Every now and then I meet friends who have given up on changing the world: “It is too complex, too violent, too far away, and I feel powerless in the face of it. So I try to focus on my own family, neighbourhood…”. Somewhat paradoxical, this attitude is partly a response to the information overload generated by (social) media. As a psychological mechanism it is not new. After the main character in Voltaire’s novel Candide, a baron’s son avec le jugement assez droit, l’esprit le plus simple, has been exposed to human ferocity in all its forms, he concludes in the end il faut cultiver son jardin. In this satire, with the subtitle ou l’Optimisme, Voltaire describes the harsh realities of the world as opposed to the rationalist philosophy of Candide’s tutor Pangloss. He puts the contingencies of real-world lives against the universalist claim that everything should be as it is in this best of all possible worlds (cf. the horizontal axis in the worldview framework, chapter 6). Moreover, he adds an ethical precept: we must cultivate our garden.

Having worked with colleagues on the construction of greenhousegas emission scenarios for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), I was confronted with the same tension when we endeavoured to simulate worlds of diversity and contingency – with scenario names such as Mixed Bag and The Hundred Flowers. How to reconcile the search for and claims of universal knowledge inherent in the Global Change models with the facts and experiences of a plural and unpredictable world? In the quest for a sustainable future, it boils down to modelling a B1-world with top-down management by UN, multinational and corporate organizations versus exploring a multitude of local and regional events and stories and – sometimes – accompanying models. The last three decades have made the tension ever more visible: rapid and ruthless globalization by the forces of technology and markets are generating an intense search of people across the world for an identity that is rooted in local or regional traditions, values and practices. Their very diversity escapes simplification and generalization (cf. the A2 and B2 worldviews, chapter 6).

I consider the rise of these counterforces a logical and welcome process, in line with Castell’s analysis of the interplay between legitimizing, resistance and project identity (Castells, The Power of Identity, 1997). In the sustainability movement, it complements the voices of official institutions (‘legitimizing identity’) with those who reject globalization in forms varying from nostalgic conservatism to radical revolutionism. In its most constructive form, it reveals itself in the many websites that communicate the local initiatives for a more sustainable world. A prime example is the site that goes with Naomi Klein’s book This changes everything, under the heading of Beautiful Solutions: https://solutions.thischangeseverything.org/. “

[It] gathers the most promising and contagious strategies for building a more just, democratic, and resilient world”, arguing that climate change is as much an opportunity as a threat. Another example is the initiative Seeds of Good Anthropocenes of the Resilience Alliance (https://goodanthropocenes.net/). It is an endeavor to collect ‘seeds’, that is:  “initiatives that exist at least in prototype form, but are not currently dominant in our world. They can be social, technological, economic, social-ecological, ways of thinking or doing, case studies, or any initiative that you feel could contribute to creating a Good Anthropocene. We need your help in building a diverse collection that captures pluralistic values and worldviews.” A third – but there are many more – example is Solutions (https://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/), a bi-monthly non-profit print and online journal “devoted to showcasing bold and innovative ideas for solving the world’s integrated ecological, social, and economic problems.” To my understanding, geo-engineering as a solution to climate change would not feature in any of these examples.

Interestingly, thanks to internet the personal-growth adage Improve the world, start with yourself increasingly integrates with the structural-change adage Improve yourself, start with the world. Local initiatives go global in search for recognition, funding, outreach and exchange of experiences, and generalizable mechanisms and recipes (cf. archetypes, chapter 9).