Kicking Up A Ström

If a convincing and realistic case is to be made for the use of Planetary Boundaries as a commercial sustainability framework, there are a couple of bases to be covered first. To start with (and what this post will take care of), understanding Rockström et al.’s concept in a little more detail, and then (in the following posts) adding context to the facts and figures by exploring how industrial activity contributes to each boundary variable.

At the heart of the theory are the 9 critical Earth-system processes identified by the team at the Stockholm Resilience Centre. These are:

·         Climate change

·         Rate of biodiversity loss

·         Interference with Nitrogen and Phosphorus cycles

·         Stratospheric ozone depletion

·         Ocean acidification

·         Global freshwater use

·         Change in land use

·         Chemical pollution

·         Atmospheric aerosol loading

The thresholds of those in red have already been crossed and those in blue are rapidly being approached. Rockström et al. go into some detail regarding the former, which I have summarised below.

Climate Change

Anthropogenic climate change is now beyond dispute and the fact that the effects of breaching the following 2 parameters are already being seen, has contributed to the exacting of this threshold.

·         2 parameters used to set climate change thresholds:

o   Atmospheric concentration of CO₂ (threshold = 350ppmv; current = 390ppmv)

o   Radiative forcing - the rate of energy change per unit of the globe as measured at the top of the atmosphere (threshold = 1Wm^-2; currently = 1.5Wm^-2)

o   A critical threshold of between 350ppmv and 550ppmv is observed from past Palaeoclimate data from the last 100 million years and subsequently, these thresholds aim to maintain the large polar ice sheets today.

Rate of Biodiversity Loss

Whilst extinction is natural, during the Anthropocene biodiversity loss has accelerated massively and currently, the rate is estimated to be between 100-1000 times that which could be considered natural.

Although quantifying a boundary for biodiversity loss is difficult, we can say with some certainty that Earth cannot sustain the current rate for much longer without incurring seriously detrimental consequences.

Nitrogen and Phosphorus Cycles

Modern agricultural practices (i.e. fertilizers) are a huge proportion of human dealings with N2, which in total convert more N2 from the atmosphere into reactive forms than the combined effects of terrestrial processes. Similarly, we are processing roughly 8 times the natural background rate of Phosphorus influx.

Detrimental effects include: pollution of waterways and coastal zones, accumulation in land systems, adding a number of gases to the atmosphere, enhancing the greenhouse effect and shifting lake systems from clear to turbid.

What Rockström and his team have done here is actually more progressive than it might seem. For decades now, we have been aware that our activities could have environmental implications but have perhaps always adopted the ‘leave it to the next generation’ mind set. However, this piece is both timely (in the sense that ‘too late’ seems to be edging ever-closer) and constructive (in the sense that from it, we can know exactly where we stand). And whilst there is a degree of uncertainty surrounding the set thresholds, there is little doubt that each variable is increasing continually. So basically, either way you look at it, we should be urging actions now rather than later. 

A New Beginning

One of the major things marking humans out from other species is our ability to manipulate the resources around us in order to produce and manufacture on a remarkable scale. This is, as we know, an increasingly global affair, as are the associated consequences. 

The industrial revolution not only saw the rise of large manufacturing hubs designed for the mass production of specialised goods, but also of extensive transportation networks tasked with distributing these goods across the globe. Both of these developments had serious environmental repercussions – increased resource consumption, air pollution, habitat destruction – the list is extensive. In fact that list has continued to grow steadily since the mid-1700s. So it is safe to say that industrial activity has an awful lot to answer for in terms of contributing to global environmental change. Thus, if we are to tackle it effectively, what better place to start than with multinational companies and global industrial giants?

Sustainable development is not a new concept by any means; in fact I am sure we are all familiar with the notion of meeting production needs whilst simultaneously preserving the environment that facilitates that production. However, actually implementing that concept has often been a far greater challenge than devising the technology to make it possible.  

Johan Rockström, working with a group of scientists at the Stockholm ResilienceCentre, outlines a framework formulated as a set of ‘Planetary Boundaries’, which define a ‘safe operating space for humanity’. Including elements such as Biodiversity Loss, Ocean Acidification and Land Use, the work presents the Earth’s current levels of each variable on a scale in relation to a ‘critical point’, beyond which we are operating in unsafe territory.

This blog will explore the potential for pursuing an agenda of sustainable development using Planetary Boundaries as a framework to implement it. It will take the stance that industries are the crucial starting point for change and in doing so, cover the ways Multinational Companies can adapt, reap benefits and kick-start an Industrial Evolution.