Systemic approach: the way to solve our current problems

Personally, I feel enormous difficulties to believe that only one field of science or engineering can become the answer for the several problems we are constantly facing in our daily lives.

Undoubtedly, one of the main current problems for mankind is related to environmental issues; which derivate to other correlated problems like an enormous web. And, perhaps, the first warnings started at the 70's, which led Paul Ehrlich to develop the following equation:

I  =  P x A x T

where, I = impact; P = population; A = affluence; T = technology.

By analyzing this equation, we can imagine how many jeopardies are concealed in the future. The improvement of sanitation, urban conditions, medicine knowledge and so on, has greatly stretched human life expectance. Obviously, especially after the WWII, there was a sharp population boom all around the world.
And, it is likely that the world population will continue to grow throughout this century.

Affluence is also an important question. A sudden and drastic reduction of consumption patterns will hamper economics. Consequently, it could lead several people to critical standards in a chain effect, and it would also be against one of the basic prerrogatives of sustainable development: the satisfaction of basic and daily needs. For example, the sharp economic development of some countries, allowed the increasing of their population, which under other economical scenarios would not be possible.

Is technology the key to solve this problem? By analyzing this equation, it would suggest that the more advanced the technology is, the lower would be the environmental burden. In simple words, this equation, optmistically puts all hopes in green and clean technologies.

Technology itself has social implications which can be hardly assessed with accuracy. I suppose that both the bad or good spillovers (externality) can be attributed to the way of technology is implemented. However, the issue is that generally the technologies are built in a cartesian approach, focusing only one objective, ignoring the effects in chain.

A simple example: one of the causes for the environmental problems such as heat island and especially in summer lies in the replacement of the original surface by asphalt in cities. So, let's focus on the asphalt. It warms up faster than bare soil, and the difference can be sensed at afternoon. The bigger the length the asphalt layer is, the more energy it accumulates.

However, asphalt layers are engendered to cope with the load of trucks, cars and motorcycles.

But, what is the big deal?

Mankind does not have the perception of thinking in a system, but in cartesian approaches. It is hardly difficult to imagine a conversation amidst carmakers, urban planners and transport enginners in order to analyze the synergic relation between automobiles, roads and heat island. However, if the vehicles were engendered in order to decrease the total weight, in a systemic approach, transport engineers could later slightly decrease the thickness of the asphalt layer designed to cope with the load of trucks, cars and so on.

As a final effect, it would decrease the accumulated energy in the asphalt and also slightly alleviate the temperature gradient of this layer.

Does it tackle the problem of urban heat island? Probably not, but, undoubtedly, it can alleviate.

However, is mankind trained to think in an holistic way? I doubt it.

Moreover, with this possible necessity of diminishing the automobiles weight would lead to more sophisticated approach of materials. By the way, Toyota has been targeting biodegradeble plastics made from, e.g., sweet potatoes, to utilize in its cars. If, for example, it can decrease the weight of cars, the nanotechnology would gain a much greater importance than it has now.

Obviously, a systemic approach would have a much greater impact than isolated cartesian initiatives to tackle global climate changes.

Nevertheless, it is an excellent time to start thinking in a systemic approach.