the value of systems science to study pan-euro-asian futures · the value of systems science to...

The Value of Systems Science to Study

Pan-Euro-Asian Futures Prof Dr Pavel Kabat

IIASA Director General /CEO Professor of Earth System Science, Wageningen University, NL

THE EARLY 1970s

Sources: nuclearweaponarchive.org, The Guardian

Sources: US Department of Interior, IIASA

International, independent, interdisciplinary

Research on major global problems

Solution oriented, integrated systems analysis

22(25) NATIONAL MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS

IIASA: TRULY INTERNATIONAL • ~ 330 researchers in house include researcher scholars,

research assistants, postdoctoral research scholars, and young scientists from more than 50 countries

• ~25% of IIASA alumni (3,475 people worldwide) remain actively involved in IIASA research

• Active and formalized collaboration with over 300 institutions worldwide

• 900 visitors (science & science diplomacy) coming to IIASA and 180 international meetings hosted in 2013

• ~2050 researchers from some 65 countries involved in IIASA’s research network in 2013

6

IIASA’s Systems Science Approach

• Integrated • Interdisciplinary • International • Independent • Solution-oriented • Long term • Trade offs

= Systems Analysis

ADVANCED SYSTEMS ANALYSIS: • Dynamic Systems • Multi-criteria decision analysis • Adaptive dynamics theory • Game theory • Agent-based modeling • Stochastic optimization • …………

Food &

Water

Poverty

& Equity

IIASA Research Strategy

Energy

& Climate Change

Benefits of Systems Approach (Example)

• 2006-12: Global Energy Assessment involving 500 experts around the world

• 2009 to date: GEA provides critical input to Un Secretary-General’s Sustainable Energy For All Initiative including defining the aspirational yet feasible objectives: 1. Ensure universal access to modern

energy services 2. Double the global rate of

improvements in energy efficiency 3. Double the share of renewable

energy in the global energy mix 10

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050

EJ

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200 Energy savings (efficiency, conservation, and behavior) ~40% improvement by 2030

~55% renewables by 2030

Oil phase-out (necessary)

Nuclear phase-out (policy)

Source: Riahi et al, 2012

Einsparungen Andere E Nuklear Gas Öl Kohle Biomasse

Global Primary Energy no CCS, no Nuclear

Savings Other renewables Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Biomass

Biomass

Coal

Renewables Nuclear

Oil

Gas

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050

EJ

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200 Savings Other renewables Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Biomass

Source: Riahi et al, 2012

Biomass

Coal

Renewables Nuclear

Oil

Gas

Global Primary Energy China

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

EJ

0

50

100

150

200

250 Savings Other renewables Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Biomass

~50% efficiency and decline of coal by 2030

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050

EJ

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200 Savings Other renewables Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Biomass

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

EJ

0

50

100

150

200 Savings Other renewables Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Biomass

Global Primary Energy Europe

~30% renewables by 2030

Source: Riahi et al, 2012

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%

Only Energy Security Only Air Pollution and Health Only Climate Change All Three Objectives

Tota

l Glo

bal P

olic

y Cos

ts (2

010-

2030

)

Added costs of ES and PH are comparatively low when CC is taken as an entry point

Energy Policy Costs (% GDP)

Source: McCollum, Krey, Riahi, 2012

Systems Science Case Study 1:

Surprising Feedbacks

Between Land Biota and Climate

The Precursor: Wladimir I. Vernadsky

”The biosphere is a unique region of the Earth’s crust occupied by life.

There are no stronger chemical forces at the earth surface [...] than living organisms taken in their totality”.

1926

LE = 0.65 R n LE = 0.25 R n

H = 0.3 R n

H = 0.65 R n

Boreal Forest

Temperate Forest

Coupling Principles - Energy Balance Link R n = LE + H + S

0.10 R g

R n = 0.87 R g

0.10 R g

R n = 0.87 R g

S = 0.03 R n

S = 0.07 R n

25 m 10 m

PBL 1500 m

PBL 3000 m

CAPE + cloud activity characteristics

Regional Deforestation and Rainfall (Amazon)

Land cover type and rainfall

current landscape

(adapted from Pielke et al, 1997)

natural landscape, showing a significant impact on the development of clouds resulting from a change in land cover type

A mesoscale simulation of clouds at 21 GMT on 15 may 1991 over part of the USA

Transpiration

Surface evaporation

Surface runoff

Subsurface runoff Infiltration

Precipitation

CO2 rise, climate change and the hydrological cycle

Transpiration

Surface evaporation

Surface runoff

Subsurface runoff Infiltration

Precipitation

CO2 rise, climate change and the hydrological cycle

Affected by climate change

Transpiration

Surface evaporation

Surface runoff

Subsurface runoff Infiltration

Precipitation

CO2 rise, climate change and the hydrological cycle

Affected by climate change

Also affected directly by changing CO2 concentration (“Physiological Forcing” – Sellers et al, 1996)

Global mean runoff (mm day-1): HadCM3LC

Radiative forcing only Radiative + physiological forcing

Global mean runoff (mm day-1): HadCM3LC

Radiative forcing only Radiative + physiological forcing

Runoff increase is greater when reduced stomatal conductance due to CO2 is included. Greater increase in flood risk? But less increase in drought risk?

However……… • We still seroiusly oversimplify the role and

behaviour of the biosphere (vegetation) in our models (land surface models, climate models, earth system models…)

• Living biosphere in our models is actually a pretty much dead biosphere

• Verdanski (and Kopffen) would not be happy at all…

Living biosphere is………like us humans

• Clever….??? • Lazy…. • Selfish and competitive (and often

cruel)….. • Selective and choosy… • Amazingly resilient…… • Extremely vulnerable….

How could the local bio-chemical activity of terrestrial vegetation species evolve to serve

in the altruism of planetary regulation?

Pavel Kabat, Ruud Janssen, Laurens Ganzeveld, Marku Kulmala,

Andi Andreae,…

The DMS (DiMethylSulphide ) -feedback

Sea to air flux (+)

Loss of solar radiation to space

(-)

Earth Surface Temperature Solar irradiance below cloud

Marine CLAW hypothesis (DMS-feedback • Charlson, Lovelock, Andreae & Watson (CLAW) 1987,

Nature • Coupling marine biology, marine & atmospheric chemistry

and atmospheric physics – DiMethylSulphide largest precursor for CCN

production over oceans • Negative feedback: biological control on climate through

modification of planetary albedo, surface radiation and consequently on biological processes

• Earth System “Self-regulation”, ‘Homeostasis’

Terrestrial CLAW-equivalent: how this may work? • Plants emit Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) under influence of

light and temperature • VOC’s are partially converted into Secondary Organic Aerosols

(SOA) • These SOA work as Cloud Condensation Nuclei (CCN) • More CCN lead to a higher cloud albedo, longer cloud lifetimes and

lower precipitation efficiency • Less incoming solar radiation received by the Earth’s surface • Suppression of emission of VOC’s (directly and by suppressing

photosynthesis)

Photooxidation

T, PAR

Terrestrial ‘CLAW’

SOA

CCN

Cloud properties

atmosphere

biosphere Photosynthesis

Radiation budget

BVOC (isoprene, monoterpenes)

Phenonoly, long-term vegetation dynamics

Short-term emission variability (daily & seasonal cycles) and chemistry

BVOC’s: a component of an “intelligent” self-regulation??

• Side-products of

photosynthesis – Defense against predation – Communication – Protection from high

temperatures • Or just emitted because they

are volatile?

Examples of self-regulation hypothesis • Contrasting effects for contrasting regimes: • “Resilience” boreal forest to climate change

– Higher temperatures > more BVOC > more cloud formation > less insolation > lower temperatures

• Resilience Amazon to drying (global warming) – Higher temperature > higher BVOC > lower

insolation > lower temperature – Higher BVOC-emissions > more CCN > more

precipitation above forest > sustained soil moisture> etc..

T- CLAW feedback mechanism important for Earth System temperature self-regulation (homeostasis) and long term resilience???

- White daisies in Gaia can do it, DMS can do it, so why not BVOCs???

- Key importance for understanding of climate system feedbacks (negative feedback)

- Sensitivity: - Doubling of present DMS emission rates may counteract global

warming of up to 2 deg! - Doubling of present DMS and BVOCs rates may counteract global

warming of up to 4 deg…..

-

Living biosphere in earth system models….how to get beyond the present state of the affaires?

• To collaborate among: • Plant physiologists, • Physicists, chemists, hydrologists, meteorologists • Plant cell and evolutionary biologists… • Plant behavior and biological cognition scientists…

Systems Science Case Study 2: Ecology, Evolution, and Game Theory at IIASA as applied to Arctic Fisheries after Ulf Dieckmann Program Director IIASA Evolution and Ecology Program

Early Highlights in Ecology

Resilience dynamics

Pest management models Adaptive management

Early Highlights in Game Theory Game theory, decision analysis Indirect reciprocity

Replicator dynamics Win-stay, lose-shift Adaptive dynamics

Methodological integration

Interdisciplinary Bridges

Anthropogenic environmental impacts

Evolution Ecology Socio- economics

on fisheries, biodiversity, common goods, …

Management measures

Socio-economic system

Processors and retailers

Fishers

Consumers

Socio-economic environment

(Arctic) Fishery Systems Management system

Fishery policy and planning

Fishery management

Fishery development

Fishery research

Service values

Fishing pressure

Ecosystem status

Ecosystem services Supporting services

Regulating services

Provisioning services

Cultural services

Natural system Target stock

Non-target species

Ecosystem embedding

Physical environment

Management of Northeast Arctic Cod

Adult biomass (1000 tonnes)

Marine Policy 39:172 (2013)

• Challenge Harvest-control rules are politically negotiated without support from quantitative modeling

• Innovation Our assessment is process-based, couples an individual-based biological model with an economic model, and accounts for three alternative objectives

• Results Current rule maximizes profit, while alternative objectives lead to more aggressive exploitation

Yield-maximizing HCR (Johannesburg World Summit 2002)

Welfare-maximizing HCR Current HCR Profit-maximizing HCR

0 20 40 60 80 100 Mi

nim

um-s

ize lim

it (c

m)

Annual harvest proportion of unprotected stock (%)

5

10

15

2

0

Status quo

70%

Management of Barents Sea Capelin • Challenge Traditional

assessments account for quotas, yields, and a single stakeholder group

• Innovation Our assessment accounts for two regulations (quotas and minimum-size limits), four benefits (yields, profits, employment, and ecological impact), and five stakeholder groups

• Results Maximum joint satisfaction is high, and is best achieved through minimum-size limits

• Challenge Stock collapsed in 1992 and has not recovered since; heavy exploitation favors earlier maturation at smaller size

• Innovation Pioneering statistical and modeling techniques

• Results We have documented a 30% drop in size at maturation and showed that such evolutionary impacts of fishing are very slow and difficult to reverse

Collapse of Northern Cod

Moratorium

1975 1992 2004 30

80

70

60

50

40

Size at 50% maturation probability at age 5 (cm)

Nature 428:932 (2004)

Improving Fishing Policies • Challenge Evolutionary

considerations are a blind spot of current fisheries management

• Innovation Convened international expert group on Fisheries-induced Evolution as part of the scientific advice by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES)

• Results Monitoring maturation evolution has become a binding EU requirement; new tool: Evolutionary Impact Assessments (EvoIAs)

Science 318:1247 (2007) Science 320:48 (2008)

Systems Science Example 3

IIASA Arctic Futures Initiative (AFI)

…in contribution to PEEX……

What do we mean by the Arctic? … and what are the challenges?

Arctic Circle (66° 33'N)

1. Decision makers perspective 2. Economic perspective 3. Researcher perspective

Various definitions of the Arctic

Decision makers’ perspective • Arctic strategies of Canada, US, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Russia

– Shared features • Focus on strong position, credible defence • Economic growth • Sustainability • World leader in Arctic research

• Arctic Council – Dialogue forum about the code of conduct – Peaceful cooperation – Role and nature of observations, membership criteria – Disaster management – NO discussion on security issues, NOR economic exploitation

• Arctic parliamentarians – Legislation of the area – role of the Arctic Council – Role of indigenous people – Geopolitical friction in the region – Nature of global warming unclear – Race of resources – Different regulatory requirements > delays

Natural resources • Oil and gas

– Undiscovered 90 bn barrels of oil, 1669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, 44 bn barrels of natural gas liquids > 412 barrel s of oil and oil equivalent natural gas

• Mineral deposits – Rare earth minerals, cobalt, lithium and molybdenum – Zink, led, silver

• Sea Routes: Cargo ship activity increased by 36 percent and tanker activity 114 percent from 2008 till 2011 (AP)

• 20% of the worlds fish catch (primary product rise in the Russian zone) (E1)

• GDP per capita is very high

Oil and Gas Production

Pan-Arctic Transit Shipping

Conflicting interests….

GROWTH

LITTORAL STATES

MAXIMIZED EXISTENCE

SUSTAINABILITY

SHARED RESOURCES

COOPERATION AND PEACE

PREDICTION REQUIREMENTS NO DATA

FINLAND’S ARCTIC VISION “Finland is an active Arctic actor with the ability to reconcile the limitations imposed and business opportunities provided

by the Arctic environment in a sustainable manner while drawing upon international cooperation.”

Finland’s Arctic strategy is based on four pillars of policy: “an Arctic country, an Arctic expert, sustainable development and

environmental considerations, international cooperation.” Finland’s Strategy for the Arctic Region (23 August 2013)

Arctic research pattern Substance

Methodology specific integrative

holistic

University of Arctic (UArctic)

Arctic Technology Centre (ARTEK)

World Weather Research Program (WWRP)

specific

Arctic Contaminants Action Program (ACAP)

Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP)

Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF)

Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR)

Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME)

Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG)

International Arctic Science Committee (IASC)

Association of Polar early career scientists (APECS)

International Arctic Social Sciences Association (IASSA)

The Pacific Arctic Group (PAG)

Forum of Arctic Research Operators (FARO)

European Polar Board (EPB)

Pan-Eurasian Experiment (PEEX)

World Climate Research Program (WCRP)

Commission of Atmospheric Sciences (CAS/WCRP)

Euro-Arctic futures 2020

Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic (AACA)

IIASA Arctic Futures

Initiative

VALUES

ACTORS

DRIVERS

PRESSURE

Global economy

Investments

Trade

Regional economy

Oil and gas

CO2, CH4, BC

Temperature

Albedo land cover, land use

Melting

IIASA Arctic framework

VALUES

ACTORS

DRIVERS

PRESSURE

Global economy

Investments

Trade

Regional economy

Oil and gas

CO2, CH4, BC

Temperature

Albedo land cover, land use

Melting

IIASA Arctic framework

Resources, energy Population Economy Policy Society Technology Climate change, global h

Researchers Politicians Businesses Organisations Media General public

Culture National Institutional Equity Economic Common goods Security Transparency Trust Cooperation Sustainability

VALUES

ACTORS

DRIVERS

PRESSURE

Global economy

Investments

Trade

Regional economy

Oil and gas

CO2, CH4, BC

Temperature

Albedo land cover, land use

Melting

IIASA Arctic framework

Resources, energy Population Economy Policy Society Technology Climate change, global h

Researchers Politicians Businesses Organisations Media General public

Culture National Institutional Equity Economic Common goods Security Transparency Trust Cooperation Sustainability

Global <-> Regional States? Impacts? Responses? Feedbacks?

BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE GLOBAL DRIVERS ; IMPACT ON and FEEDBACKS WITH THE ARTIC

BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE ARCTIC DRIVERS IMPACT ON THE GLOBAL SYSTEMS

Holistic research approach by • Generating policy relevant

questions • Collaboration with the Arctic

Council, Arctic Economic Council, Arctic research community, governments, corporate decision makers and research funders

• Using IIASA methodological frameworks

• Holistic integrated assessment

ARCTIC FUTURES INITIATIVE

Systems Science is needed to put the ”Pan-Euroasian puzzle” together by emphasizing trans- and multidisciplinary, and multi-sectoral systems thinking, methodologies, applications and science to policy dialogue...

Thank you and welcome at IIASA soon !!