- May 2022
A creative state refers to the idea that a nation state can transform in an intra-active way in response to new demands presented by the hyperthreat. The creative state can emerge as a far more powerful but just and agile entity, with increased agency to protect its people and natural systems. For democratic nations, the creative state also refers to democratic repair, which includes devolution of greater decision-making, analysis, and resources to local levels.
One way to affect the creative state is to promote a global campaign to encourage eco-civilizationally and social justice minded women to enter into local political leadership roles. Recent research shows that such system level change can result in far greater impact than ineffective individual scale change.
An analysis of “friendly forces” via a “tribal discourse” activity found that although many of humanity’s smaller and less powerful tribes are engaged in minor operations against the hyperthreat, its most powerful tribes often abet the hyperthreat (figure 2). If humanity’s tribes could be united against the hyperthreat, the current balance of probabilities, which currently lie with a hyperthreat victory and a Hothouse Earth outcome, could be recast.
This is the key idea behind mobilizing an effective global, multi-stakeholder, bottom-up response. Minor operations implies an aggregate approach that has little impact, otherwise known colloquially as "tinkering at the edge". IPCC AR6, WGIII Chapter 5 articulates this same message and for the first time, outlines that demand side system changes can play a significant role in mitigation effectiveness against the hyperthreat. It must be collectively organized individual change that scales to community scales around the globe in order to have impact, leveraging what the IPCC call "middle actors".
An effective strategy must be very time sensitive to the short time window to peak emissions so must identify all leverage points, idling resources and social tipping points available to a global bottom-up mobilization.
- IPCC AR6 Chapter 5
- leverage points
- IPCC AR6
- vote for women
- social aspects of mitigation
- middle actors
- social tippping points
- women leaders
- idling resources
- Apr 2022
But it turns out there isn’t such a hard-line distinction on where individual action ends, because even individual actions can have network effects. In between, there are schools, counties, cities, professions, and peer groups that can push for climate action. The IPCC calls these “middle actors.”
The middle actors are a strategic group.
So the bottom line of the IPCC’s first look at individual action is this: By reexamining the way we live, move around, and eat, the world has the potential to slash up to 70 percent of end-use emissions by 2050. Change is even possible in the very short term. And while hard data and peer-reviewed science show individual actions do matter, ultimately, the world has to think beyond the individual carbon footprint in addressing the climate crisis, including thinking about how individuals can bring about structural change.
This is exactly what SRG has been advocating for in its bottom-up, rapid whole system change approach.