Global balance and the environment - Development feedback loop

Since developers have become more aware of the environment, policy-makers have noted a link between environmental and societal instability hinting at a human-nature planetary balance that hosts both stabilising retroactions and disruptive feedback loops: within the ecosystem, within society, and alsoconnecting both dimensions. The commonly feared scenario is a “business as usual” neglect of natural balance, but the severe impairment ofthe ecosystem favours conditions worse than “business as usual”. It would trigger human fragility, instability, and conflict which can paralyze society’s ability to manage the ecosystem itself. This, in turn, could worsen environmental degradation, creating even greater instability and conflict in a dangerous self-feeding cycle. If verified, this understanding has deep operational implications and would ultimately require a revision ofour economies. Policies are already being launched based on this perception, although it has not been investigated in rigorous quantitative terms: a call is out for science to fill the gap.


Introduction
A ew era bega fr devepet i 2016 with a ew ageda that sets Wrd devepet curse uti 2030 buidig  the previus iteratia fraewr the ieiu Devepet Gas This was a ist f eight bectives which ed a re articuated architecture 17 gas that specified 169 subtargets ( Figure 1) ad subected t itrig thrugh a set f quatitative idicatrs 1 This set f actis is y the surface f a deeper revuti i perspective the true vety f the 2030 Devepet Ageda is that it refects a ew awareess abut the wrd we ive i the eed fr gba baace The 2030 Devepet Ageda is ivative by three ai features  its devepet gas are quaified as sustaiabe  it shifts the perspective f eway aid  fr the rich t the pr  t the hri f a shared iterest t better devep tgether ad fudaetay 2 Understanding global balance: the "Earth's matrix" Huaity vibrates fr achieveets that rhye with the ever grwig chage we ca prgress expasi grwth Istead with few exceptis we vaue baace as a viabe cditi but t as a ga ad it is i this sese fr istace that baace is a ccer i the ecy 2 We tae baace fr grated especiay whe it refers t a stabe ad predictabe ecsyste atura baace has aiy bee preserved by the bisphere sice the set f the agricutura revuti ad we teded t tae it fr grated t reaisig that withut baace we cat achieve grwth r expasi  it is ipssibe t structure a stabe sciety ad prgress withut reyig  atura cyces which are a expressi f baace Eve wrse we teded t cceive baace as a static cditi ad therefre as ihibitig chage grwth ad prgress I this idset we saw the eviret as a factr iitig weath 3 4 ad fet that there was a tradeff that we had t ce t ters with ser r ater sice ur paet's resurces are fiite prtectig evireta stabiity ay we be a ecessary burde i the ed but it ca y ce at the expeses f devepet The 2030 Ageda istead ipies that baace is t y cpatibe with prgress ad chage but as that there ust be a dyaic baace betwee huaid ad ature that acts as a prpeig factr fr expasi ad quaity f ife a syergy istead f a tradeff The iteractis haressed withi such paetary baace ca be described at varius eves f cpexity i ters f a atrix shwig hw the whe situati evves as a resut f the variati i its eeets Previus devepet agedas hited i this directi the iages chse t cuicate bth the ieiu Gas ad the 2030 Ageda d  ie a atrix with siiar graphics pacig each ga i a bx I bth tabes the differece betwee seeig the as a atrix istead f a ere ist f gas csists f idetifyig the fuctis cectig the differet bxes which we are y startig t expre i quatitative ters The fact that each f the 2030 Ageda gas wi be itred usig quatitative idicatrs is t ureated ust e step away fr taig a path t itr their iteractis ad gruped evuti If we  at the agedas i this perspective we recgise fuctis that cect fr istace ife  ad with quaity educati that i tur refect   pverty which agai is a factr i peace ustice ad strg istitutis the ed resut f which cud agai i tur reshape ife  ad ad quaity educati I ther wrds we are cpig with tras sectr ca regia ad eve gba feedbac ps Uderyig the 2030 Ageda a re rgaic tabe ca describe gba baace  fr a athrpic pit f view -as a dyaic reatiship betwee the eviret devepet hua rights ad peace ( Figure 2)

The threat of a mankind-nature system collapse
There sees t be a feedbac p at wr ag the fur diesis if ad is ctaiated it wi  ger sustai its wer wh ca bece vuerabe t abuses pre t igrati r easier prey fr faaticis Cversey if see is grated a suder educati they ca aage better their far defed it fr ctaiati cut  a re digified iveihd ad therefre resist teptatis t egage i cficts ad s   atter which part f the atrix is subected t iitia stress r iprveet its csequeces ca cycicay reverberate  the three reated diesis ad grw i scpe ad ipact Feedbac ps aw us t better uderstad ad cuter the ca dyaics f cuped scietaevireta disrupti They have a expaatry ad predictive pwer i ca crises i which uderdevepet the cpressi f rights viece ad evireta decay see trapped i a iextricabe cyce where every stress factr sees t be bth a cause ad a effect 5 6 At this pit i tie hwever these dyaics  re tha ca ad cfied We face ruaway ciate chage the great acceerati i species exticti ad cea acidificati ag varius scearis f evireta capse which are theseves the prduct f the feedbac ps that huaity is triggerig withi the atura wrd Eve if these ecsystewide threats prve t be verestiated idividuay gba evireta ubaace is as a fucti f grwig ca ad sectria perturbatis re tha the resut f their su it iics the prduct f their utipicati because ca r sectria ubaaces ted t fuse ad trigger further ubaace 7 8 These treds wud be prbeatic eve if they y deveped withi the atura wrd but the prspect is wrse as they resate crss ad verap with cyces f hua istabiity Fr the i betwee years f uprecedeted drught ad the Syria crisis t the re payed by the agy f ae Chad i fsterig B Hara a the way t the tesis arud the shriig Sea f Ara disruptive huaeviret ps are utipyig ad cvergig Evireta degradati is fte prected i future scearis aitaiig huaity as a ratia r a reactive spectatr but the greatest uw variabe fr the future is hua behaviur i the ctext f a grwigy dysfuctia ecsyste t the ecsyste itsef If the ipairet f ecsyste services beces severe it wi trigger scieta ad istitutia fragiity istabiity ad cfict which i tur wi paraye sciety's aptitude t ratiay aage the ecsyste itsef predati f ature is a shrtter way ut i ipverished ctexts 9 This i tur cud wrse evireta degradati creatig eve greater istabiity ad cfict i a dagerus seffeedig cyce ( Figure 3)   Fig. 3. Self-feeding cycle of environment stress [10][11][12] The need to break this cycle concerns all societies, but it is an absolute priority in developing regions [13][14][15]. If adaptation fails there, hen these areas will opt out of the longer term strategic challenge of mitigation and global environmental recovery from the onset, to the detriment of everyone's interests [16,17]. At the same time, poorer communities are more likely to become hotspots of instability where human-environmental disruption cycles start, gain global momentum, and finally impact wider regions, dragging them into mitigation "paralysis" [18]. Development aid, from this perspective, acquires a new status: far beyond an instrument to bridge a gap in justice, it stands out as the first action needed to defuse a planet-wide loop of instability, provided it is environmentally compliant, integrated, and mainstreamed.

Conclusions
Feedback loops within the interconnectedness of the global system are threatening, and introduce a frightening degree of complexity: our task is not to solve a collection of isolated problems but to halt and reverse interlinked loops. But -once connection knots are identified -loops can provide a powerful amplifier to bring balance back on track, as we can leverage the interconnectedness in the opposite direction, towards rebalancing the system.
An imbalance in one sector tends to propagate to others and start cumulative cycles of instability, but the opposite also seems true: rebalancing crucial regions, sectors or dynamics could start a cascading cycle of wider rebalancing. This notion is surfacing at the operational level as we start to identify "co-benefits". Clearly, protecting biodiversity helps fight climate change, for instance; and even more promisingly, the societal co-benefits of environmental actions and the environmental co-benefits of socio-economic advances are emerging. In a circular balance system, the myth of the trade-off between nature and progress is dead.
Co-benefits are revealing feedback loops in a coherent global balance that can host both disruptive and constructive trans-sector cycles. The one feature that would make this balance coherent is "mixed" loopswith both beneficial and destructive cascade consequences, among which a trade-off could be pondered -which seem to be foreign to the system: all dynamics tend to resolve either in a comprehensively constructive cycle or in its opposite, while mixed balances mostly characterise transition phases or, more often, are considered "progress" by a group of temporary "winners" to the detriment of "losers"; but the total sum remains negative for the system. It could suggest that what is fair and good for humanity as a whole tends to be protective of nature and, vice versa, that a healthy nature improves quality of life and encourages that more equitable development with which we are engaged in the 2030 agenda: no trade-offs.
Cyclical connections come with equivalences: fighting poverty means protecting the environment; involving women in building green belts improves security and economy; more justice in a region will propagate to other parts of the planet. The possible combinations are endless. This does not mean that we can avoid selecting priorities; the law of marginal utility tells us we should intervene first where the problem is more severe, such as poorer communities, or more fragile ecosystems that -this is not a coincidence -tend to overlap on the map.
A matrix is a mathematical architecture. It would not be surprising if its ultimate solution lies in a simple and elegant equation, like the one physics is struggling to find in a theory of everything. An equation for Earth's theory of all is emerging: environment = justice.