7 Structural Shifts:
Reconfiguring Transition Landscapes
Entering 2024, it becomes increasingly important to shift the focus from immediate technological and demographic trends to the broader systemic tendencies that are likely to shape the future and options landscape. The seven drivers outlined below must be understood against a systemic backdrop of steadily declining foundational systems of civilisation — from decreasing available arable land along with structural decline in quality at a planetary scale, a quantum decline in energy returned for energy invested, to decreasing global well-being and a decline in life expectancy.
These fundamental shifts place us in a new paradigm where foundational resources are relatively diminishing in comparison to demand, while climate breakdown introduces increased volatility and shocks into the system. This volatility, coupled with a systemic decline, suggests we will face more shocks and an accelerating shortfall in nutrients, energy and well being.
As these factors converge, we don’t just mean fluctuating availability, but also significant price spikes. For instance, a 3–4% drop in food system availability, or 5% in aggregate, could lead to price increases of up to 400%. Such price volatility will lead to systemic inequality within and between nations, potentially triggering social tipping points. It is within this context and transition that we need to consider the following trends.
These structural tendencies, which demand both adaptation and mitigation, are key factors in determining how we evolve and adapt in the years (if not decades) ahead. Some of these tendencies will naturally allow for evolutionary progress, while others will require significant adaptation. Understanding these tendencies from a structural perspective is crucial because they form the undercurrents that will influence long-term trajectories. Recognizing and responding to these systemic tendencies and propensities will be essential in navigating the complex landscape of our future, and shaping our decisions, innovations, and strategies for the decades to come.
The essence of the “propensities” defined below lies in a profound transformation of our constraint space shifting our approach towards technology, society, and future planning. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that these propensities have historically always existed. What is now being manifested is that those propensities are not just a functional reality for the “ignorable many”, but becoming the dominant propensity at a planetary scale.This transformation is reshaping the very notions of progress, the integration of technology into daily existence, and the structuring of institutions.
These tendencies and propensities transcend the simple adoption of new technologies or the following of emerging trends. They represent a more profound, structural evolution in our collective thought processes and approaches. They signify a departure from linear, predictable models derived from extensions of ‘the adjacent possible’ socio-technical landscape based on present-day comprehensions.
In the following sections, 7 of these pivotal propensities are presented. Readers and participants are encouraged to critically engage with these ideas, offering their perspectives and insights. These shifts appear increasingly essential in framing and supporting the magnitude of the transition and more critically the innovation landscapes necessary to provide pathways for the transition.
- Multi-Perspectival Pathways for Tomorrow
The transformation towards a multipolar world is one of the most structural shifts that the world is facing and it is driving profound changes in our pathway of transition. This multipolar world view increasingly extends beyond geopolitics, permeating into foundational shifts and divergences in transition pathways for societies.
The multiperspectival approach to climate transition underscores the growing portfolio of strategies being implemented globally — either passively or actively, each reflecting unique civilizational insights, lock-ins and interests. COP28 started to crystallize this emerging reality, with a breakdown in the hegemony of a singular transition pathway.
In this context, it is important to recognise that there appear to be at least three structural principal transition perspectives emerging:
Supply Side — Asset & Investment Driven Transformation
Predominantly observed in the U.S., this strategy emphasizes the creation and enhancement of assets to revolutionize supply chains and technologies. It entails substantial investments in new technologies and infrastructure, nurturing innovation ecosystems, enacting supportive policies and regulations, fostering public-private collaborations, and integrating global supply chains. The goal is to transform supply and technology landscapes while promoting economic growth and competitiveness. It will necessitate new market design and financial innovations.
Integrated Transition Strategies:
This method aims to fundamentally alter supply-side technologies while simultaneously managing or reducing demand. Its’ complexity arises from the dual focus on high-cost supply-side innovation and transitioning demand, necessitating changes in consumer behavior and infrastructure adaptation. The central challenge is to harmonize advancing supply technologies with evolving demand trends, targeting resilience and sustainability. This strategy requires robust policy and regulatory frameworks for successful implementation but perhaps more critically the capacity for societies to make legitimate decisions at the speed and scale necessary.
Offset Systems
In regions like Saudi Arabia, where hydrocarbon energy base costs are low, investing in offset technologies becomes a strategic focus. This includes carbon capture and storage, efficiency enhancements, alternative hydrocarbon applications, and geo-engineering. This approach, contrasting with European or American strategies, leans towards maintaining the hydrocarbon economy while seeking to reduce or mitigate future environmental It’s’ . This strategy necessitates novel methods for managing planetary risks and innovations. Moreover, the unproven technologies that it is reliant on will most certainly accelerate climate breakdown risks in the short term.
These divergent transition pathways will require adopting shared, dialogic and negotiation frameworks for handling different planetary risks and allocations and making provisions for them, not just within national contexts but also in relation to the planet as a whole (i.e. if we are to avoid a race to the bottom and collective self termination). holding and management of these risks on a global scale calls for an innovative form of systemic-level innovation from countries. It means rethinking and redesigning the way that risks are assessed (including historically accrued risks), addressed, and mitigated, integrating both national priorities and planetary responsibilities. Such an approach is crucial for navigating the complex, interlinked challenges that define the current era. It requires a shift towards more collaborative, integrated risk management strategies at the planetary level.
The multiperspectival nature of the climate transition calls for diverse innovation economies, national and metanational alliances, and a reimagined approach to negotiation and collaboration. Navigating this multipolar landscape requires recognizing varied transition pathways, managing geopolitical effects, balancing risks and trade-offs, and adapting to a substantial shift in global transitions. This multipolar, multi perspectival scenario necessitates sophisticated, economic diplomacy to forge a viable, and non-self terminating, equitable future
2. Planetary justice as a precursor for a planetary transition
The emergence and embedding of a multipolar world is also revealing long-standing injustices and accelerating future injustices, previously obscured by asymmetric and extractive power dynamics. The addressing of these injustices is not just an ethical imperative, but also a practical necessity for any large-scale planetary agreement on the necessary transitions ahead. The danger is not just that and equitable transitions might be otherwise being impeded by deeply rooted systemic injustices but any transition will be impeded itself progressing us to a path of mutually assured destruction. This stalemate response when confronting structural barriers has hitherto been the status quo. Tackling such injustices on a planetary scale demands substantial and concerted effort as they prevent a viable pathway towards the magnitude of change that will be.
3. High Interest High Inflation Macroeconomics
The macroeconomic landscape is also shifting alongside the unfurling implications of climate change intensifying in an increasingly multipolar world. We are witnessing increased market volatility and a more pressing scramble for transition materials — driven not just by market dynamics but also by existential necessities and increasing conflict.
This confluence of factors is likely to induce a sustained high-inflationary environment within the economic system and might drive a persistently high interest rate environment that will systemically restrain investment broadly especially in environments most vulnerable to planetary risks. It will throttle our capacity to mitigate the runaway risks associated with climate breakdown (i.e. with the exception of entities wielding substantial economic power).
Moreover, such macroeconomic factors are going to systemically accelerate the missing trillions problem, throttling the flow of capital into the real world economy. This is because as both the volatilities increase, future uncertainties increase, and the cost of capital will become increasingly prohibitive.
Moreover, this shift is poised to aggravate systemic inequalities, disproportionately affecting the poorest and most vulnerable and marginalized by rapidly increasing the cost of living. As systemic inequality widens, it will threaten to destabilize nation-states. This paradigm shift presents a formidable challenge, making global economies more susceptible to fragility. Addressing these emerging vulnerabilities will require systemic innovation at the monetary level that cannot be discounted and will increasingly become a systemic throttle if not addressed.
4. Operating in a Security World
The transition from a world predominantly driven by free trade principles to one increasingly centered around security agreements has been accelerating over the past six years (e.g. the UK/US Atlantic agreement or UK/Japan agreement). The shift towards security-based alliances is expected to continue, with an evolving and broadening definition of security. Recent trends have started to integrate critical technologies into security frameworks, and we can foresee this expansion to further encompass areas such as nutrition, critical minerals (already a traditional focus in security) and essential health commodities and needs.
The expansion of the security domain will also necessitate an even greater systems-based approach to security.
In a more systems-oriented worldview, the traditional concept of nation-state boundaries will undergo a fundamental change. Instead of being defined by geographical lines, states will be characterized by their critical metabolic flows that do not respect national boundaries. It is foreseen that these flows, encompassing energy, materials, and other vital resources, will increasingly become the definitional landscape of statehood. This perspective emphasizes the importance of resource dynamics and interdependencies in defining national identity and capabilities.
Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge that the increasing securitization of the world also paves the way for the weaponization of various elements. This might include areas such as food supplies, weather systems, geo-infrastructures, material goods, energy grids, and information systems. As security concerns broaden, so too does the scope of potential weaponization. This development raises fundamental questions about our response strategies. Relying solely on market transaction-based frameworks is increasingly insufficient for understanding the value and risks associated with such diverse sectors. A more comprehensive approach is needed to address the complexities that they present.
As we begin to recognize and operationalize security within these new frameworks of entanglement, we will see planetary-scale reconfigurations. This evolution signifies a deepening understanding of our interconnectedness and the need for comprehensive strategies in addressing security challenges.
The extension of the security framework to incorporate elements like energy, critical materials, food systems, and health infrastructures is poised to significantly reshape the planetary landscape. The move from a commodities-centric free trade world to one focused on security goods and security alliances will be pivotal in determining the pathways for future transitions. This growing emphasis on security is likely to transform international relations and economic agendas, marking a profound shift in the way that global interdependencies and cooperation are perceived and navigated. This evolution marks a new era in global geopolitics, where security considerations permeate multiple aspects of international engagement and decision-making.
5. The New Environmental Right
There is an emergence of what can be described as a surge in environmental nationalism (e.g. rise of AFD in Germany and its recent positions on environmental risks). This brand of nationalism is dedicated to the protection of environmental systems, advocating for methods such as population reduction (principally l by reducing migration) as means to conserve environmental resources. This is poised to be a defining feature of the new political right wing. Environmental nationalism is set to introduce a systemic form of austerity that transcends traditional public goods. Its primary focus will be on enacting austerity measures on essential environmental resources and might be used as a lever to propel a more nationalistic agenda.
Whilst such ideology is ostensibly aimed at preserving certain environmental aspects for particular socio-economic groups, it may also serve as a driving force for increasing systemic inequality. Its selective approach to conserving and allocating environmental resources is likely to generate imbalances, privileging certain groups while disadvantaging others and/or exacerbating existing disparities. A notable characteristic of such environmental nationalism will be its propensity to externalize environmental degradation. It prioritizes the maintenance and conservation of high environmental standards within its own borders, often by shifting environmental burdens to other regions or nations. This practice, akin to a form of passive economic warfare, is expected to intensify. Nations adopting this ideology may prioritize their internal environmental quality, frequently at the detriment of the broader global environment. This leads to aggravated issues like pollution and resource depletion elsewhere. Such externalization tactics, rapidly escalating under the banner of environmental nationalism, are likely to contribute to global environmental imbalances and tensions, complicating the quest for unified, worldwide environmental objectives.
6. Labour Crisis
Furthermore, a labor crisis is being evidenced in advanced economies that are grappling with diminishing labor supply, particularly noticeable in care and transition sectors. For example, numerous areas are readying for substantial urban and community retrofits, but face a shortfall in the workforce that is required to carry out such projects. Moreover, demographic shifts in these economies are outpacing the development of sufficient care infrastructure and labor resources.
To overcome such labor challenges, groundbreaking strategies are required. It entails a greater reliance on automation, significant investments in demand shifting infrastructures and human capital development and a structural reevaluation and reimagination of migration policies and international relations — such as multi-tier citizenships such as digital nomad and essential services visas or multi-tier participation rights and obligations. Such shifts are vital to reconfigure how we approach the new mass demands of work — from care provision to managing large-scale transition such as retrofits in a 21st-century context (especially considering the constraints on labor).
These labor issues and constraints are poised to drive profound change in the innovation landscape and transition strategies. The accessibility and distribution of labor and human resources will emerge as a key systemic limitation, with its impact varying significantly across the globe. This factor will be instrumental in determining the nature and efficacy of strategies for transition.
7. Information Flooding
The seventh foundational shift reshaping our organizational structures pertains to the nature of information economies. Human systems and institutional economies are inundated with an overwhelming flow of information, fundamentally altering our information processing methods. Instead of synthesizing and comprehensively understanding this influx, we are increasingly reliant on pattern-based computations. This approach involves identifying adjacent patterns to make sense of emerging data trends — a significant departure from traditional methods of knowledge processing.
However, knowledge institutions are designed to regulate the computation of knowledge rather than pattern recognition. Therefore they struggle to keep pace with the rapid influx of information, either in the computation of information or the pattern sharing. They are increasingly unable to adapt quickly enough to new demands or develop alternative frameworks for understanding. This gap in societal processing capability opens the door to the weaponization of pattern spaces, where myths and false narratives can proliferate, filling the voids left by conventional institutional computation. We are witnessing an era where the ‘hallucination of patterns’ becomes a systematic method to manage the deluge of information.
A critical challenge will be to construct a new institutional economy that is equipped to handle the scale of information overload. It necessitates a deep understanding of how societies process information and a structural reevaluation of current systems. Addressing this will be key to enhancing our collective capacity and capabilities for managing and facilitating the transition in an era of information abundance.
It is essential to effectively address societal capability to process vast quantities of information in order to construct robust decision-making structures that are fit for an era marked by heightened complexity and built on mass distribution of agency. The challenge will lie not only in developing information processing and decision-making systems for society, but also how to build such systems as a network capability of society as a whole, rather than for a representative few.
Moreover, the building of such systems is not just an operational necessity; it is a fundamental issue that sits at the heart of our societal evolution to transcend the transition challenge. These systems must be capable of managing the deluge of information and translating it into coherent, mass multi-agent decision-making processes that are both inclusive and effective in scope and context.
Navigating the Shift: A New Era of Planetarity **
The effort of this post is driven by the need to perceive, acknowledge and anticipate these structural changes with regard to our investments in innovation and transition frameworks and recognising that this is essential to prevent an escalating planetary landscape that becomes increasingly in crisis and at risk of geopolitical tension and conflict.
A dual purpose is served in understanding these contextual shifts. Firstly, the structural nature of the challenges that we face are acknowledged. More importantly, it involves devising of a new class of relevant innovative strategies and domains for the adaptation and mitigation of the impact of these shifts as society transitions.
Further, as we examine such transitions, we must recognize this moment presents a move from an era defined by industrial internationalism, with its colonisation and extractionism, to a new phase of multipolarity and systemic interconnectedness. This transition, from 19th century globalization to a nascent phase of planetarism, demands care if we are to preserve essential systemic capabilities that we have built as a planetary civilization (such as those exemplified by the microchip, antibiotics, satellites etc.), whilst we systemically and justly rewire our energy, materials, nutrient and cognition systems.
As we look towards the future, it is becoming increasingly evident that our pathways will not follow a single, universal transition. Instead, it will be characterized by a highly multipolar, multi-perspective, and hyperpluralistic approach. The critical question then becomes: how can we preserve this diversity of perspectives and multipolarity while fostering a new theory of diplomacy? This theory must be rooted in coordination, empathy, and respect amidst such diversity.
Central to this endeavor may be our ability to construct a new framework for diplomacy that can facilitate negotiation and understanding between various worldviews, playing a pivotal role in crafting a planetary future capable of embracing complex diversities (hard and soft power, new relational theories and a framework that acknowledges interconnected and, shared destinies on a global scale (both human, more than human and machine capability).
In addition, innovative institutions and the development of new institutional capacities will be required. The concept of diplomacy needs to be reimagined, including by the use of computational machinery and dynamic protocols that can make diplomacy not only more efficient but also legitimate by effectively integrating non-nation state actors and different regional blocs and perspectives, wider groups such as indigenous nations, and even diplomacy that takes into account future generations and more than human species. At last, the infrastructure exists to support the most providing the necessary infrastructure to support the most diverse of plurality. This will lay the groundwork for a new planetary future — and one that harmoniously integrates an array of perspectives and approaches.
Furthermore, it is also becoming increasingly apparent that as we shift away from our current material economy — a system that has generated abundance for some segments of society and scarcity for others — we are entering an era marked by greater scarcity. This transition could potentially lead us towards a novel concept of abundance. However, this journey is not without its challenges. As we begin to encounter the limitations inherent in our economies, particularly the rise of net-zero-sum scenarios, the risk of conflict and war further escalates.
The crucial question is: how do we navigate this transition? How do we move from a reality dominated by the dynamics of abundance through a valley of scarcity to a new paradigm of abundance? The new abundance could be conceptualized not just in material terms but also in terms of meaning. As we constrain our material economy and reshape the social signaling functions that it serves, we need to approach this transformation with careful consideration. There is a potential, perhaps in the next 40 years, to unlock a new era of energy abundance. This could revolutionize our material economy, creating both material and cognitive abundance in ways previously unimagined.
While this future pathway holds a promise, it is important to acknowledge that we are entering a world characterized by diminishing — particularly 19th century concepts of abundances. The implications of operating in such a world are profound and warrant significant attention and strategic planning.
Indy Johar with support from Dm colleagues — all errors and omissions are mine…
