A version of this is to be published by the Frank Fenner Foundation.
The Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences (USA) has published, in late September 2016, a paper called
Anticipating
societal collapse; Hints from the Stone Age. This repeats speculation that
the Syrian conflict has in part been triggered by the worst drought in the
Fertile Crescent in its instrumental record, and it lists several mechanisms for why
societies can sometime be so slow to take evasive action that collapse becomes
inevitable.
One of these is called the “sunk-cost effect” – essentially, people
have invested so much effort and time in something that once worked, that they
keep on with the same approach, even though it is like sending more money after
bad. A second is the “bystander effect.” We are herd creatures and behave like
those around us. A third is that elites have a vested interest in maintaining
the status quo, thus blocking change – this mechanism surely is easy to see
today, in modern Australia and elsewhere.
The paper reviews evidence that
science can increasingly detect incipient collapse (by finding evidence of
falling “resilience”) and concludes by suggesting that science and big data be used
to scan the globe for empirical indicators of such declines, in the hope that
this will finally shift society’s behaviour. That seems reasonable, but
evidence alone will not be enough to overcome either the sunk-cost effect or to
convert predatory human elites into benevolent change agents. Furthermore, does
one really needs big science to sense that resilience is in decline – is not
the massive increase in global refugee numbers sufficient evidence of a major
problem?
Much of my own academic work (since
1991) has been relevant to social collapse. In particular, I have been making
the case that if societies collapse then this will do immense harm to public
health. Therefore, public health and medicine more broadly would be well served
– indeed they have a duty of care – to recognise these issues and to try
to prevent collapse. The bystander effect could switch from a liability to an
asset – humans can change their collective behaviour, not only to do harm (e.g.
by going to war) but to transform society in ways that mean civilisation can
survive, e.g. by switching to clean energy, eating less meat, and establishing
a fairer, more bio-sensitive world.
In the last three months I have
published two more articles about these topics, called Sounding the Alarm: Health in the
Anthropocene and Planetary
overload, limits to growth and health. They are both open access. I welcome
any comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment