On a personal note, even though technology has attracted a lot of interest and funding to combat climate change, it is becoming more and more clear that taking care of the "Human Dimension" is just as equally important. This change acknowledges that there are social and behavioral aspects to climate change in addition to environmental ones. Understanding and changing the attitudes, actions, and social structures that contribute to climate change are essential components of placing an emphasis on the human element. Involving communities in climate action, guaranteeing fair access to resources, encouraging sustainable lifestyles, and raising public awareness are all part of it. Through the integration of social sciences and technological advancements, more resilient and effective holistic strategies can be developed. In the end, taking into account the human factor in addition to technological advancements can result in more inclusive and sustainable solutions, encouraging a social movement toward long-term environmental stewardship. However, is it possible that one of these factors may be more important than the other? Which should be accorded more cognizance, funding and research attention at this times?
Both technological advancements and the human dimension are critical in combating climate change. Rather than prioritizing one over the other, a balanced approach that integrates both can lead to more effective and inclusive solutions. By recognizing the strengths and limitations of each, policymakers, researchers, and funding bodies can ensure that climate action is both innovative and socially responsible.
Thanks Raghad Mouhamad , I particularly love the aspect of emphasis on "...the need for (climate actions to be) innovative (and socially responsible). Very vital
The human and technological aspects need to be secondary to ecological awareness. Humans will not change: I stopped cutting lawns 5 years ago (that stops 5% of carbon emissions). I drive at 80 kph (that saves 15%. New Zealand drivers regularly pass me at 150 kph, paying no attention to our 100kph maximum speed, burning twice as much petrol.
The "technology can fix it boys" ignore their effect on flora and fauna. So DDT is great for controlling pests, but it kills all insects, now reduced by an average of 70% worldwide. Birds that rely on insects, like swallows, must also decline by 70%. On my study area starlings are still dying of DDT poisoning, although it was banned in 1968. Capturing and storing carbon underground takes a lot of energy.Why not just stop producing it?
Ecology tells us the world can support 2 billion humans, above that we burn capital. There is plenty of capital, but we fight for it, as you may have noticed.
The human factor, of course. No one likes to talk about it, but a human to live reasonable life needs a certain amount of resources, and procuring these resources is what drives climate change. At the current pace of human reproduction we will run out of these resources very quickly.
But, Dr. John Flux, doesn't "Ecological Awareness" fall within the parameters of the human factor? Or who "gains awareness" or "lacks it"? ...will really love it if you shed more light on that sir, please.
Margarita Orlova, I particularly love your response, Perhaps, I feel that is part of what Dr. John Flux was making reference to in the examples he analysed/referenced in his explanation.
Of course, the human factor comes first, and then technology. Essentially human mental setup has to grow up (strengthened by the knowledge base, rather than promoting or adopting a consumerist lifestyle that enhances profit-making, waste generation, resource exhaustion, and pressure on the environmental support system) to combat the challenge (then technology would flow in)
@ Ebenezer Odji This is an interesting discussion. I feel that civilised humans have become separated from the real, ecological world; they want to make everything "better" - for themselves. Uncivilised races have adapted to exist in the real world, and do not overeat their food supplies.
For an open to air essay on this, giving my background and the implications for us, Google "John Flux Deevey"
I think: of course the human factor is more important than the technological factor in combating climate change because it drives the awareness, policy changes, and behavioral shifts necessary for sustainable solutions. on the other hand, technology provides tools and innovations to reduce emissions and adapt to changing conditions, it is the human commitment to change—through responsible consumption, activism, and the enforcement of environmental regulations—that ensures these technologies are implemented effectively. Without the collective will and action of people, even the most advanced technologies would fail to make a significant impact.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Filing