Nature’s Hierarchy of Needs
I have been working in sustainability since 2001 and have been constantly frustrated by the repeated attempts by often well-intentioned environmentalists and activists to polarize behavior and actions into unnecessary dichotomies. In fact, this polarization in the climate community led Hunter Lovins and I to publish my first book, Climate Capitalism in an attempt to debunk the myth that we must act on climate, but also accept that it involves significant economic sacrifice.
More recently we have witnessed, or participated in, growing debate within the climate community regarding nature-based versus tech-based solutions to climate mitigation and carbon dioxide removal (CDR). Some “purists” have been arguing that only nature-based solutions will solve climate change, while many, especially in the startup and corporate community, are pushing for a tech-based approach with solutions like direct air capture (DAC) and battery energy storage systems (BESS).
If we have learned anything regarding climate science and our trajectory towards a net zero or regenerative future over the past few decades, it is that we need all hands on deck. We need scientists, economists, corporations, startups, local governments, multilateral agencies and citizens themselves to engage in solutions to climate action.
In a world of increasing polarization, this may be a hard pill to swallow, but the inconvenient truth is that all actors who contribute to climate change and the loss of biodiversity (i.e. virtually every part of human society except perhaps a tiny minority who already live in regenerative ways off the grid), must act NOW to avert the worst of the climate crisis and make no mistake, it is too late to avoid it, we are in the eye of the storm already.
Inspired by Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, I have put together a version 1 of what I am calling Nature’s Hierarchy of Needs. Caveat, nature will be just fine without us humans on planet Earth, but if we want nature to support not just human survival but rather human thriving, we need to embrace the role that all of us play in environmental degradation and climate change and become part of the solution.
The model, like the original that inspired it, is intended to be read from the bottom up. I am proposing that nature-based removal solutions should come first. They are the most optimal towards accelerating a restoration of the Earth to its most productive state and include actions such as regenerative agriculture, tree planting and circular and regenerative urban ecological systems. Nature-based and tech-based removal solutions are commonly referred to as carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as they involve permanent removal of carbon dioxide and other GHGs. Recent research suggests that up to 1/3 of the necessary carbon reductions to hit our target temperature thresholds can be achieved through nature-based solutions.
The next level up are tech-based removal solutions such as DAC, carbon sequestration and storage (CSS) and BESS. While many purists oppose CDR because it seems like a technocentric view that technology can solve everything and they make the wrong assumption that CDR can not co-exist with nature-based solutions. They can, and they must! There is growing consensus amongst the climate science community that we are so far off our targets from mitigation efforts that we must embrace CDR (nature-based and tech-based) if we have any chance to avert the worst of the climate crisis and hit our collective objectives.
Most people are aware of climate change mitigation measures such as energy efficiency, greener buildings and transportation and more sustainable product development. More recently there is growing interest in circular approaches to industries, companies and product development whereby material flows are optimized for reuse and products are designed for disassembly. All of these measures can obviously make a significant dent in our climate and sustainability targets.
Another great example of false dichotomies in the climate arena relates to carbon offsets. Many people believe that carbon offsets are a scam and are a way for companies, governments and individuals to take the easy way to becoming carbon neutral by leveraging “dubious” carbon offsets so that their sinning ways are absolved. Truth be told, unfortunately these claims are often accurate. However, not all carbon offsets are created equal, nor are all actors purchasing them unrepentant sinners. Many organizations are trying to do the best they can to mitigate their emissions but are unable to eliminate emissions from their operations entirely. This is where high quality carbon offsets can be used after significant mitigation efforts have been completed.
A subject covered by many others relates to the importance of digital measurement reporting and verification (dMRV), often leveraging blockchain technology, to increase the transparency of the quality of the carbon offsets being developed, purchased and retired. This category of Nature’s Hierarchy includes the emerging, and exploding space of CDR credits. Currently, demand for CDR credits dwarfs supply which is helping to bring climate finance to the carbon dioxide removal industry.
Last and definitely not least, is the role of citizens on our quest to get right with nature. As companies and governments innovate at the lower levels of the Hierarchy, the options for all of us to live in harmony with natural ecosystems will be much easier. Whether that involves increased locally produced food from urban regenerative farming, increased access to renewable energy to cool our homes or simpler ways to travel from a to b without using fossil fuels, we will all have an easier time living a one-planet lifestyle.
But that is not all. The theory of change embraced by 350.org and a new stealth initiative from Hunter Lovins and colleagues, suggests that citizens, acting alone at first (e.g. Greta Thunberg) or in collective action (e.g. 350.org events around the globe), are capable of accelerating change at all levels of government, the economy and society. This is why Nature’s Hierarchy of Needs has an element of circularity with the arrows demonstrating that there is a feedback loop between citizens and the actions of other key stakeholders to accelerate a society in harmony with nature.
We must move past this flawed mentality that everything must be dichotomous. This is no longer an either or situation. We have no choice but to get all actors on board and to participate in restoring our economic activity and lifestyles towards one in harmony with natural systems leveraging all of the elements of the Hierarchy simultaneously.
About the Author
Dr. Cohen started his career with Accenture before obtaining a PhD. in strategy and entrepreneurship at the University of Colorado. Afterwards, he pursued a hybrid career as a researcher, professor and founder in the sustainable innovation, smart cities and climate change arena. Dr. Cohen has published dozens of peer-reviewed articles in these fields in leading journals in entrepreneurship, strategy and sustainability and has also authored three books, including Climate Capitalism, and contributed smart cities and climate strategy thought leadership to Fast Company, CoinDesk and GITEX Impact among others. He has co-founded 6 companies (usually as CEO) in green buildings and neighbourhoods, smart and green cities, carbon origination and mobility. Iomob, his latest venture incorporated in 2018, has focused on accelerating the adoption of green mobility through enterprise and end users (B2B2C).
