Copy
January 2015
Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser

MAHB
MILLENNIUM ALLIANCE FOR
HUMANITY & THE BIOSPHERE
- Updates from MAHB Nodes -

Center for Biological Diversity
Celebrating its 25th Anniversary, the Center for Biological Diversity is an environmental advocacy organization working through science, law, and creative media to secure the future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. In 2009 the Center launched its Population Program, understanding that failing to address human population growth could undermine the organization’s core efforts, and in 2013 they expanded the program to encompass overconsumption and sustainability. 

The Center’s Population and Sustainability Program focuses on common-sense solutions, including the empowerment of women and girls, the education of all people, universal access to birth control, sustainable consumer choices, and a societal commitment to giving all species a chance to live and thrive. It mindfully considers human population as a global issue, supporting rights-based approaches to both population growth and immigration.

The Center quickly found that few other environmental organizations were making the same commitment to addressing the connection between rampant population growth and the extinction crisis. With limited models to learn from, the Center has embraced the opportunity to build their own approach to highlighting the impact of human population on wildlife and habitat. The Center manages to raise the often taboo topics surrounding population through innovative initiatives that engage people on issues they are already passionate about, such as wildlife extinction and habitat loss. Two successful initiatives from the Center for Biological Diversity’s Population and Sustainabiltiy Program are described briefly below. To learn more about the program and its other initiatives, please visit the Center for Biological Diversity

Crowded Planet Campaign
The Center for Biological Diversity launched the Crowded Planet Campaign in recognition of World Population Day 2014. Crowded Planet is a social media campaign that asks people to share photos capturing how it looks and feels to live in a world of 7 billion people. The result of the campaign was a powerful visual conversation of how human population growth affects our daily lives. Submitted photos included traffic, crowds, construction and pollution along with photos of profoundly impactful places and wildlife that are becoming harder to find. Through the photos submitted, the campaign transformed from a way to raise awareness to a story in which people were expressing their concern and will to protect the planet for future generations. To learn more, or to contribute your photo to the story, visit #CrowdedPlanet.

Endangered Species Condoms
Launched in 2009, the Center for Biological Diversity’s Endangered Species Condoms project provides a fun and unique way to get people thinking and talking about the often ignored link between population growth and species extinction. The condoms are wrapped in wildlife-themed packages with colorful artwork by Roger Peet. Each package highlights one of six endangered species through vibrant artwork, a rhyming slogan, and information about the animal. The packages also include facts about unsustainable population growth and its link to the extinction crisis –and of course two condoms. A nationwide network of volunteers hands out the condoms in settings including universities, concerts, and spiritual group meetings often around holidays and big events. The vast network allows the project to reach people where they are. With more than 600,000 Endangered Species Condoms handed out, the project has definitely sparked conversation and gained media attention. If you are interested in volunteering to distribute Endangered Species Condoms you can sign up here.

As one of the few environmental groups making the firm commitment to include population in their work, the Center for Biological Diversity is always looking to collaborate with experts and organizations in fields linked to population science.  The Center is also eager to share their approach with other environmental groups moving to include the crucial connections between human population and environmental degradation in their work. If you are interested in collaborating with the Center for Biological Diversity’s Population and Sustainability Program, please check out their MAHB Node profile for more information.

Written by Erika Gavenus from correspondence with Stephanie Feldstein


CHANS Lab
The Connecting Human and Natural Systems (CHANS) Lab in the Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia is a dedicated group of scholars envisioning a world where consideration of social and ecological risks and consequences is fundamental to decision-making. Under the leadership of Kai Chan, lab members work across academic fields to conduct cutting-edge analysis and modelling of social-ecological systems, for both fundamental insight and real-world practice and transformation—to enable the just treatment of current and future people and the natural world.

The proposed Northern Gateway Project presented a close-to-home challenge for the CHANS lab. In 2004 Enbridge Inc. launched the Northern Gateway Project, a proposed twin pipeline stretching more than 1000 km from Northern Alberta to the coast of British Columbia. The pipeline would be used to transport bitumen, which has the odor, appearance and color of tar, extracted from the oilsands of Alberta to a deep water port at the head of Douglas Channel near Kitimat, British Columbia. From B.C. the bitumen would be loaded onto freighters for shipment to Asia for refinement. There would also be a smaller, parallel line carrying condensate, an oilsands thinning agent, back to Alberta for reuse in the transport process.

Capitalizing on their unique position at the intersection of human and natural systems, members of the CHANS lab voiced their concerns about the risks that the Northern Gateway Project poses to B.C.'s coastal ecosystem and the communities who are intimately connected to these local natural systems. Three lab members (Sarah KlainEdward Gregr, and Kai Chan) testified publicly to the Joint Review Panel in 2013. Their testimonies touched on the profound ecological and cultural risks of an oil spill, the potential damage to government-to-government relationships with Coastal First Nations, the negligence of further fossil fuel development in light of climate change, and the ethical dimensions of weighing the project’s costs and benefits. Despite thousands of voices providing cautionary testimony, the Joint Review Panel declared that Canadians would be better off with than without the Northern Gateway Project given all ‘environmental, social, and economic considerations’. Following careful analysis of the panel’s report, Kai Chan co-led a group of 300 scholars denouncing the Joint Review Panel’s assessment as the Project went to the federal government for approval.

In December of 2013, the National Energy Board provided regulatory approval for the Project, and the Prime Minister signaled his approval in June of 2014. The federal government’s approval is conditional on Enbridge Inc. meeting 209 stipulations. The government also explicitly called for increased engagement and collaboration with B.C.’s First Nations. Meanwhile, the province of British Columbia is holding to its pre-stated 5 conditions for heavy oil pipeline development. The federal government’s decision only satisfied the first of these. For now, Enbridge Inc. has declared that initial construction has been pushed back to 2018 at the earliest. Contesting the science behind the approval of this pipeline project garnered considerable media attention. Although the “science-based” risk assessment has been completed, First Nations are taking numerous legal actions in their continued fight against this pipeline.

Guided by the lab’s experiences navigating the engagement of academics in policy matters, members of the CHANS lab co-authored an article in Frontiers in Ecology and the EnvironmentThe article investigates scientists’ engagement in policy formulation using a survey administered at several conferences. Now they are broadening their reach and asking others to take the survey. You can learn more here and access the surveys through the following links: faculty, gov’t & NGO scientistsstudents & postdocs.
 
The CHANS lab provides an inspiring example of how academia can meaningfully participate in the political arena.

Written by Erika Gavenus with contributions by Sarah Klain and Kai Chan.

The Qualicum Institute
The Qualicum Institute (QI) was formed on April 23, 2002, specifically to educate the public on the principles and practices of ecological, social and economic sustainability.

QI is a small, grassroots 'think tank' involved with providing science-based advice to local governments on their Official Community Plans, Growth Management Strategies, and Sustainability Plans. Other activities have included radio interviews, writing weekly newspaper columns, op-ed articles, and letters on sustainability issues, providing critical comments on scientific e-publications and giving illustrated presentations to local governments and community groups on what achieving a sustainable community truly entails. An important part of QI's outreach is the provision of thoughts on sustainability issues on their website.
 
Until recently, QI's focus had been on emphasizing the impacts of economic growth to the biosphere and its life-supporting ecosystem services, specifically to demonstrate that there is a fundamental conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation. They believed economic growth was an excellent metric to allow broaching more controversial issues such as growth in per capita consumption and population growth, the drivers of economic growth. And they believed that economic growth was the root cause of our environmental problems.

However, QI also considers adaptive management an important tool in their arsenal and after taking a close look at where they wanted to be as a result of their efforts and where they actually were, they concluded that their local impact has been minimal to non-existent. Unlimited growth is still the main course on the menu of local governments and communities they have worked with while environmental issues are merely viewed as the dessert.

QI has provided a significant amount of science-based data showing that increasing the tax base does not provide the assumed economic benefits, that you can't have both a healthy environment and a healthy growing economy, that biodiversity (even in protected areas) is being lost through species extinctions, and that wild species form the structure of ecosystems and are an essential part of the life support systems of the planet. 

Despite efforts there is neither any visible shift in the direction of the polity nor of the citizenry toward a sustainable future. In fact, a quick glance at what environmentalists and conservationists have been doing globally, also suggests that what we're doing collectively isn't working, yet we keep repeating the same tactics over and over.

After considerable thought and discussion of where QI might direct its future energies, QI's leadership concluded that an all-out assault on our current social, economic and environmental paradigms, and the aspects of our human nature that maintain these faulty paradigms is needed. There is little doubt we are in ecological overshoot, a tenuous position for any organism. The environmental movement, in QI's opinion, has been anything but successful. Papers, such as the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ehrlich and Ehrlich (2013), Turner (2014), WWF (2014), and Rees (2014), clearly indicate our current situation and our options.

Rees (2014), in particular, struck a chord with leaders at QI: the root cause seems to be aspects of our human nature and our malignant social constructs. As Rees points out, “The fate of global civilization may therefore rest on humanity’s penchant for self-delusion in the face of harsh reality. People’s learned or 'soft-wired' cognitive barriers can be broken down, but this requires acknowledgement of the problem and significant effort on the part of the individual — or an external shock powerful enough to shatter the treasured illusion.”

So this has now become QI's focus, recognizing that a massive effort is needed to sell the story of where we are as a civilization and what we need to do to become sustainable. It is also clear QI needs to reach out to a much broader spectrum of people with its message to achieve its goal.

If we are truly concerned about the state of the biosphere and the organisms living in it, including ourselves, we have to address the root cause and we have to do it collectively, now! We need to overcome the barriers of our fixed beliefs, resistance to unwanted news, and denial of reality. Failing that, “it could mean the end of the entire human experiment. Homo sapiens will have been selected out by ecological and social environments in turmoil. We will have failed to adapt, despite exquisite documentation of the changing reality destined to do us in” (Rees 2014).

Today, the QI is directing its limited energies to ensure that doesn't happen

Contributed by Neil Dawe



Visit the MAHB website to learn more about MAHB Nodes and their activities.

To share your Node's recent activities, please contact erika@mahbonline.org.
 


Forward
Share
Tweet
Greetings MAHB Community

As we welcome in 2015, we want to catch you up on the activities taking place across our community.

This newsletter begins with updates from three inspiring MAHB Nodes: the Center for Biological Diversitythe CHANS Lab at the University of British Columbia, and the Qualicum Institute. Each lending a different perspective and approach to fostering global change.

The right-hand section brings news from the MAHB secretariat covering the website's new look, the ongoing Sustainability Blog series, changes that have been made to the MAHB's governance structure, and recognition of our wonderful volunteers.

Letters from MAHB Executive Director, Joan Diamond, and Founder, Paul R. Ehrlich, conclude the issue. Their letters share successes from the past year and also outline paths for further action as we move forward.

Thank you for your continued interest and involvement in the MAHB.
The MAHB Website's 
New Look!

If you have visited the MAHB website recently, you may have noticed that it has undergone a major overhaul! We are very excited about these changes, which go much deeper than appearances. We believe that these changes will help the website better serve the mission of the MAHB.

At its heart the new format is all about improving the MAHB’s ability to facilitate connections. Connections among MAHB Associates and Nodes. Connections to relevant news and resources. Connections to the growing social movement.

We can now share more publications, events, commentaries, news stories, and members’ activities in a high-profile way right on the frontpage. If you have resources or activities you want to share with the MAHB Community, please contact Erika at (erika@mahbonline.org).

We have also built in the ability for you to join MAHB Nodes addressing issues important to you.  Nodes can be either pre-existing organizations or groups formed by MAHB members to focus on key issues.  Simply visit the MAHB Nodes page to start connecting with the current groups and click here to create your own MAHB Node.

Please explore the new site and let us know what you think, we look forward to your feedback.
The MAHB's 
Sustainability Blog Series

The MAHB is a little over one year into the blog series it hosts in collaboration with the University of Technology, Sydney-Sustainability Central! We are thrilled by the interest we are seeing among readers and the enthusiasm from our broad base of contributors. 

To date, we have published more than 80 posts from over 30 contributors! These posts have covered topics ranging from improving composting to the role of population in the current ebola epidemic. Most importantly, the posts have served to initiate lively discussions on the MAHB site, we thank all of you that have shared your perspectives.

If you have not yet had the chance to read the MAHB Blog, all of the past posts can be accessed here. New posts go up weekly so keep your eye out for announcements.

In 2015 we will be seeking additional bloggers and welcome suggestions, of particular interest are more voices and perspectives from Asia, Central and South America, Africa, Pacific Islands, social activists, and youth.


If you are interested in contributing, please contact us at (info@mahbonline.org).
Changes to the MAHB's Governance Structure 

The MAHB operates primarily as a network of Nodes and Associates. In short, you are the MAHB. 

The mission, aims, and strategy approaches underlying this network have been created with the advisement of the MAHB Governance Organization

This fall the MAHB restructured its governance body to expand the range of perspectives represented in this process. The MAHB’s governance body now includes both an Advisory Board and a Coordinating Committee. 

The MAHB is honored to announce the current members of the MAHB Coordinating Committee and the newly created Advisory Board:
 
Coordinating Committee
Erik Assadourian
Paul Ehrlich
Marilyn Hempel
Ilan Kelman
Richard York
Joan Diamond
 
Advisory Board
Tom Burns
Tom Dietz
Anne Ehrlich
Bob Horn
Don Kennedy
Hal Mooney
Kirk Smith
 
Please find their full credentials below, or on the MAHB website.

The Advisory Board provides, on an ad hoc basis, expertise to the MAHB’s development and initiatives. Members of the Coordinating Committee bring their expertise and experience to actively help guide the MAHB on a more regular basis. 

The MAHB Coordinating Committee is comprised of outstanding leaders in their field who demonstrate through their individual work the values of the MAHB. Specifically, they work across disciplines and foster foresight intelligence to help solve global problems of over population, over consumption, inequity, environmental degradation of all kinds, including vulnerability to pandemics, and other threats to the biosphere upon which we all depend. 
 
Finally, and hopefully unobtrusively, there is a small secretariat that maintains and develops the website, recruits Nodes and Associates, organizes meetings and workshops, and helps to build the global infrastructure necessary to foster a wide-spread social movement. The current secretariat includes Joan Diamond as Executive Director and Erika Gavenus as Communications Officer.

We are looking forward to the increased diversity in perspectives this new structure provides the MAHB. We are also looking forward to further expanding both of the guiding bodies to include even more leaders committed to the mission of the MAHB.

Please contact us at info@mahbonline.org if you have any questions. 
Thank You MAHB Volunteers!
The efforts of the MAHB are made possible by the generous work of our outstanding volunteers. For 2014, we would like to give a special thanks to:
 
Tara MassadChitra Bhade-Tadinada, Venkatesh Tadinada, Binoy Kampark and Sherry Morse.
A letter from MAHB Executive Director
Joan Diamond

Dear MAHB Community,
 
At the core of the MAHB is a philosophy of social change. We are a community of individuals and groups deeply concerned that civilization is headed towards collapse and the only hope for humanity is to quickly and dramatically begin reversing current trends of population growth, destruction of society’s life-support systems, resource depletion, and diminishing economic equity.
 
The MAHB believes that the necessary social change requires two things: knowledge about the Earth’s carrying capacity, the inter-relationships among diverse social and environmental factors, and an understanding of how societies rapidly change; this knowledge must be coupled with a highly effective progressive civil society. The first is the responsibility of scholars; the second the responsibility of progressive civil society: NGOs, individuals, and institutions that can influence policy makers and governance systems. The MAHB works in both arenas.
 
Our online library is a compilation of high quality articles, books, videos, and commentaries about the social predicament and environmental degradation. The MAHB is committed to getting the best research from top scholars into the hands of activists and concerned citizens. Too often the public, students, and progressive activists use weak science as a basis for arguments and become vulnerable and less effective—we hope to prevent that. Suggestions for additions to the library are welcome.
 
Central to the MAHB’s goal of preventing collapse is finding ways to bring progressive civil society groups and individuals together for greater social impact. There are tens of thousands of groups and millions of people globally who share concerns about the future of civilization. If we can find ways to work together, the goal of greater policy impact has a fighting chance of being realized. Our website aims to develop tools that will empower you to work together without the MAHB secretariat in the middle. 2014 saw progress in this arena and we hope to see it develop further in 2015. 
 
On the more visible level, in March 2014 the MAHB co-hosted with the Population Media Center a workshop in Washington, DC Population: Giving Voice to the Elephant in the Room—Understanding Strategy and Moving from goals to effective action. The workshop information and final report can be found at http://mahb.stanford.edu/population-workshop/.

In October, MAHB member Sherry Morse hosted an evening symposium at her home in the Berkeley hills. Our speaker was Norwegian scholar and politician Gudmund Hernes who led a conversation on Why do People not want to change their mind: Climate Change and Attitude Change. With your leadership and ideas, we hope to hold more such conversations in 2015.

In Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania, Europe and around the US, Paul continued to speak about the MAHB and the need to act now if we are to reverse current trends. I met with groups and individuals interested in the MAHB in China, India, Nepal, Austria and the US. In February 2015, I will be delivering a keynote on the MAHB at a large student symposium in Seoul, Korea.
 
One of our greatest achievements this year is the Sustainability Blog series mentioned elsewhere in this newsletter. If you missed any of the blogs, please take a look.
 
Of course none of this would have been possible without Erika Gavenus who managed the blog series, re-designed the website, and works with members to facilitate joint initiatives.
 
As I look at 2015, I anticipate the MAHB launching a major population/behavior change initiative, an enriched blog series (more voices, more young voices, more African, Asian and Pacific voices), and more interaction among Nodes and Associates.

I also have a few wishes. I hope this is the year progressive civil society can make great progress in effectively speaking to the middle—not just those who agree with us but all the thoughtful people who don’t know how to think about the human predicament; who don’t want to feel scared into thinking one way or the other; who don’t want to feel manipulated; people who have less formal education than the average MAHB member; people who care and are open to dialogue. 

I also hope that this is the year when progressive civil society can resist the temptation to compete with itself, sniping at groups who share the same goal but have chosen a slightly different path. If we spend the energy we now spend sniping on bridging, I believe the momentum and energy generated will help shift the odds towards a sustainable and equitable future for all humanity.
 
- Joan Diamond | Executive Director
A letter from MAHB Founder 
Paul R. Ehrlich

Dear Fellow Academics,

Your help is essential.

The MAHB’s main goal is to transform concern for the state of the environment (and the world in general) into action to avoid a collapse of civilization. There is, however, still much that could be done to determine what actions, and by whom, are likely to produce necessary results in the very limited time remaining. One of the things that all analysts tend to do is make statements of the “To get the desired results, we must…” without being clear on just who the “we is.” It has become increasingly clear that the dispersion of responsibility for the human predicament makes this increasingly difficult to state. My own view is that somehow a bottom-up movement by civil society must mesh with top-down controls from the governmental level, but more clear-cut answers need to be formulated about participation at both levels. Those pushing reforms need to know more about the systems they are working with, and they need to know it fast.

That’s where academia comes in, and that’s where, in my opinion, universities around the world are failing dramatically. The situation in the social sciences (and humanities) seems especially desperate. Sociologists, political scientists, economists, psychologists and others need to develop coordinated attacks on major basic questions like:
  • How can the influence of money on politics be greatly reduced?
  • What is the least disruptive way within and between nations to reduce economic inequity?
  • Is there an incentive-based optimal distribution of income?
  • What would a sustainable economy look like (e.g., could it have a fractional reserve banking system?)
  • Can the influence of transnational corporations be directed toward creating a sustainable society?
  • Can the oxymoron of “sustainable growth” be removed from discourse in a capitalist society?
  • How can resources in the U.S. (and elsewhere) now wasted on useless or vastly overpriced military equipment (like the trillions going down the drain on the F-35 jet fighter disaster) and programs be diverted toward insuring against a civilizational collapse? 
  • What political changes since World War II can explain sea-change phenomena as the triumph of the military-industrial complex and the development of the American prison gulag?
  • Is the now ubiquitous exposure of people to biologically active synthetic compounds gradually lowering the intelligence of our species?
  • Can new methods of risk analysis be applied to “discontinuities” such as a global epidemic or a thermonuclear war, and provide guidance in allocating resources to lowering the chance or such events as opposed to dealing with the gradual descent toward a collapse of civilization.
Of course, social scientists give many explanations for these phenomena, but what the social scientists don’t seem to do is focus their disciplines on the critical problems of the day. For example, the natural scientific community has moved the issue of understanding climate change high on the agenda – not just for atmospheric physicists and chemists, but ecologists, physiologists, evolutionists, soil scientists, and on and on. But social scientists have not made similar moves – there is no focus in the vast community of economists to study how the necessary end to standard economic growth can be handled without a vast disaster. And much more help can be expected out of the humanities (especially philosophy and ethics) and arts. Look what Charles Dickens did on the major issues of poverty, the situation of the very poor, and of class structure in general in industrializing Britain of the mid-19th century. Recently there’s been Wallace Stegner, Ed Abbey, Daniel Quinn, and others – but no Nobel prizes in literature as far as I know. Photography can make big changes – just consider how views were changed by the first pictures of Earth from space. 

There are signs of progress here at Stanford – my brilliant neurophysiologist colleague Sue McConnell is spending a large amount of time developing wildlife photography, and my philosopher colleague Debra Satz is applying ethics to a series of the most serious human problems. Another creative multi-disciplinary initiative is Scott Loarie’s iNaturalist, which uses social media to build and energize an international community for reporting personal observations of any plant or animal species in the world. But much more is needed.

And my “hard science” colleagues shouldn't be resting on their laurels. There are technical questions in the natural sciences that require much more attention in the form of well-designed and imaginative research. For example:
  • What is the actual state of humanity’s soil and groundwater resources, and can they be made in some sense sustainable?
  • Can climate change scenarios be created that would give policy-makers better guidance in designing adaptation strategies.
  • Can the understanding of the impact of predators/parasites on herbivorous insect populations be refined enough to evaluate the decline of pest control services through population extinctions of the pests’ enemies?
  • Can a general and easy to apply protocol be developed to allow not just testing the human health and environmental safety of novel synthetic compounds, but of possible synergies among compounds?
A big problem, in my view, is the failure of many smart social scientists to give top priority to urgent research. For example, Steven Leavitt is an extremely clever economist of Freakonomics fame. But the problems he writes about cleverly are second or third order at best, and he didn’t apply his brain when he allowed his web site to publish a silly article claiming the economy can grow in perpetuity. Too many ecologists, animal behaviorists, and taxonomists still put their efforts primarily into questions of little potential significance given the crisis now facing humanity, but the problem is less serious there because it’s in the cultural areas that progress is needed. As is widely recognized, more than enough is known about the biophysical nature of the human predicament to know many of the actions that humanity should be taking now.  

Those who are doing basic research on environmental and social problems are building the basic background of knowledge, are providing the scientific (natural and social science) information/knowledge necessary for those who design solutions. The good basic researcher ensures that the solution seekers are addressing the right issues, but the good basic researcher also pays close attention to the predicament so that her contributions are in significant areas. Knowledge must be gathered selectively – the entire universe cannot be mapped into journal articles or computers.

One of the weaknesses of non-academic civil society is that they are very vulnerable to using lousy easily assessable science and being ineffective and vulnerable as a result. Treating GDP as the measure of economic progress or species extinctions as the measure of biodiversity loss, are current examples. If academia is to make major contributions to solving the predicament, these issues need much more discussion and fast, not just a harangue from me.

- Paul R. Ehrlich | MAHB Founder  
MAHB Website
Email the MAHB
Join us on Facebook

Coordinating Committee


Erik Assadourian: Senior Fellow, Worldwatch Institute; Director of Transforming Cultures Project and Co-Director of State of the World 2013 and 2012

Paul Ehrlich: Bing Professor of Population Studies and President, Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University

Marilyn Hempel: Co-founder, Blue Planet United; Editor, Pop!ulation Press

Ilan Kelman: Reader in Risk, Resilience and Global Health, Institute for Risk & Disaster Reduction and Institute for Global Health, University College London; Senior Research Fellow, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs

Richard York: Professor of Sociology and Environmental Studies, Director of Graduate Studies for Sociology, Department of Sociology, University of Oregon

Joan Diamond, ex-officio, Secratariat: Chief Operating Officer, The Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability

Advisory Board


Tom Burns: Professor Emeritus, Uppsala University, Sweden; Woods Institute, Stanford University

Tom Dietz: Professor Sociology, Environmental Science and Policy and Animal Studies; Assistant VP for Environmental Research at Michigan State University

Anne Ehrlich: Policy Coordinator, Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University

Bob Horn: Visiting Scholar, H-STAR, Human Sciences and Technology Advanced Research Institute, Stanford University

Don Kennedy: Bing Professor of Environmental Sciences; President, emeritus, Stanford University; Senior Fellow, Woods Institute

Hal Mooney: Paul S. Achilles Professor of Environmental Biology and FSI Senior Fellow, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University

Kirk Smith: Professor of Global Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley

Secretariat
Joan Diamond, Executive Director | Erika Gavenus, Communications Officer
Aknowledgements
Peter and Helen Bing | Larry Condon | Wren Wirth | The Mertz Gilmore Foundation | The Winslow Foundation