Climate-Change Response: a System View

In this post I continue my journey (started here) as a software systems thinker approaching the problem of climate change from a systems perspective. Having laid out the basics of system thinking, I can now dive into the climate problem and start exploring the system that underpins it. As noted in my first post, I’ll be taking a more analytic/wonky lens than I might in my day job as a business-focused product manager, with the goal of laying solid foundations for future strategic thinking.

A major caveat: I’m going to focus on the system in the US; of course, climate change is a global issue and different regions and economies face different challenges. But the US is in a position to lead the world on climate response so it is a convenient place to start; and the underlying systems should share similarities across regions, even if the nuances are different.

Climate change is the quintessential problem requiring system thinking. It’s an incredibly complex problem (and truly, complex, not just complicated, as in the Cynefin model), overflowing with dependencies, convoluted incentives, and the inherent unknowability and unpredictability of how the planet will respond to our actions. Moreover its genesis goes back ~200 years to the Industrial Revolution, and the forces that have shaped it — like fossil fuels, shifts in land use, and globalization — are the same ones that have driven global development and growth across major societal and economic transformations.

So the climate-change system is not only inherently complex, but it’s also inextricably intertwined with the economic and social order that has delivered global prosperity and growth — much of which may have to change to achieve decarbonization and achieve targets like keeping global mean temperature rise below 1.5 °C. It will stretch all the systems-thinking tools we have to make sense of it and identify opportunities for doing more.

But let’s not be daunted! Even the most complex systems will reveal their leverage points with patient application of systems thinking. And the first step in doing that is to identify the main forces and actors within the system. I’m going to try to do this in a way that encompasses the entire climate system in all its sprawl and complexity — so it will necessarily be high-level and may not look like something that gives immediate insight. But that’s ok — the goal right now is to create the foundation for more insightful system analysis down the road.

So, what are the main forces affecting the climate-change-response system?

• Solutions: all the technologies, science, practices, and supporting ecosystems (e.g. consulting, deployment, measurement, etc.) that drive reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and/or sequester carbon from the atmosphere. This is an extremely broad category covering all the tangible interventions that affect GHG levels, from grid decarbonization to alternative protein to low-carbon industrial materials to changes in agricultural practice to smart buildings and much more.
• Capital: the funding needed to develop and deploy solutions. This is also a broad category, including sources like venture and project funding as well as philanthropic and corporate capital.
• Economics: primarily, the market prices of climate solutions relative to the prices (and availability) of GHG-emitting alternatives (like fossil fuels, traditional carbon-intensive industrial processes, etc.), and the factors affecting those prices.
• Policy: the legal and regulatory frameworks, including incentives and penalties, affecting the deployment of climate solutions and deployment of capital into those solutions, as well as the viability of continued deployment of GHG-emitting technologies and practices.
• Societal context: the “state of mind” of society regarding climate change, which influences policy, capital, solution adoption, and urgency of change. Societal context includes factors like: the dominant cultural narrative on climate change; the political landscape; the legal landscape and precedents (e.g. around liability of GHG emitters, or recent Supreme Court ruling in West Virginia v. EPA); popular perception and awareness of climate change and its impacts, attitudes toward actors in the system, awareness of disparities in climate impacts, and attitudes toward prioritizing social justice; and popular motivation to make decisions and/or sacrifices for climate outcomes.
• External shocks: events that make visible the impact of climate change and/or significantly shift economics — for example the Ukraine war and disruptions to Russian gas, extreme weather events, climate refugee crises due to displacement from sea level rise, etc.).

These forces are very much not independent; for example, external shocks can change the societal context enabling policy changes that shift the economics of certain solutions, causing an influx of capital to scale them. Here’s a visualization of some of those interactions:

The other key part of our climate-system map is the actors who participate in it, wielding and shaping the above forces. (Note that I’m focusing on the human-driven actors whose behavior we can potentially influence; the planet itself is an important but implicit actor in the system.)

• Producers (primarily but not exclusively corporations): entities that produce outputs (products, food, fuel, electricity, etc) and services, typically companies generating carbon emissions through their operations or supply chains. These are also potential buyers/adopters of climate solutions
• Solution creators: companies creating climate solutions or participating in solution delivery ecosystems, like consultants and installers
• Financers: sources of capital or financing
• Consumers: individuals making decisions to buy/use technologies, products, and services (including from both producers and solution creators)
• Governments: federal, state, local, and international governments and governmental organizations that set policies and help shape societal context
• NGOs: organizations (typically non-profit) that advocate for policies, convene and align other actors, and help shape societal context
• Activists: individuals and groups that speak out and/or take intentional action to raise awareness and drive change in societal context. I include artists, celebs, and media/communication organizations in this bucket.

Adding the actors to our picture helps reveal some of the interactions and underscores the complexity of the system:

These complex interactions drive some of the biggest challenges in the climate system, like readiness and scalability of climate solutions, unsustainable economics, resistance from entrenched interests, and a disaffected societal context. With a basic model of the system, though, we are equipped to start unpacking these challenges, understanding why they manifest and what we might do to change things — both in terms of specific solution opportunities as well as more holistic change opportunities that lie outside pure solutions.

My plan is to explore both of these dimensions in future posts as I continue my “system thinker’s journey into climate”. I hope you’ll come along with me, and as always let me know if you find this systems-thinking perspective useful (feedback and dialog always welcome — comment here or find me at abbrown at gmail.com)!

This series continues with my next post looking at solution opportunities in the climate system, here.