In this paper, we propose a new governance paradigm for managing the Earth System based on a digital contract inspired on blockchain technology. This proposal allows for a radical decentralisation of the procedures of controlling, maintaining and restoring ecosystems by a set of networks willing to engage in improving the operational conditions of local ecosystems so to contribute to an optimal functioning of the Earth System. These procedures are aimed to improve local Planetary Boundary parameters so that they approach the optimal Holocene reference values, the so-called Safe Operating Space, via a reciprocal validation process and an exchange unit that internalises the state of the Earth System.
AragãoMASFerreiraFMagalhãesPMF, et al. (2016) The Safe Operating Space Treaty: A New Approach to Managing Our Use of the Earth System. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
2.
BarbosaMFranciscoFBertolamiO (2020) Towards a physically motivated planetary accounting framework. The Anthropocene Review7(3): 191–207. DOI: 10.1177/2053019620909659.
3.
BertolamiOFranciscoF (2018) A physical framework for the earth system, Anthropocene equation and the great acceleration. Global Planet Change169: 66–69. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2018.07.006.
4.
BertolamiOFranciscoF (2019a) A physical framework for the earth system in the anthropocene: Towards an accountancy system. In: Proceedings of EIBEA2019 – Iberoamerican meeting of anthropocene studies, 11–13 June 2019, Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal. DOI: 10.21814/1822.62541.
5.
BertolamiOFranciscoF (2019b) A phase space description of the earth system in the anthropocene. EPL (Europhysics Letters)127(5): 59001. DOI: 10.1209/0295-5075/127/59001.
6.
CrutzenPJStoermerEF (2000) The anthropocene. Global Change Newsletter (41): 17–18.
DorriAKanhereSSJurdakR (2017) Towards an optimized blockchain for iot. In: 2017 IEEE/ACM Second International Conference on Internet-of-Things Design and Implementation (IoTDI). pp.173–178.
KotzéLJKimRE (2019) Earth system law: The juridical dimensions of earth system governance. Earth System Governance1: 100003. DOI: 10.1016/j.esg.2019.100003.
13.
LadeSJSteffenWde Vries StephenR, et al. (2020) Human impacts on planetary boundaries amplified by earth system interactions. Nature Sustainability3: 119–128. DOI: 10.1038/s41893-019-0454-4.
MeyerKNewmanP (2018) The planetary accounting framework: A novel, quota-based approach to understanding the impacts of any scale of human activity in the context of the planetary boundaries. Sustainable Earth1: 4. DOI: 10.1186/s42055-018-0004-3.
17.
MilutinovicMHeWWuH, et al. (2016) Proof of luck. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on System Software for Trusted Execution – SysTEX ’16 DOI: 10.1145/3007788.3007790.
NarayananABonneauJFeltenE, et al. (2016) Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies: A Comprehensive Introduction. Princeton University Press.
20.
RockströmJSteffenWNooneK, et al. (2009) Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society14(2): 32. DOI: 10.5751/es-03180-140232.
21.
SteffenWCrutzenPJMcNeillJR (2007) The anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature?Ambio36(8): 614–621.
22.
SteffenWPerssonÅDeutschL, et al. (2011) The anthropocene: From global change to planetary stewardship. Ambio40(7): 739–761.
SteffenWRockströmJRichardsonK, et al. (2018) Trajectories of the earth system in the anthropocene. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA115: 8252–8259. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1810141115.
25.
WatersCNZalasiewiczJSummerhayesC, et al. (2016) The anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene. Science351(6269): aad2622. Available at: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6269/aad2622.
