If I were in Obama's shoes, what would I do NOW?

Consider: the economic crisis and related financial melt-down; global warming and climate change; energy; food; global unrest and potential resource wars...

These are global, substantial, and interrelated problems that are developing at rates that would have been unimaginable even just a year ago, just before I started this blog. Nothing like this, even the world wars and the great depression, has ever faced humanity. Most of the problems are the result of our own actions. And, sadly, our leaders don't really know what to do.

Right now it looks like Obama will win the election. The better of two possibilities is still not showing much savvy about the totality of these problems. If he believes that there is a chance for clean coal, or that raising taxes on the rich are the solutions, he really doesn't have a grasp as yet. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama is a very smart guy. I suspect he would be able to understand if he is getting the right information. As to whether that is happening still remains an open question. The stump speeches provide no evidence to support a positive answer.

But it isn't fair to criticize without some kind of suggestions about how to fix the deficiencies. So here goes. If I were in Obama's shoes I would be setting up an advisory board of some of the world's (not just the US's) most knowledgeable people on these problems. And by knowledgeable I mean scientists with broad and deep understanding of how the world works. Here is my list of people I believe would contribute positively to advising him (me) on how these problems interrelate and how to start corrective actions as soon as he (I) take office.

Global Warming

James Hansen leads the list here. He has shown a willingness to take political stands, especially on the issue of coal as the highest CO₂ source. He also has started showing an interest in the energy issues.

Population

There are a number of people who understand population pressures and the ecosystem damages suffered under large populations. Paul and Anne Ehrlich would be the people I would go to to address population growth and how it impacts everything else. My friend Ken Smail at Kenyon College has written a great deal about humane population reduction strategies.

Energy

Whoever is providing guidance on energy issues must have a grounding in physics of energy. I would go to David Goodstein at Caltech ("Out of Gas"). But I would also include the oil geologist Ken Deffeyes ("Beyond Oil") for his understanding of Peak Oil.

Since energy issues have many faces I would include Matt Simmons ("Twilight in the Desert"), who is an investment banker, so understands the financial side of energy and Robert Heinberg (several books, "Power Down" maybe the most useful) who has studied peak oil and social/economic consequences for years.

Vaclav Smil ("Global Catastrophes and Trends: The Next Fifty Years"), a Canadian(!) has produced some of the most comprehensive work on energy in society that I am aware of. I don't agree with some of his conclusions regarding the standardization of money with energy units (but then you have to have the ability to hear competing ideas!) but he is one of the most knowledgeable people around when it comes to energy. He has done considerable work regarding alternative energy sources.

Climate Change

You need biologists, climatologists, geologists — you name it! But one person that could act as a focal point for integrating information about climate change is Australian Tim Flannery ("The Weather Makers"). He is a naturalist's naturalist with his fingers on the pulse of the planet. Gustav Speth, Dean of the School of Forestry and Environmental Sciences at Yale ("Red Sky at Morning" and "The Bridge at the Edge of the World") has a very broad perspective and knows all of the people in the climate change community.

Human Nature

I actually have a long list of people in psychology and neurobiology that might be tapped for this, but at the top of my list is Howard Gardner (many books and "Multiple Intellegences&quout; fame). He is one of most holistic thinking people I've read when it comes to human nature. But I would also love to hear from Robert Sternberg (I've mentioned his work in wisdom research many times) and Michael Gazzaniga ("The Ethical Brain" and "Human: The Science Behind What Makes Us Unique"). Paul Ehrlich has tackled this area as well.

Economics

Herman Daly, Robert Costanza, Cutler Cleveland, and Charles Hall (who I just wrote about) are all involved in ecological or biophysical economics which is a much more comprehensive view of how the economy needs to work in order to provide sustainable wealth production.

Systems Science

As you might gather, if you have read some of my previous work, there are a number of people who come to mind in this area. These people are essentially the integrators. The folk who are able to talk multiple technical languages and bring disparate fields together for dialogue. One of my most treasured sources for systems thinking has been Fritjof Capra ("The Web of Life", but many more great books). so many of the other people I have named are truly systems thinkers so they should be able to communicate beautifully even when they disagree on points. But Fritjof is a systems scientist's systems scientist! Wisdom abounds in his views.

Chair

One of my all time heroes is E.O. Wilson at Harvard. I've mentioned before that I think he is one of the wisest human beings I have read. I'd actually opt for a co-chair with another biologist, Lynn Margulis, University of Massachusetts Amherst. Professor Margulis is the originator of the endosymbiotic theory of how complex eukaryotic cells were formed (organelle such as the mitochondria were once free-living organisms that took up residence in newly emerging nucleated cells). In general I think biologists have the broadest possible perspective on the world and nature, including humans. And both of these individuals have demonstrated deep wisdom about life in general.

There are many others that I would ask to participate in a part-time capacity or on an as-needed basis. I've dropped a few names around in previous blogs. But the real point is that the problems facing humanity need to be understood scientifically, including how humans are going to react to them. Politics and governance now have to have a very strong grasp on the real nature of the world, not some ideological understanding that in most cases is just plain wrong. This group of people share some interesting attributes that lead me to believe they would be able to provide sage advice. First they are all elders of our society. They have been around a bit. Second they all have professed a strategic vision of what could and should be. They have, as I have said, a systems perspective, meaning that they see the interconnectedness of all things. And they know everyone else in the various fields who could contribute. They have access to massive intellectual resources that it will take to make sense of what is happening to and in our world.

I would ask this group to meet and start formulating definitive frameworks for defining and resolving these issues. I would ask them to approach this from the perspective of the best available science and not on the basis of what would sell politically. I would want to know what the best minds on Earth understand, no matter how devastating the news might be. We need to know the truth.

If I were Mr. Obama, I would recognize the need to assemble wisdom and insight. I would put emphasis on the scientific world view because that is the only way we are going to grasp truth and reality. The time for politics is at an end. The time for rigorous understanding of how the world really works is at hand. He cannot rely on conventional wisdom, because, as we are seeing the conventional wisdom cannot provide answers.

Now, the question is, will Mr. Obama see this.

Comments

[Sukhbir Dadwal]

Wow Dr. Mobus, this is an amazing plan and I sincerely hope Obama is wise enough to implement at least parts of it. Your plan is very exciting but I hope it is not too good to be true.

I almost wish I hadn't sent in my mail in ballot, I should of voted for you as a write in!

[George Mobus]

Sukhbir,

Don't be throwing your vote away!!!

To tell the truth, I sometimes wonder what real power the president has. As we have seen with the Bush administration the only time you get to do what you want is when you scare everyone after a real threat surfaces. Otherwise Bush's legacy is one of inaction and incompetence.

Even if Obama wants to do the right things, can he?

The problem is that the people are just not willing to listen to a message of sacrifice and contraction. They want their toys and guns and they want their big houses. All of which is contributing directly to global warming and energy depletion. It seems the only time you can mobilize the populace is when calamity strikes (Pearl Harbor, 9/11, etc.). Obama's job (assuming he is elected) won't be easy as it is; knowing what to do. It will be harder still figuring out how to do it.

The best outcome for this election is Obama as president, a 60-member democratic, filibuster-proof Senate, and a large majority of democrats in the House. With that, he might be able to make some progress. Let's hope he gets a chance.

[Sukhbir Dadwal]

I was just kidding about the write in comment.

However, you are absolutley right, even if Obama wanted, he cannot do the right things because the American people will not let him.

It's sad but the truth is the typical American probably just wants Obama to fix the credit problems so he/she can buy that SUV they always wanted. While only a handful are thinking about the long term consequences.

[RBM]

Our political machine does not solve problems. People with ideas like yours do.

[George Mobus]

RBM,

But coming up with a solution isn't enough either. Implementation is the real problem, yes? The political machine holds the power for now. How to either turn the machine to implementation, or wait for the machine to self-destruct and be ready with an implementation; I wonder?

George

[SystemsThinker]

I think Obama is the closest thing we've had to a true systems thinker in the presidency in a long time, if not ever. And I suspect he is aware of many of the deeper problems you raise here. He is also aware of the limits of the current political system. I'm hopeful that he will do more than anyone else would have done in his position, but ultimately, if we want even deeper changes, it will be up to us to reform the political system on a level that makes it possible.

[George Mobus]

I hope you are right ST. I tend to see mixed signs. I'll agree he is the closest thing we've had to a systems thinker in a long time.

My sense on reforming the political system is that it will take a major breakdown in the current system (perhaps underway now) before the general public is ready to consider alternatives. Then the question will be will systems thinking come out on top?

George