The National Association of State Boards of Geology (ASBOG) plays an essential role in supporting the licensing of applied geoscientists in more than 30 states in the United States [1] through promulgating model law, rules, and regulations for professional licensure, [2] by developing and implementing the Fundamentals of Geology (FG) and Practice of Geology (PG) exams, and [3] by providing related educational materials.  The content of the FG and PG exams is driven substantially by the results of Task Analysis Surveys (TAS) taken by practicing geologists and academic geologists.  Before 2023, the exams included content related to ethics reflected in the earlier TAS analytical summaries;  however, ethics content is not included in the 2023 TAS or, reportedly, in the current FG or PG exams.
     ASBOG has a history of including applied ethics in its products and organizational structure.  There is a "Code of Conduct/Harassment Policy and Performance Guidelines" for the ASBOG organization on its website (ASBOG.org).  The "Professional Geologist Model Licensure Law" states that each applicant must "submit a signed statement that the applicant has read and shall adhere to any code of professional conduct/ethics and rules established by the Board..." and that the application "be signed and sworn to by the applicant before a notary public" (ASBOG 2017, lines 844-847).  Its "Model Rules and Regulations" includes a sample "Code of Ethics" for licensed professional geologists (ASBOG 2019, p. 27-29).  
     Geoscience professional organizations in the US and internationally affirm the fundamental importance of ethics in academic and applied geoscience.  Virtually all professional organizations relevant to applied-geoscience practice in the United States (e.g., AAPG, AGI, AGU, AIPG, AEG, ASBOG, GSA, SIPES...) have some form of ethics code that their members are obligated to know and adhere to.  The International Association for the Promotion of Geoethics (IAPG -- www.geoethics.org) curates a list of codes of ethics/professional practice and provides publications and educational opportunities supporting geoethics.  Another essential resource is the "Teaching Geoethics" website (serc.carleton.edu/geoethics -- Mogk and Bruckner, 2014-23).
     Robert Tepel (1995) described the essential connection between licensure laws and professional ethics.  To the extent that there is a lack of ethics content in the current 2023 TAS, candidate handbook, exam preparation resources, and FG and PG exams, ASBOG sends a message that applied ethics might not be a core competency for licensed geoscientists -- a message for which there is essentially no support among geoscience professional organizations.
          I suggest that ASBOG collaborate with IAPG and other relevant organizations to address the problems or concerns that resulted in the reported elimination/reduction of ethics content in the application, preparation, and implementation of its FG and PG exams.  Licensed professional geoscientists must continue to understand that geoethics is foundational for their work within society.  For references and resources, visit CroninProjects.org/EGU-Geoethics2024/.

How to cite: Cronin, V.: The need to include ethics content in professional licensure exams in the US (and worldwide), EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-6136, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-6136, 2024.

Academic researchers have long been advocates of various causes in the public arena; their public advocacy to take normative positions regarding various moral, political or social issues is not new. Today, however, in the face of the many challenges facing our society, the question of researchers' public positions, particularly in relation to the environment and climate change, is being raised anew. A number of climate scientists are committed in a variety of ways, from signing op-eds to participating in the work of NGOs or think tanks, supporting legal actions or writing blog posts. In addition, the development of traditional and social media has significantly increased the public exposure of these researchers. At the same time, serious questions are being raised within the research community. Many of its members are debating the ways in which researchers can engage in such public advocacy, its advisability, and even its very principle. However, these debates are currently taking place in informal settings and, given the extensive individual experience of a number of colleagues, it is probably time to engage in this discussion in a more collective and organised way, as is done in other research communities.

Here are some examples of questions that might be discussed. How can researchers engage in public advocacy safely and responsibly? What is the role of the scientist versus the expert versus the citizen versus the activist? Can a researcher be neutral when taking a public stance? What is the risk of appearing naive, manipulated or irrelevant? How should researchers deal with vested interests and private actors? Should the climate community research geoengineering? For whom should researchers develop climate services?

Because addressing these issues involves a tension between personal values that may go beyond those shared by the scientific community, they are essentially novel ethical questions. Some may be so intimidating that many researchers choose not to engage publicly. Care must therefore be taken to organise the exchange properly, for example by creating safe internal spaces for debate or by inviting experts from other disciplines.

The French CNRS Ethics Committee has recently published on opinions on these issues[1], which I will use as a starting point for a broader discussion.

How to cite: Guilyardi, E.: Freedom and Responsibility: the Ethics of Academic Researchers’ Public Advocacy, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-1344, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-1344, 2024.

Leaders across geographical and political boundaries are united behind a pledge to deliver a net zero carbon world by 2050.  Society’s conundrum is that mining is an essential part of that delivery, yet is an activity regarded by many as unpalatable. Projects that have fallen short on ecological, ethical, or social grounds, serve to confirm to many that mining is currently not an industry to be trusted, rather than being the industry that could and should be empowering significant societal development.

Examples of societal failure include the incidents around the 2012 miners’ strike at the Marikana platinum mine in South Africa which escalated into violence and loss of life.  Failure on ethical grounds was most recently highlighted by the settlement of corruption claims in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) where international mining company staff bribed country officials to secure “improper business advantages.”  Ecological failures are all too common and most visible in the failure of tailings storage facilities such as the 2015 Mariana (Brazil), 2019 Brumadinho (Brazil), and 2022 Jagersfontein (South Africa) dam disasters.

The challenge for those who explore, extract, and process the raw materials so vital for the energy transition, is to do so whilst delivering on true Sustainability right from the start of any project.  Mining disasters are rarely a surprise.  The proactive management of both threats and opportunities is therefore key to the urgent delivery of materials to secure our net zero future in a responsible manner.  We must ensure that this delivery is achieved by projects with wholly net positive outcomes for the environment and people.

How to cite: Herrington, R. and Gordon, S.: Delivering Critical Raw Materials: Ecological, Ethical and Societal Issues, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-7655, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-7655, 2024.

A geological definition of the Anthropocene, shorthand for humanity’s cumulative disruption of the Earth-Human Ecosystem, looms as the planet-and-people focused UN approaches its Summit of the Future in New York City on 22-23 September 2024. The International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) “aims to promote development of the Earth sciences through the support of broad-based scientific studies relevant to the entire Earth system”. With the UN recently declaring that the planet is in peril and in need of a rescue plan, Anthropocene considerations with a geoethical lens are urgently needed.

Each potential new interval in the Geological Time Scale begins with a working group mandated by the International Stratigraphic Commission (ICS), in the case of the Anthropocene also by its Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS). The Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) was formed in 2009. In 2010, its first chair Jan Zalasiewicz with co-authors Mark Williams, Will Steffen and Paul Crutzen recognized that “the Anthropocene represents a new phase in both humankind and of the Earth, when natural forces and human forces become intertwined, so that the future of one determines the fate of the other”. In 2015, the AWG’s second and current chair Colin Waters with ten co-authors posed the question "Can nuclear weapons fallout mark the beginning of the Anthropocene Epoch?" in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. This was affirmed in 2019 and the AWG presented its recommendation to the SQS in early 2024. The remaining review and decision steps are the ICS and IUGS. Reflecting concerns of other geoscience scholars as well as of other professions and an anxious public, an opposing mindset advocates for an Anthropocene event that spans the cumulative and ongoing environmental impacts of Homo sapiens. It views Geological Time Scale protocols as unsuitable for archaeological and contemporary developments, regards unemotive references to humanity’s most abhorrent invention as distasteful, and visualizes the Anthropocene Event as valuably informing a new zeitgeist for our troubled world.

In 1950 astronomer Fred Hoyle anticipated that humanity’s first view of the Earth from space would revolutionize the course of history. Insofar as a ‘giant leap of mankind’ did not result from NASA’s Apollo 1969 lunar mission with its estimated 600 million viewers, the Anthropocene Event fuels an opportunity for geoscience to inform a realistic outlook during NASA’s upcoming Artemis lunar mission. With unique knowledge of once pristine environments, current climate change and incipient sea level rise, ongoing biodiversity loss and ecosystem disruption, finite energy and mineral resources, the geoscience profession should arguably have already become a crucial asset in this troubled world.

How to cite: Koster, E. and Gibbard, P.: The most consequential ethical decision for geoscience , EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-12918, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-12918, 2024.

The ocean has started to attract more attention in the recent past with the notions of Blue Economy and Blue Growth becoming rallying points for a new frontier for investments [1]. Many countries and institutions prepare policy papers promising to end poverty, a push for new technologies and profits to fund the development. A recent systematic review of the literature [2], however, found no trace of articulated ethics and justice notions in midst of all the lofty hope and hype surrounding the often blurred concepts. The increasing financialisation of technological developments accelerated through digitalisation and the internet are creating increasing injustices to humans and harm to nature. But, as Rushkoff argues [3], the possibilities for feedback and more circular reasoning have potential to teach everybody that there is no escape from the natural world, thus weaning us from the hyperbole of permanent exponential growth. Here it is argued that critically engaged ocean and geo-sciences with their inherent message of a changing planet through deep time can contribute to debunking the ahistorical promise of fixing self-created problems by starting on a presumed ‘clean slate’. We frequently observe a pattern of wanting to solve the damage provoked by one technology with more technology, e.g. deep sea mining [4] or further technology development in fisheries and aquaculture [5]. At country level, these deliberately disruptive industrial approaches often pay little attention to working with the affected small-scale wild food producers who account for a quarter of global production. Instead, harnessing a combination of traditional and indigenous knowledges and providing intelligible access to the sciences holds significant potential for less destructive pathways. That would also be consonant with the promotion of knowledge co-creation during the UN Ocean Decade in pursuit of a vision of ‘the science we need for the ocean we want’. Practice of co-creation will require some rethinking of the self-image of many sciences and adaptations to typical project formulation and flows. In return, this is expected to produce valuable new insights in addition to opportunities for cooperation and blue justice as steps towards transformations based on ethical principles.

[1] World Bank. (2016). Oceans 2030: Financing the blue economy for sustainable development. Blue Economy Development Framework, Growing the Blue Economy to Combat Poverty and Accelerate Prosperity. World Bank Group, Washington DC.

[2] Das, J. (2023). Blue Economy, Blue Growth, Social Equity and Small-scale Fisheries: A Global and National Level Review. Studies in Social Science Research, 4(1):45 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22158/sssr.v4n1p38

[3] Rushkoff, D. (2022). Survival of the richest. Escape fantasies of the tech billionaires. Scribepublications, UK, ISBN 978-1-915590-24-4, 212 p.

[4] Zenghui Liu, Kai Liu, Xuguang Chen, Zhengkuo Ma, Rui Lv, Changyun Wei, Ke Ma. (2023). Deep-sea rock mechanics and mining technology: State of the art and perspectives. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 33(9):1083-1115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2023.07.007.

[5] FAO. (2022). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022: Towards Blue Transformation. Rome, FAO. doi:10.4060/cc0461en

How to cite: Nauen, C. E.: Can geosciences help inserting social justice notions into Blue Economy narratives?, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-4054, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-4054, 2024.

The concepts of biodiversity and ecosystem services, focusing on the diversity of life and the services provided to humans by such diversity, in interaction with abiotic ecosystem components, are well established. Only recently, geosciences have started to challenge this rather biocentric view by highlighting that geodiversity – understood as the diversity of minerals, rocks, geological structures, soils, landforms, and hydrological conditions – provides substantial services to society and should be treated as equal partner to biodiversity. It was proposed to use the more general term natural services or, where geodiversity is much more relevant than biodiversity, geosystem services. Even though the term geosystem services is more and more employed in literature, it evolves only slowly into a commonly used concept with a clearly defined meaning. Interpretations range from all services associated with geodiversity which are independent of interactions with biotic nature, to the restriction to subsurface services. None or few of these concepts, however, include risks as negative services, or as costs of services, which is surprising as this would enable a more integrated vision on human-nature relationships. Only very recently, the potential of geosystem service maps to highlight both services and risks related to geomorphological processes was pointed out.

This work picks up landslides as a type of geomorphological process and landform, which is rather negatively connotated in society and associated with risks rather than with chances. We use landslides to develop a broader understanding of geosystem services, together with the common understanding of hazards and risks. We will (i) present a sound and integrated conceptual framework to consider landslides within the field of tension between risks and resources, and (ii) highlight a case study where landslides are used as cultural geosystem services for environmental education in the context of UNESCO Global Geoparks, which are considered important instruments for conserving and promoting geodiversity.

How to cite: Mergili, M., Bauer, C., Kellerer-Pirklbauer-Eulenstein, A., Petermann, J., Pfeffer, H., Robl, J., and Schröder, A.: Can landslides provide geosystem services?, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-8075, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-8075, 2024.

Science indicates that human impact on the planet's climate is clear. Over the past 30 years, climate change has shifted from being primarily a scientific concern to emerging as one of the defining environmental challenges within our society. However, science alone cannot guide us on how to address this crisis. This challenge is also about how we envision living together, what we collectively value, and the level of risk we are prepared to assume. It fundamentally pertains to the kind of society we aspire to, making education a pivotal component. Inspired by the Paris Agreement, the time has arrived for Climate Change Education. It derives its momentum from the aspirations and mobilization of the youth, making it the most potent transformative action in response to climate change.

Climate Change Education comes with unique and exciting opportunities. Firstly, it offers a chance to learn about science in general and climate science specifically, drawing from authoritative sources like IPCC reports. Secondly, it provides an avenue to acquire life skills, humanities knowledge, and insights into global citizenship, imparting a holistic perspective to the young generation on a global scale. Lastly, it fosters critical thinking, hopeful hearts, and empathy in an ever-evolving educational landscape. However, Climate Change Education presents numerous challenges as it strives to balance the development of cognitive, emotional, and practical aspects within existing educational systems. Educators need to be prepared for this unique combination of ‘head’, ‘heart’, and ‘hands’.

The mission of the Office for Climate Education (OCE) is precisely to empower educators in preparing young generations with a robust understanding of climate change and the skills needed to act as global citizens in a changing world. The OCE, driven by collaboration between climate science and educational communities, develops sets of pedagogical resources, offers teacher professional development opportunities, and facilitates networks of practice worldwide. As a pivotal participant in the newly established Greening Education Partnership, the OCE serves as a bridge between the global landscape of IPCC-based science and the specific needs of local primary and secondary educational systems in over 20 countries.

How to cite: Guilyardi, E. and Wilgenbus, D.: Exciting times for Climate Change Education – from global opportunities to local challenges, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-6101, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-6101, 2024.

In the Anthropocentric era, the human-driven climate crisis has become a serious global issue. To mitigate the impacts of climate change, it is crucial for humans to adopt a more sustainable way of living. Human behaviors are shaped by their culture, where religious beliefs play important roles. As a result, people turned to religions for addressing with climate change issues.

Seeming to be unrelated, religions and climate issues have found connections through social systems and communication. By endowing climate issues with religions meanings, religions are able to resonate with the ecological crisis and take meaningful actions. Through this "resonance," religions contribute to climate issues by shaping worldviews, establishing sustainable habits, initiating actions, and influencing policies.

Religious communities have recognized the severity of the human-driven climate crisis. Their call for action reflects the fact that Taiwanese society has failed to respond to the climate crisis due to its endless pursuit of consumerism. To deal with the challenges, religious communities have advocated for “Ecological Conversion”, which persuade people to save the nature for the sake of God.

How religions can empirically contribute to environment issues has been a long-discussed topic. However, previous literatures only focus on the Western-Christian World. Countries with religious beliefs other than Judeo-Christian ethics are seldom discussed. To explore the relationship between religion and climate in Asian contexts, this research will focus on Taiwan, a multicultural country with various religions.

Using the sample data from the 2020 Taiwan Social Change Survey, this study aims to explore the relationship between religion and climate by conducting factor analysis and ordinary least squares regressions.

The evidence reveals a weak connection between religions and people's climate attitudes in Taiwan. Among all the religions in Taiwan, Buddhists and Christians tend to have the most eco-friendly attitudes. The social networks within these two religious communities foster an eco-friendly atmosphere, which highlights the importance of environmental conservation. However, when it comes to peoples’ willingness to pay, faith holders are less likely to show their supports.

By illustrating the religion-climate relationship in Taiwan, this study demonstrates how these two fields intersect in a non-Western society. It also provides implications for how religions can inspire people's willingness to engage in environmental conservation efforts.

How to cite: Tsui, C. H.: Do religions matter? The empirical study of the religion-climate relation in Taiwan, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-14027, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-14027, 2024.

After more than 40 years of reasoned alerts from the scientific community directed towards society, with minimal impact, a recent surge in the size and frequency of extraordinary climatic events has begun to reshape the perspectives of ordinary citizens. This situation underscores the challenge of directly influencing society with scientific evidence or models, emphasizing the crucial role of universities in training students who will occupy intermediate or elevated positions that may impact society at large.

While "Climate Fresk" has gained widespread popularity in higher education institutions as an effective tool for raising awareness about climate change and the intricate processes affecting our global earth ecosystem, concerns have arisen at the university level. The repetition of "Climate Fresk" or similar tools may be perceived as greenwashing practices, as university students are already well-acquainted with the issue. Hence, there is a need to surpass mere awareness in higher education.

As TASK Change Leaders at ENS-Lyon, we explored pedagogical and assessment tools provided by Sulitest. This initiative, extends beyond climate and ocean changes, it places a significant emphasis on various topics, including Sustainable Development Goals, earth limits, and driving processes of climate change. One of the major interest of the approach is to address all disciplines (scientific or non scientific).

We built a three-step strategy involving:

• Administering a positioning test to enable students to assess their performance relative to the institution and the wider community.

• Utilizing the looping tool from Sulitest, wherein small teams of students generate Multiple Choice Questions accompanied by a list of academic publications validating the terms of their questions. Subsequently, these questions are discussed in large interdisciplinary open groups, compelling students to articulate questions and answers intelligible across all disciplines.

• Participating in the TASK to receive an assessment of their proficiency in sustainable development, evaluated by an external body.

This strategy, particularly the second step, empowers students to assume the role of a teacher or knowledge spreader in the face of a diverse peer community. It serves as a simulation of their potential future roles as educators, knowledge spreaders or decision-makers, instilling an understanding of the importance of providing validated sources and the challenges associated with crafting questions and answers comprehensible to all, preparing them for future teaching or decision-making scenarios. A notable byproduct is the creation of valuable pedagogical resources in a "connectivist MOOC flavor."

Beyond the training benefits, membership in the TASK Change Leaders group provides opportunities for discussions on the sustainability of education, green education, and competency frameworks, to apply to ourselves the concepts we are teaching.

How to cite: Vidal, G., Eyraud, C.-H., Larose, C., and Lejan, É.: Choice Question (MCQ) Peer Construction for Training Students as Climate Change decision-makers or Knowledge Spreaders, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-17614, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-17614, 2024.

How to cite: Marin-Ceron, M. I.: Science Diplomacy with Nontraditional Actors: Enhancing Geo-Bio-Cultural Diversity in Colombian Cities and Territories, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-22117, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-22117, 2024.

The new School of Ocean Futures (oceans.asu.edu) at Arizona State University (Tempe, AZ, USA) has embarked on a novel way of teaching ocean science with a forward-looking philosophy that centers on the current and future states of the ocean. While situated in Arizona State University’s main campus, it leverages the location of its two offshore campuses, the Center of Global Discovery and Conservation Science in Hilo, Hawaii, and the Bermuda Institute of Ocean Sciences (BIOS) in Bermuda. The Ocean Futures programs combine aspects of traditional ocean science teaching with ocean stewardship, partnerships, and Indigenous knowledge, and focus on the communities that live with the ocean and are affected by its rapid change. In this presentation we will introduce the curriculum of the new degree, as well as the challenges encountered, and best practices learned. Novel courses include “Introduction to Ocean Futures”, a capture course that aims at increasing the interdisciplinary knowledge of oceans, while actively seeking to increase diversity and retention in the field via inclusive pedagogical practices, the historical context of oceanography and an emphasis on developing a mindset of empowerment for change. It is followed by “Ocean Communities”, a course that immerses students through an ethnobotanical lens in global mountain to ocean cultural connections, while elaborating on how various human communities engage, exchange, and build relationships with regional resources. The students will receive hands-on aquatic knowledge through field courses at BIOS, the Sea of Cortez, Hawaii, and Antarctica. The curriculum culminates with an ocean workshop and capstone course that will allow the students to work directly with partners to address real-world challenges facing coastal communities and marine systems.

How to cite: Neuer, S., Pfirman, S., Martin, R., Kamelamela, K., Maas, A., and Bates, N.: Ocean Futures: A New Paradigm and Teaching in the Age of Ocean Change, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-13965, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-13965, 2024.

Fifty years ago, Peter Berg developed a way to locate yourself within your bio-region, starting with your watershed. To begin, trace your water from precipitation to tap—and back to precipitation. Then, how much rain fell in your area last year? How much water does your household consume per month? What percentage of your town’s water supply goes to households? to manufacturing? to farming? to golf courses? to mining operations? to extinguishing fires? What pollutants affect your water supply? Once you can map your local water supplies, consider how manufacturing transistors, operating data storage centers and streaming videos impact international waters. With awareness of our daily lives’ impacts on local and international waters, we can create realistic limits.  

How to cite: Singer, K.: Mapping water from our tap to the watershed: A first step toward ecological limits  , EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-21221, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-21221, 2024.

Since time immemorial, nature, and by extension the ocean, have made positive contributions to the health of mankind. Whether it be fertile soil, pollination, medicine, taking part in mindfulness activities, or food, we as a species depend on the many services provided by the natural world.  Our environment can be linked to some fundamental determinants of health, such as clean air, clean water, and balanced nutrition, and emotional wellbeing.  Therefore, any environmental degradation as a result of climate change has undeniable tangible and intangible effects on human health all over the globe, and this is especially true in relation to mental health in populations occupying Large Ocean Island States (LOIS).   As climate change has led to an increase in extreme weather events, and the accompanying devastation, there has been a corresponding decrease in health and quality of life.  This presentation will explore how the impact of climate change and its corresponding impact on the ocean has enduring impacts, both physiologically and mentally.   Therefore, all of the processes and recommendations to combat climate
change will have important co-benefits to mental and physical health, and help to build resilience in the face of the dearth of resources faced by LOIS. This lack of resources must be urgently addressed, and solutions can be explored by fostering collaboration between mental health professionals and climate scientists to collect sufficient data. The resulting findings can be used to expedite access to the funds needed to implement the necessary levels of mitigation and adaptation specifically tailored to the infrastructural realities of LOIS.

How to cite: Alvarez de la Campa, S.: Climate Change, Ocean Health and Quality of Life - An Inextricable Connection in Large Ocean Island States, EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-16730, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-16730, 2024.