Civilisations, even the greatest ones, come with an expiry date. As we know, greatness did not protect earlier civilisations, such as Ancient Egypt or the Greek and Roman empires, from collapse. Research from the University of Cambridge tells us that the average lifespan of a civilization is a meagre 336 years.[i] What does this mean for our Modern Global civilisation? How many more years do we have? And what can we learn from previous civilisations and the factors that preceded their collapse?

Our civilization has achieved amazing things: from curing previously deadly diseases to travelling into space, from connecting people around the globe in an instant to developing carbon capture technology. Unfortunately this greatness tends to blind us to the severity and urgency of the risks we are facing today. We think that our civilization is better and more advanced than previous ones, and that therefore it is somehow resistant to collapse. We think of our own civilisation as permanent, as the ultimate civilisation that has achieved what humans can possibly achieve. We think of our world as the pinnacle of evolution. I bet you that those Ancient Egyptians, Greeks and Romans thought the same.

This makes us too slow to respond when the risks finally dawn on us, and too focused on one-dimensional solutions. Many of us believe that technology and innovation, which have indeed served us so well in overcoming challenges of the past, are the servants that can continue to make sure we stay ahead. We think within civilizational boundaries which we do not question. But ignoring complexity and failing to look at the bigger picture from a systems perspective is dangerous.

No matter how advanced our Modern Global civilisation may be, it certainly is not immune to collapse. Greatness may actually be a risk factor: greatness seems to correlate with complexity, and both real and perceived greatness has led to the sort of hybris that makes civilizations blind to very real risks. Historically, it was rarely just one event or one factor that caused civilization collapse. A combination of factors seems to have been preceding collapse in many cases. Historical analysis suggests that besides external shocks through war, famine and disease (and sometimes simply bad luck) four main factors are linked to civilisation collapse: Climate change; negative environmental impact; inequality; and complexity.[ii] Does this sound familiar? Climate and other forms of environmental change, widening gaps between the rich and the poor and accelerating complexity are the very issues we are struggling with today. They are already keeping scientists, activists, policy makers and some enlightened business leaders who have understood the need for systems change very busy. We have recognised the trigger points, but we have not yet been able to move much into the right direction.

What does distinguish us from earlier civilisations is that our impact on the climate is human-made and much more pronounced than that of our ancestors. A narrow focus on economic growth, the very progress we cite as a means to push our civilization forward and assure it survives and thrives, is putting our lives at risk, and threatens our entire civilisation. The enormous degree of complexity and interdependence in a globalised world, the fact that we depend on a complex network of private and public entities across several regions and countries for food, water, medicine and other essentials, makes our civilisation even more vulnerable than previous ones.

So if greatness - real or perceived - cannot protect us, what can? The tools we have to arm ourselves against collapse are science, systems thinking and global collaboration. We must address complexity head-on. Science, technology and innovation can indeed go a long way in decelerating the pathway towards collapse. However, without a bigger picture perspective and long-term thinking as well as true global collaboration on policy and action across governments, businesses and citizens – and across countries and cultures - technological innovation will not do the trick. Many of the technical solutions are well known and their likely impact can be tested and demonstrated in very comprehensive and user-friendly ways, for example the EN-ROADS climate change solutions simulator developed by management school MIT Sloan together with Climate Interactive, a think-tank. We now “only” need sufficient political will and societal understanding to actually implement the solutions we have known about for decades.

Addressing climate change is a worthy goal and essential for saving our civilisation. However, it is not an end in itself, but rather a means to maximising health and wellbeing for all, and to save the billions of Euros and Dollars resulting from inaction. Not only at some distant point in the future, but right here and now, where seven million people die from air pollution every year and millions more are affected by drought, flooding, hurricanes, extreme heat and other effects of climate change, all of which has enormous societal costs.

Positive framing and harnessing the power of multisolving – of creating and demonstrating triple wins across the environmental, social and economic spheres at the same time – is the way to go. Rather than messages of doom and gloom this will ensure that action to address the climate crisis and improve global justice is palatable to politicians and business leaders alike, besides providing the necessary incentives for citizens to change their attitudes and behavior.




[i] Kemp, L. BBC Future http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190218-are-we-on-the-road-to-civilization-collapse. “The data is drawn from two studies on the growth and decline of empires (for 3000-600BC and 600BC-600), and an informal, crowd-sourced survey of ancient civilizations (which I have amended).”
[ii] Ibid

Want to start the new decade with a win-win-win? Digital detox will make you happier and healthier while benefiting the environment and politics at the same time

If you felt happier and more wholesome over this holiday period than during the rest of the year, this may well be because you were spending less time on social media and had more real-life interactions with friends and family instead. Perhaps you let life move a bit more slowly than usual, taking a break from constantly checking what your friends and colleagues were doing (or purporting to do) online, or agonizing over how many likes a certain post of yours received?
 
When people give up social media for a time, their happiness levels measurably improve. In one Danish study a group of adults had to give up Facebook for a week. By the end of that week, the detox group reported more happiness and less depression than the control group, which continued using social media as usual. Another study asked college students to limit their social media use to ten minutes per day per platform, and no more than 30 minutes in total. Compared to a group of people who continued using social media as usual, those who limited social media use felt less lonely and less depressed over the course of several weeks.
 
If you ended up using your holiday time to go for a walk in the woods, your happiness levels may have further increased: people who exercise in the natural environment at least once per week have only about half the risk of poor mental health compared with people who don’t. Each additional use of the natural environment for physical activity per week decreases the risk of poor mental health by a further 6%.
 
If, on the contrary, you escaped stressful family festivities by retiring with your smartphone to tweet, post and upload, this may have made the situation worse. Getting a glimpse of the joyous celebrations, lavish presents or perfect holidays your peers appeared to enjoy may have made you feel even more stressed and anxious. FOMO – the fear of missing out -  can be very powerful and very painful, particularly at this sensitive time of year. And the grass is almost always greener on the other end of the data highway.
 
So digital detox may be for you. And here is the thing: it will not only make you happier and healthier, it will benefit the environment at the same time. We rarely think about data and communications when we hear about climate change, but your data may actually be quite dirty. The servers and data centers that store and process your data have a massive carbon footprint since they consume large amounts of energy, energy that more often than not comes from fossil fuels. The carbon footprint of ICT (information and communication technologies) is already comparable to that of the aviation industry’s emissions from fuel (2% of global emissions). Some experts predict that the total electricity demand of ICT will be around 20% by 2030.
 
The beginning of this new year also marks the beginning of the decade in which our global carbon budget to remain within the 1.5C limit will be depleted if we continue business as usual. Where global leaders have failed, it is time for individual action, bit by bit. Consider this the next time you switch on Netflix, re-tweet a hilarious comment about Trump or upload photos to Facebook.
 
What’s there not to love? Your digital detox will boost your health and happiness, while also reducing your carbon footprint – and decreasing Trump’s airtime - at the same time. A great win-win-win for starting into this new decade.