What I always notice when we talk about sustainability is that some of it is not sustainable. Therefore, I try more and more to use the term regenerative.

My objective in this article is to study the history of the terms sustainable and sustainability, as well as the various definitions published thereby offering a set of five axioms to help clarify the characteristics of a sustainable society.

"That which can be maintained over time" is the essence of the term sustainable. This implies that no long can be maintained and will cease operating in any society or aspect of a society that is unsustainable.

It is likely that no society can be preserved forever: astronomers assure us that the Sun will have boiled away in several billions of years, and life on our planet will be finished. There is a great book called “After Collapse”. Sustainability is therefore a relative term. The lengths of previous civilisation, from several hundred to several thousand years, seem to be a temporal frame of reference. A sustainable/ regenerative society would therefore be able to remain in the future for several centuries.

In recent years, however, the word "sustainable" is often used only generally and vaguely to refer to practices that are considered more environmentally sound than others. The word is often used so unscrupulously that environmentalists and others advise that it no longer be used. However, I believe that the concept of sustainability, if we are to make some effort to define it clearly, is essential to understanding and solving our species' environmental dilemma. The only question is whether we haven't already corrupted the word and therefore need to form a stronger narrative.

How did the word come into being?

In fact, many indigenous people's viewpoints and traditions have incorporated the basic concept of sustainability; the heads consider the impact of their decisions on the seventh generation.

In 1712 German forester and scientist Hannss Carl von Carlowitz conducted the first well-known European sustainable use in the book Sylvicultura Oeconomica. Later, French and English foresters adopted trees as a way of 'sustainable forestry yields.'

Later, the Swede Dr. Karl-Henrik Robèrt had formulated a series of paraphrases for a sustainable society. It goes like this:

1. Nature's functions and diversity are not subject to increasing levels of substances extracted from the crust of the Earth to make a society sustainable.

2. Nature's functions and diversity will not be systematically subject to an increasing amount of substances manufactured by society in order to be sustainable in society.

3. Natural functions and diversity are not systematically impoverished by physical removal, over-harvesting or other forms of manipulation of ecosystems so that a society may be sustainable.

4. People are not systematically undermining their ability to meet their needs in a sustainable society.

Five self-evident truths of sustainability

I have tried to find points for myself that best define sustainability or regenerative to find out for projects or topics if it is something that is still relevant for a future in 100 years. I have formulated five self-evident truths of sustainability as a contribution to this continuous refinement of the concept. I have not introduced new notions to any of the axioms in essence; my objective is simply to distill and put in more precise and easier to understand ideas that have been proposed and explored by others.

I had the following criteria:

A statement must be able to be tested with the methodology of science to qualify;

Overall, there must be a minimum (no redundancies) of truths to define sustainability;

They must, at the same time, be sufficient, leaving no glaring breakthroughs and layers should be formulated.

First

Any society that continues to use critical resources in an unsustainable manner will collapse.

Exception: A society can avoid collapse by finding regenerative substitute resources.

The exception has a limit: In a finite world, the number of possible substitute resources is also finite.

A society that uses resources sustainably may collapse for reasons beyond its control (for example, as a result of an overwhelming natural disaster or conquest by another, more militarily formidable and aggressive society, to name just two possibilities), so it cannot be said that a sustainable society is immune to collapse unless many more conditions for sustainability are met. First argument focuses on resource consumption because it is an important, quantifiable, and, in theory, controllable determinant of a society's long-term survival.

Second

Population growth and/or increases in resource consumption rates cannot be sustained.

For many decades, the world's human population has been increasing, and this trend has clearly continued to the present. How can we be certain that it cannot be sustained indefinitely? Simple arithmetic can be used to demonstrate that even small rates of growth, if sustained, add up to absurdly large—and clearly unsustainable—population sizes and consumption rates.

Third

To be sustainable, renewable resource use must occur at a rate less than or equal to the rate of natural replenishment.

Renewable resources are finite. Forests can be over-cut, resulting in barren landscapes and a lack of wood (as happened in many parts of Europe in previous centuries), and fish can be over-harvested, leading to the extinction or near-extinction of many species (as is occurring today globally).

Fourth

To be sustainable, the use of nonrenewable resources must be declining at a rate greater than or equal to the rate of depletion.

The rate of depletion is defined as the amount extracted and used in a given time interval (usually a year) expressed as a percentage of the amount left to extract.

There is no such thing as a sustainable rate of use for any nonrenewable resource. However, if the rate of use declines at a rate greater than or equal to the rate of depletion, the society's reliance on the resource will be reduced to insignificance before the resource is exhausted.

Fifth

Sustainability necessitates the reduction of substances introduced into the environment as a result of human activities and their rendering harmless to biosphere functions.

In cases where pollution from the extraction and consumption of nonrenewable resources has been increasing at an increasing rate for some time and threatens the viability of ecosystems, the rate of extraction and consumption of those resources may need to be reduced at a rate greater than the rate of depletion.

Pollution should be reduced if explanations 2 through 4 are followed. Nonetheless, these conditions are not always sufficient to avert potentially collapse-inducing impacts.

It is possible for a society to cause serious pollution by wasting renewable resources (the use of toxins in agriculture polluted streams for decades), and such consequences must be avoided. Similarly, especially in densely populated areas, biological wastes from humans can cause serious environmental problems; such wastes must be properly composted.

However, in the present situation, where the extraction and consumption of non-renewable resources have been increasing for some time, leading to levels of pollution that threaten the basic functions of the biosphere, heroic measures are required. This is true, of course, for greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, especially as a result of the use of the non-renewable resource coal and soon rare metals used for solar panels and batteries; it is also true for the hormone-like petrochemical pollution that inhibits the reproduction of many vertebrate species. To begin with, simply reducing coal consumption by the global coal depletion rate would not suffice to avert a climatic catastrophe. The rate of coal depletion is slow, but the climate impacts of coal combustion emissions are increasing rapidly, and annual reductions in those emissions must occur at a rapid pace if ecosystem-threatening consequences are to be avoided. Similarly, in the case of petrochemical pollution, simply reducing the dispersion of plastics and other petrochemicals into the environment by the annual rate of depletion of oil and natural gas would not suffice to avert environmental harms on a large enough scale to threaten ecosystems and human societies. If a reduction in emissions or other pollutants can be obtained without a reduction in consumption of non-renewable resources, such as by using technological means to capture polluting substances and sequester them harmlessly, or by limiting the production of certain industrial chemicals, then a reduction in consumption of such resources need only occur at the rate of depletion in o However, society should be extremely skeptical and cautious of claims that untested technologies can safely sequester polluting substances for extremely long periods of time.

Will local, national, and international leaders ever formulate public policy based on these five assumptions? Clearly, policies requiring an end to population growth—and possibly even a population decline—as well as a reduction in resource consumption would be unpopular, unless the general populace could be persuaded of the importance of making its activities sustainable. However, if leaders do not begin to follow those points, society as a whole, or at least some aspects of it, will undoubtedly collapse. Perhaps this is enough motivation to overcome the psychological and political barriers that would otherwise stymie efforts toward true sustainability.

For a long time, I have been looking for a plan that could support us to heal ourselves and our planet. Unfortunately, there is no one plan, like always there will be many things we have to do.

A friend and I are fans of the "Tesla" model. You develop a prototype, which you can show as a showcase project and then adapt to others. Similar to my article Charter Cities for Cities. My Theory is about why and how only a few specialized centers/ cities around the world, known as Healing RegenTopes (tried to use the word BioTop to become more regenerative, not sure if it makes sense - let me know), are capable of replacing the existing informational field of fear and violence with a new, globally effective informational field of trust and cooperation.

How can these regional regenerative tops have a global impact? The answer can be found in the nature of holistic systems, the functions and parameters of which are described as: It is not how big and strong these local centers are (in comparison to the existing apparatus of violence), but how comprehensive and complex they are, how many elements of life combine and unite well in them, that is critical to their success. Evolutionary fields develop according to the “success of the most comprehensive,” not the “survival of the fittest.” Otherwise, no new development could take hold, because everything begins “small and inconspicuously”. There are similar projects all over the world (Civium, Pirate Academy, Rainbird Earth, Regen Village, GRC, Motherland, etc.).

What exactly is a Healing Regentop?

A Healing Regentope is a future society model. The Healing Regentopes plan is based on building a model of a new society before it can be applied on a large scale, similar to how a new prototype is first developed in a laboratory.

The global problems that currently lead to war all over the world will be solved or in the process of being solved in a future culture of peace. Healing Regentopes are thus locations where these solutions are created. The findings must be generalizable and accessible to anyone who seeks them. Healing Regtopes are organized in such a way that the various solutions can be linked to each other until the overall solution image becomes visible.

To make things clearer, I've divided the overall solution into several components:

• the material foundation of life

• the social foundation of life

• the mental-spiritual foundation of life

To begin a nonviolent future, humanity requires new responses in all three of these areas. There are a lot more, but I thought it is easier to focus on a few.

The Material Foundation

The problem of the material basis of life manifests itself in the global scarcity of water, food, and energy, as well as their unequal distribution. Desertification, famine, and peak oil are just a few manifestations of this scarcity, which stems from humanity's fundamentally flawed relationship with the earth, water, and nature. The necessary correction consists of developing human-made systems that are compatible with nature's inexhaustible systems and energy sources.

The solution, in particular, lies in the establishment of decentralized, regionally self-sufficient, water-rich, and sustainable centers capable of housing thousands of people. With the help of Water Retention Landscapes, permaculture, peace gardens, and new energy technologies that work according to the laws of life, insufficient numbers, these centers will be able to supply all of humanity with sufficient food, energy, and fresh drinking water within a few decades. They heal all of nature's ecosystems and living beings at the same time. The conflict between economic growth and environmental protection is resolved.

New energies are more based on the "line of tension" than on a breaking resistance. They link the new centers to the sun and the universe's everlasting energy sources. There is no struggle for resources. We are currently covering the field of energy through Nextness and have had some good discussions with researchers here.

Just yesterday I had an investor meeting with a young company that can manufacture products such as palm oil or other substances from yeast in the laboratory. Doesn't that sound great?

The Social Fundament

All societies have destroyed their social foundation. The ability of man to live in peace has been lost. From the smallest marriage and family systems, all the way to global crisis and wars, fear, alienation and lack of confidence lead to insolvent conflicts in all systems. The latent readiness for violence can be used for wars and cruel confrontations at any time.

Healing Regentopes illustrate how cooperation and trust can be developed permanently and structurally by creating new habitats. This change is not (only) caused by individual therapies or admonitions. It is the social being who determines awareness. The higher level of order at which previously insoluble conflicts can be resolved is the new type of socialization. In these new communities, human beings support and assist others and their neighborhoods not because they follow an external moral command, but because they realize that all life belongs to the great family of life to which they also belong.

The reconciliation of the sexes is central to building trust. As long as there is war in the love, there can be no peace on earth. The men-dominated patriarchal society must be transformed into a way of life in which women and men reconnect and apply their sensual knowledge to the future culture of the men and women's partnership.

The Spiritual and Mental Base

Today the struggle against the mental-spiritual basis of life is perceived in such subtle and comprehensive ways. We only see their consequences like religious wars, domination and subordination structures, psychological deprivation, and blocked anger to self-destruction. Mankind lost its true religious and ethical anchor.

To get back from this exile, we must take a new view of the world and study an early trust theory, which can open up the human heart again. In this learning process, people who no longer subject themselves to punishing authorities will develop autonomously, self-confidently. These persons have developed and are therefore incorruptible a strong human core. They make life and protect it wherever they are, their sacred authority itself.

Next Manifesting Steps

First, it is necessary to create a global information field. It is important worldwide to know the idea of curing Regentopes, the way of life they represent, the basic ideas, and partial solutions that have already been found and can be generalized. This knowledge is then irretrievable. New information is needed for Earth!

Second: The spread of the idea itself will lead to the establishment of stations and so-called 'model universities' all over the world that incorporate both ecological and technological knowledge and intellectual as well as social know-how to develop working communities. This process of global networking by mental, spiritual, human, and ecological formation is supported by several organizations already.

Thirdly, until the "model universities" take up that task, I (and others) will be the principal educational center. The already emerging model of self-sufficient living needs to be supported, the training facilities expanded, the scholarship Fund maintained, and practical education sites established.

Do you know someone who wants to work on this?

Malte

If you remember my article how to prepare for 2050, I believe in order to solve the problems in our world, we must detach ourselves from our traumas. A few weeks ago I came across TRE. Something I can only describe as unbelievable, after all the years of meditating, breathing exercises, and more, this was a special experience after a while.

So here we go. Have you ever experienced an unexpected shock, tension, or nerve attack and find yourself trembling uncontrollably? It happened to me several times: once I remember when I was 9 or 11 years old and was taking the test and my legs start shaking. I remember that moment very deeply. If I remember, it was especially in stressful situations. Shaking, on the other hand, has never happened to me as anything other than a sign of utter fear. It turns out that it can be beneficial and is gaining popularity as a form of therapy. So for example in other forms like in Qi Gong, gentle shaking is a way of transforming stress into vital energy. So I was already somewhat familiar with this shaking.

However, the claims that a specific shaking therapy known as TRE (Trauma Release Exercise), can transform the way we handle stress, particularly old and accumulated baggage radically, fascinate me. We all can feel how stress builds muscular tension patterns in the body, like your stomach, jaw, or shoulders. It can lead to pain (back sickness is a prime example) and it can influence our behavior – wrath, anger, or even more severe things such as self-damaging. It is said that TRE works by changing our system and freeing us from default stress patterns that have been established to protect us. It is called 'trauma protection.' But we don't have to break us, but we can't stop hard life events.

What is TRE?

Trauma and tension release exercises are a few simple exercises that trigger a natural shaking reflection in the body. Shaking can unleash long-lasting tension patterns and encourage new connective feelings and ease. Shaking is the central nervous system's novel stimulus. New, safe and curious stimuli can encourage learning and growth. Trauma psychology is a complex and relatively straightforward physiology. Trauma fixes old parts of the brain on 'fight or flight' or 'freeze' defense cascades.

TRE® is a safe and natural process to reboot reflexes.

TRE is a simple group of exercises to help reset central nervous system reflection and habit. When we have tension and trauma, the old parts of the brain become tightly tightened, ready to fight or fly or freeze the body, into defensive strategies. TRE is a secure and simple way to release stress and wake your body up.

It works by deliberately enabling that unintentional shaking, to discharge stress and balance the system – a sort of factory reset, if you like, that we have all been through in times of terror. This is what all mammals, except us, do because we know how to control it. We all saw antelopes escaping from a predator's jaws, picking up, having a good shake then acting as never before. They're over it. They're over it. Dogs are also shaking to calm down. We are the only species that bottles everything up and prefers to be "stuck against life," We just have to be a little more "mammal" to learn.

The shaking is a reboot that can be used to tell new, safe stories that don't need to arm themselves old-fashionedly, between your mind and body. To benefit from TRE, you don't have to have a specific trauma, and many of us don't know how or why we are responding to stress as we are. The good news is that it really doesn't matter. TRE tells us that we're not mad bad or ruined, be it anxious, depressed or overwhelmed.

I think we're not connected enough to our bodies and too much in our heads. This would seem to be supported by the popularity of awareness, which helps us to link up with the present rather than old stresses.

For me, the experience was magical. I shall persist, however; it will relax, it will be easy, it will be mindful and progressive and it will be good for my meditation and yoga practices. It is very easy to know that I can bend against stress with some easy exercises.

Here is a great video:

Just saw an Instagram Live from a friend. It was about Authentic Living, which is something I always talk about. Especially when it comes to leadership topics, it is becoming more and more important to be authentic and to appear confident and sovereign in an environment of uncertainty.

For years I have been dealing with systems very naturally, so I won't go into details today, I have already written about a lot of things here. But I am just in the flow and wanted to get rid of this here today. Many models are available for how systems should work. Everyone has a philosophy, sometimes understood and described explicitly, often less so. Moreover, a prescribed methodology defines a path towards an answer and leads to seemingly unavoidable achievement. We have had more diverse experiences.

The fact is that leadership can be very difficult for the people involved through large, complex, and politically challenging issues. It challenges our understanding of what is best and how to achieve it best. And it challenges how to link up with all those who have to participate.

As systems managers, they can't just rely on sophisticated and orderly problem-solving approaches like Jungle Framework, Gantt charts, root-cause analysis, and logical frameworks to address complex global challenges. They need a whole range of functions, some of which cannot simply be learned in the seminar room. You have to develop a feel for these systems.

How can we deal with uncertainty as a leader?

System leaders should always be able to deal with and manage uncertainty. It is a fact that the environment is uncertain. You would have nothing to do if the future direction was clear and agreed upon. I mean your own insecurities; how you deal with yourself. Two of the uncertainties that I sense here within us. I feel them the more I talk to founders and executives.

First, "How do I know if my contribution is meaningful?" The uncertainty experienced by a changing system can challenge both the system leader's existing sense of coherence and his or her ability to sustain it.

When a system changes, participants begin to doubt their relationships and wonder who they are and where they belong. Some familiar things seem to break down, and this leads to a fear of collapse. We begin to gravitate toward those to whom we feel a sense of belonging and push further and further away from others.

This causes worry and grief for many people who cling to the past and fight to keep it that way, not resigning themselves to the need for change. What is our escape valve when we find ourselves in these moments? Being able to deal with uncertainty starts with knowing who we are.

Second, "How can I tell if I'm succeeding?" Many system leaders feel that real progress is made when the systems themselves begin to grow. New connections and new patterns become established and intriguing. More effective ways of doing things evolve. But for everyone, at least in the short term, things don't necessarily get better.

That is why the role of system leadership means thinking about and enhancing what is happening in the less desirable parts of any system. Neither of us can just destroy the hard parts. Emergence and collapse go hand in hand. The Systems Leader's role is to support both and help various actors to develop what they can solve and solve together. Then we can devise ways to work with people so that they can develop the means to solve the challenges.

I can't tell you how to be you. I hope that by sharing my experiences, I can show you how to be a little better. And how, by developing your ability to draw from all that you have within you, you can also make your world a little better.

Malte

If you know me. I talk a lot about complexity and future modeling. Don´t trust anyone who says this will happen in the future. Predictions are bullshit (read my article about our jungle method). We can't predict the future, but scenarios let us look at potential outcomes, the assumptions that underpin them, and the actions that could lead to them.

While we are aware that global warming is already happening and affecting nature and human culture, the most far-reaching effects are yet to be seen. Over decades and centuries, a number of social factors can decide human-induced climate change. Most of these variables' future evolution is highly unpredictable, and it will be determined by our behavior. As a result, asking "What will happen?" and attempting to forecast potential climate change is pointless. Although the future is inherently unpredictable, it is not completely unknown. Given our opportunity to influence our future, scenarios can be used to explore "What could happen?" and also "What should happen?"

Scenarios related to climate change are no exception. They aren't forecasts, but rather estimates of what could happen by constructing realistic, coherent, and internally consistent explanations of potential climate change futures. They may also be used to create plausible, coherent, and internally consistent representations of paths leading to specific objectives. So, depending on the type of question they wish to address, climate change scenarios can take two forms: predictions (black line) (“What could happen?”) and goal-oriented pathways (A or B) (“What should happen?”).

A single scenario is virtually pointless because scenarios aren't about predicting the future. Scenarios are often used in pairs or in broader groups to compare various futures and decisions. We do our best to integrate dynamic ecosystems in order to predict how things will turn out. Scenario-based climate policy analysis, for example, compares a forecast without policy action (typically referred to as a baseline scenario) with a path to the desired goal (e.g., the 2°C targets). As a result, scenarios are essentially context-dependent.

To comprehend a single scenario, it is necessary to comprehend the entire set of scenarios in which it is embedded. As a result, I believe the 2°C goal, or CO2 terms, is ineffective.

Scenario analysis is a popular method in climate change research and its numerous subfields due to the complexities of climate change. There are seven different types of situations that can be described in general:

• Socioeconomic scenarios that characterize the evolution of social drivers of human climate system interference.

• Scenarios for emissions, concentrations, and climate forcing that result from these changes.

• Climate change scenarios resulting from human-caused climate change.

• As a result of these climate changes, climate impact scenarios have been created.

• Scenarios for mitigating human-caused climate change.

• Adaptation scenarios that reduce the negative effects of climate change on society.

• Integrated climate change scenarios that include all of the above elements.

Climate change occurs in concert with other processes of environmental, social, technological, economic, and cultural change, rather than in isolation. Climate change has been embedded in a wider sense of change through scenario forms. Climate-resilient development pathways broaden the idea of adaptation pathways to include future development trends that make communities more climate-resilient. Sustainable development paths are goal-oriented routes to achieving a wide variety of sustainable development objectives, such as the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Would you be interested in going into the individual points in more detail?