Endorsements
We, the undersigned, subscribe to the following as individuals, not as representatives of any organization to which we are affiliated.
In order to address the many related global crises, there is a need for an effective procedure to globally decide on systemic changes. For example, the Conferences of the Parties (COPs) on climate change and the ones on biodiversity loss lack a sufficiently effective decision-making procedure and systemic approach. To provide an alternative to the COPs and many other decision-making bodies, a decision-making procedure needs to be designed by experts in decision-making (such as deliberation techniques, voting mechanisms, and problem analysis) and by auxiliary bodies (comprising lay people) that also overview and support the design process. The result would be a procedure and a decision-making body that employs this procedure to decide on systemic changes. (Notably, these decision-making experts and auxiliary bodies do not decide on system change but how others decide on it. They `decide how to decide.’) Probably, the decision-making procedure would be well-designed; also, many proposals for systemic change would be available. For these reasons, the decision-making body could be perceived as legitimate. However, implementation of the resulting measures may be obstructed in many ways. Yet, decision change should be attempted because there presently is no sufficiently effective global decision-making on fundamental matters. In conclusion, an independent organization should facilitate decision change to more effectively address the global crises.
Antoine Heideveld, MSc, managing director of Het Groene Brein, an interface between science and innovation.