to insects often does get better - in the short term. Unfortunately, the view diagrammed above represents only part of the picture. What frequently happens is that in following years the problem of crop damage gets worse and worse and the pesticide that formerly seemed so effective does not seem to help 'anymore. This is because the insect that was eating the crops was controlling the population of another insect, either rjy preying on it or by competing with it. When the pesticide kills the insects that were eating the crops, it eliminates the control that those insects were applying on the population of the other insects. Then the population of the insects*/ that were being controlled explodes and they cause more damage than the insects killed by the pesticide used to. In other words, the action intended to solve the problem actually makes it worse because the way N its unintended side effects change the system ends up exacerbating the problem. In fact, some studies suggest that a majority of the 25 insects that cause the most crop damage each year became problems to begin with because of exactly this cycle. Graphically, the way this happens can be represented as: Numbers of Insect A amaging Crop t Pesticide Application V otal Numberof Insects. Damaging Crop Numbers of Insect B I Numbers of Insect B Damaging Crop According to this understanding, the greater the pesticide application, the smaller the numbers of Insect A (the original pest) that will eat the crop. This leads to an immediate decrease in the numbers of insects eating the crop (note that this is the effect those applying the pesticides are intending). However, the smaller numbers of insect A eventually lead to greater numbers of Insect B (the hash marks on the arrow indicate a delay), because insect A is no longer controlling the numbers of insect B to the same extent. This leads to a population explosion of insect B, to greater numbers of insect B damaging crops, and to greater numbers of insects damaging the crop, exactly the opposite of what was intended. Thus, although the short-term effects of applying the

7 pesticide were exactly what was intended, the long-term effects were quite different. With this picture of the system in mind, other actions with better long-term results have been developed, such as Integrated Pest Management, which includes controlling the insect eating the crops by introducing more of its predators into the area. These methods have been proven effective in studies conducted by MIT, the National Academy of Sciences, and others, and they also avoid running the risk of soil and water pollution. The way that the broader perspective" of systems thinking creates the understanding necessary for better long-term solutions was also evident in work I did with a company whose industry was being deregulated. They seemed to be doing everything right in working on a customerrelations problem they were experiencing: they had a team of capable people working on it, they were using a process that had been successful many timesin the past, and they even had affected customers giving them feedback on.ptoposals to rectify the situation. However, they were having difficulty seeingthe big picture of how the way they historically did things was contributing to the problem. Working together over two days, I was able to help them see how the problem was being exacerbated and the most powerful actions they could take to solve it. The session ended with the creation of a strategy for "addressing the problem that was unanimously supported by the team and the customers. By seeing the whole picture, the team was able to think of new possibilities that they had not come up with previously, in spite of their best efforts. Systems thinking has the power to help teams create insights like these, when applied'well to a.suitable problem. (Other examples of positive results obtained by systems thinking in service, human resources, and high-technology industries can be found in Peter Senge's classic The Fifth Discipline and in The Systems Thinker newsletter, published by Pegasus Communications. 1 ) A Better Way to Deal with Our Most Difficult Problems So many important problems that plague-us today are complex, involve multiple actors, and are at least partly the result of past actions that were taken to alleviate them. Dealing with such problems is notoriously difficult and the results of conventional solutions are often popr enough to create discouragement about the prospects of ever effectively addressing them. One of the key benefits of systems thinking is its ability to deal effectively with just these types of problems and to raise our thinking to the level at which we create the results we want as individuals and organizations even in those difficult situations marked by complexity, great numbers of interactions, and the absence or ineffectiveness of immediately apparent solutions. Daniel Aronson is the host of the Thinking Page ( This article is Copyright Daniel Aronson 1 Senge, Peter, The Fifth Discipline NY: Currency/Doubleday, 1990 Pegasus Communications can be reached at (781) Note: Daniel Aronson is not affiliated with Peter Senge, Currency/Doubleday, or Pegasus Communications.

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46 ENCYCLICAL LETTER LAUDATO SI OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS ON CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME

47 and he is beautiful and playful and robust and strong The bishops of Brazil have pointed out that nature as a whole not only manifests God but is also a locus of his presence. The Spirit of life dwells in every living creature and calls us to enter into relationship with him. 65 Discovering this presence leads us to cultivate the ecological virtues. 66 This is not to forget that there is an infinite distance between God and the things of this world, which do not possess his fullness. Otherwise, we would not be doing the creatures themselves any good either, for we would be failing to acknowledge their right and proper place. We would end up unduly demanding of them something which they, in their smallness, cannot give us. V. A universal communion 89. The created things of this world are not free of ownership: For they are yours, O Lord, who love the living (Wis 11:26). This is the basis of our conviction that, as part of the universe, called into being by one Father, all of us are linked by unseen bonds and together form a kind 64 Canticle of the Creatures, in Francis of Assisi: Early Documents, New York-London-Manila, 1999, Cf. National Conference of the Bishops of Brazil, A Igreja e a Questão Ecológica, 1992, Ibid.,

48 of universal family, a sublime communion which fills us with a sacred, affectionate and humble respect. Here I would reiterate that God has joined us so closely to the world around us that we can feel the desertification of the soil almost as a physical ailment, and the extinction of a species as a painful disfigurement This is not to put all living beings on the same level nor to deprive human beings of their unique worth and the tremendous responsibility it entails. Nor does it imply a divinization of the earth which would prevent us from working on it and protecting it in its fragility. Such notions would end up creating new imbalances which would deflect us from the reality which challenges us. 68 At times we see an obsession with denying any pre-eminence to the human person; more zeal is shown in protecting other species than in defending the dignity which all human beings share in equal measure. Certainly, we should be concerned lest other living beings be treated irresponsibly. But we should be particularly indignant at the enormous inequalities in our midst, whereby we continue to tolerate some considering themselves more worthy than others. We fail to see that some are mired in desperate and degrading poverty, with no way out, 67 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), 215: AAS 105 (2013), Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 14: AAS 101 (2009),

49 while others have not the faintest idea of what to do with their possessions, vainly showing off their supposed superiority and leaving behind them so much waste which, if it were the case everywhere, would destroy the planet. In practice, we continue to tolerate that some consider themselves more human than others, as if they had been born with greater rights. 91. A sense of deep communion with the rest of nature cannot be real if our hearts lack tenderness, compassion and concern for our fellow human beings. It is clearly inconsistent to combat trafficking in endangered species while remaining completely indifferent to human trafficking, unconcerned about the poor, or undertaking to destroy another human being deemed unwanted. This compromises the very meaning of our struggle for the sake of the environment. It is no coincidence that, in the canticle in which Saint Francis praises God for his creatures, he goes on to say: Praised be you my Lord, through those who give pardon for your love. Everything is connected. Concern for the environment thus needs to be joined to a sincere love for our fellow human beings and an unwavering commitment to resolving the problems of society. 92. Moreover, when our hearts are authentically open to universal communion, this sense of fraternity excludes nothing and no one. It follows that our indifference or cruelty towards fellow 67

50 creatures of this world sooner or later affects the treatment we mete out to other human beings. We have only one heart, and the same wretchedness which leads us to mistreat an animal will not be long in showing itself in our relationships with other people. Every act of cruelty towards any creature is contrary to human dignity. 69 We can hardly consider ourselves to be fully loving if we disregard any aspect of reality: Peace, justice and the preservation of creation are three absolutely interconnected themes, which cannot be separated and treated individually without once again falling into reductionism. 70 Everything is related, and we human beings are united as brothers and sisters on a wonderful pilgrimage, woven together by the love God has for each of his creatures and which also unites us in fond affection with brother sun, sister moon, brother river and mother earth. VI. The common destination of goods 93. Whether believers or not, we are agreed today that the earth is essentially a shared inheritance, whose fruits are meant to benefit everyone. For believers, this becomes a question of fidelity to the Creator, since God created the world for everyone. Hence every ecological approach needs to incorporate a social perspective 69 Catechism of the Catholic Church, Conference of Dominican Bishops, Pastoral Letter Sobre la relación del hombre con la naturaleza (21 January 1987). 68

51 which takes into account the fundamental rights of the poor and the underprivileged. The principle of the subordination of private property to the universal destination of goods, and thus the right of everyone to their use, is a golden rule of social conduct and the first principle of the whole ethical and social order. 71 The Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable, and has stressed the social purpose of all forms of private property. Saint John Paul II forcefully reaffirmed this teaching, stating that God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone. 72 These are strong words. He noted that a type of development which did not respect and promote human rights personal and social, economic and political, including the rights of nations and of peoples would not be really worthy of man. 73 He clearly explained that the Church does indeed defend the legitimate right to private property, but she also teaches no less clearly that there is always a social mortgage on all private property, in order that goods may serve the general purpose that God gave them John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), 19: AAS 73 (1981), Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), 31: AAS 83 (1991), Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), 33: AAS 80 (1988), Address to Indigenous and Rural People, Cuilapán, Mexico (29 January 1979), 6: AAS 71 (1979),

52 Consequently, he maintained, it is not in accord with God s plan that this gift be used in such a way that its benefits favour only a few. 75 This calls into serious question the unjust habits of a part of humanity The rich and the poor have equal dignity, for the Lord is the maker of them all (Prov 22:2). He himself made both small and great (Wis 6:7), and he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good (Mt 5:45). This has practical consequences, such as those pointed out by the bishops of Paraguay: Every campesino has a natural right to possess a reasonable allotment of land where he can establish his home, work for subsistence of his family and a secure life. This right must be guaranteed so that its exercise is not illusory but real. That means that apart from the ownership of property, rural people must have access to means of technical education, credit, insurance, and markets The natural environment is a collective good, the patrimony of all humanity and the responsibility of everyone. If we make something our own, it is only to administer it for the good 75 Homily at Mass for Farmers, Recife, Brazil (7 July 1980): AAS 72 (1980): AAS 72 (1980), Cf. Message for the 1990 World Day of Peace, 8: AAS 82 (1990), Paraguayan Bishops Conference, Pastoral Letter El campesino paraguayo y la tierra (12 June 1983), 2, 4, d. 70

53 of all. If we do not, we burden our consciences with the weight of having denied the existence of others. That is why the New Zealand bishops asked what the commandment Thou shalt not kill means when twenty percent of the world s population consumes resources at a rate that robs the poor nations and future generations of what they need to survive. 78 VII. The gaze of Jesus 96. Jesus took up the biblical faith in God the Creator, emphasizing a fundamental truth: God is Father (cf. Mt 11:25). In talking with his disciples, Jesus would invite them to recognize the paternal relationship God has with all his creatures. With moving tenderness he would remind them that each one of them is important in God s eyes: Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? And not one of them is forgotten before God (Lk 12:6). Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them (Mt 6:26). 97. The Lord was able to invite others to be attentive to the beauty that there is in the world because he himself was in constant touch with nature, lending it an attention full of fondness and wonder. As he made his way throughout the 78 New Zealand Catholic Bishops Conference, Statement on Environmental Issues (1 September 2006). 71

54