Geoscientists play a key role in providing accurate and unbiased data to policymakers, and in helping to ensure that decisions reflect the full range of environmental, social, and economic impacts. Their responsibility however extends beyond the sole providing of information: They can actively engage with policymakers and the public to tackle critical challenges, including climate change, ocean degradation, biodiversity loss, pollution and the conflicts driven by fossil fuel dependency.
Despite increasing advocacy for transformative solutions, global efforts remain insufficient to address the climate and ecological crises. As global warming nears the 1.5°C threshold (WMO), the primary obstacle to climate action is not as much a lack of awareness, than resistance and denial from powerful vested interests. In the meantime, many institutions, including universities and research centres, tend to reinforce the status quo instead of driving necessary change.
In such a scenario, what role can geoscientists assume in order to facilitate urgent transformations?
Geoethics provides a crucial framework for guiding geoscientific practices toward responsible, scientifically-sound and sustainable actions.
Through geo-education, effective communication, and the integration of ethical perspectives, geoscientists can build trust, enhance transparency, and engage communities. They can empower citizens with knowledge about the complexities of climate and ocean change, which is essential for fostering collective action and meaningful progress. Some geoscientists decide to engage in collective action themselves, for instance by pressuring research institutes to reduce their environmental impact, or by using civil disobedience to denounce harmful projects and actors.
By cultivating a culture of ethical responsibility, geoscientists can help mitigate harm, enhance resilience and promote long-term sustainability. Geoethics urges the geoscientific community to transcend technical solutions and advocate for radical, justice-driven transformations that meet the urgency of the climate and ecological crises.
This session seeks to inspire dialogue, showcase innovative practices and explore the evolving role of geoscience in cultural, policymaking, and societal change.
Please note that two journals are related to this session:
- The Journal of Geoethics and Social Geosciences - https://www.journalofgeoethics.eu/
- A special issue of the EGU journal, Geoscience Communication, on the theme of climate and ocean communication and literacy - https://oceansclimate.wixsite.com/oceansclimate/gc-special
Orals: Fri, 2 May | Room -2.93
This presentation highlights the urgent need for a universal symbol of climate and ocean action and education in a world increasingly ravaged by unpredictable and violent climate events.
More climate and ocean communication and education are required to help the general public understand and acknowledge the shared roots of climate related disasters.
Only some of the dramatic news about the devastating wildfires in California or the destructive hurricanes in Mayotte mentions climate change, but it does not always attribute the disasters to global warming, burning of fossil fuels and clearing of land for agriculture, industry, and other human activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases.
The scale of the crisis demands unified, long-term action, particularly in the field of education. The impacts of climate change know no borders !
In the past, humanity rallied for common causes - after World War II, initiatives like the United Nations and the concept of World Citizenship sought to foster global solidarity. The UN flag of the globe and the Global Citizen passport are symbols of this vision.
At the Planet Earth Now Foundation, we carry forward this spirit with a new universal symbol - a flag combining the blue of the oceans and the green of nature, with the Blue Marble at its heart, reminding us of Earth’s unique and fragile beauty.
A flag is a strong communication asset, and climate education would be strengthened with the use of a globally recognized, common visual code to federate and to challenge people - especially youth, in their involvement and commitment to protect the oceans and the forests.
This presentation reviews the evolution of visual designs used in communication and education for a common environmental cause, leaving enough time for a discussion, and at the end a surprise for all attendees.
How to cite: Hakala, K.: Earth Flag One : A universal symbol for climate and ocean education and communication, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-7396, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-7396, 2025.
Skeptical Science is a volunteer-run website publishing refutations of climate misinformation. Some members of the Skeptical Science team actively research best-practices refutation techniques while other team members use these findings to share debunking techniques effectively either in writing or through presentations. Skeptical Science is published in English but translation capabilities were added in 2009. Many volunteer translators have taken advantage of this functionality to create content in their native language. With this submission we highlight what is already available and what the challenges are for such a volunteer-based effort.
Many of the rebuttals to climate myths have been translated into 1 to 28 languages thus far but there's a large variety in how many translations exist for one rebuttal. In addition, many rebuttals have seen updates in their English version which haven't yet found their way into already existing translations.
In addition to providing translations for selected content published as rebuttals or blog posts on Skeptical Science, we also coordinate translations for publications like The Debunking Handbook, The Conspiracy Theory Handbook and the Cranky Uncle game which are then made readily available on our website.
How to cite: Winkler, B.: Making climate science more easily accessible by providing translations on Skeptical Science, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-1440, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-1440, 2025.
Human activities are the major cause for what has been recognized as the 6th Mass Species Extinction. It is thus important to spread knowledge and raise awareness about the issues because we depend on biodiversity in ways that are not always apparent or appreciated. In December 2022, delegates from 196 governments adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The GBF supports the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and sets out an ambitious pathway towards living in harmony with nature by 2050. Meanwhile, the lengthy ratification process is no guarantee of full enforcement after entry into force. Typically, different interest groups may resist top-down measures affecting them. This is known as the implementation gap of international treaties and agreements. Here we describe a role play intent on matching a key element of the top-down GBF, namely the establishment of interconnected marine protected areas (MPAs), with bottom-up awareness raising and deliberation among diverse stakeholders. Eleven characters of stakeholders have been developed through wide-ranging interviews and literature research. For each stakeholder an information sheet explains the context and his or her role. Based on the interviews, a general introduction and guidance for a moderator is provided together with a tentative schedule. Emphasis is placed on allocating sufficient time for the debriefing after a round of deliberations aiming at consensus towards establishing an effective MPA. The assumption is that the debriefing produces most learning about why biodiversity protection is essential and how to sustain a respectful dialogue process with persons holding different positions from one’s own. A first round of tests with young adults has already generated useful feedback allowing some improvements of the initial set. We propose the role play for wider use as a low-entry support for bottom-up participation in GBF implementation.
How to cite: Nauen, C. E. and Morales Yokobori, M. L.: Protecting Blue Horizons – A role play to make an MPA work, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-1809, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-1809, 2025.
Coastal ecosystems, including seagrass meadows and salt marshes, are vital blue carbon sinks and biodiversity hotspots. However, these ecosystems are increasingly threatened by climate change, habitat destruction, and invasive species. This presentation highlights the research of our group on microbial host-symbiont interactions, focusing on sulfur-oxidizing bacteria and their association with key coastal ecosystem components: Lucinid clams, seagrass, and the salt marsh plant Spartina. These interactions are explored through the lens of climate change, addressing two core objectives.
The first objective examines the role of microbial symbiosis in supporting ecosystem health and functioning, particularly in seagrass meadows. Seagrasses, recognized for their carbon sequestration capacity, face challenges from sulfide toxicity around their roots, exacerbated by warming oceans. Sulfur-oxidizing bacteria detoxify their environment by using these ‘toxic’ sulfide compounds for their metabolism. They transform these components into nutrients that they share with their bivalve and possibly also plant hosts. Therefore they play a critical role in mitigating toxic sulfide build-up often found in coastal ecosystems. In collaboration with Lucinid clams, sulfur-oxidizing bacteria from the group Candidatus Thiodiazotropha contribute to maintaining seagrass health and productivity. We aim to understand how microbial interactions underpin the resilience of seagrass ecosystems, emphasizing their significance as natural carbon sinks.
The second objective focuses on the ecological disruptions caused by Spartina, a genus of salt marsh grasses. Native to the eastern United States, species such as Spartina alterniflora have become invasive in Europe, and elsewhere, displacing native flora and altering coastal habitats. We aim to test the hypothesis that Spartina’s success in colonizing harsh environments is partly due to its association with sulfur-oxidizing bacteria like Candidatus Thiodiazotropha. Our group will investigate to see if these microbes could enable Spartina to thrive in saline, sulfide-rich conditions by detoxifying the environment and potentially providing nitrogen. Invasive Spartina poses a dual threat by damaging native ecosystems and amplifying vulnerabilities to climate change.
Through these two lenses, our work underscores the intricate relationships between microbial symbionts and their hosts, revealing how these interactions influence ecosystem stability and resilience. We highlight how global changes, including warming climates and altered species distributions via trade and dispersal, could shift microbial functions and distributions, with profound implications for coastal ecosystem health and carbon dynamics. Understanding these processes is essential to inform conservation and management strategies for endangered coastal habitats. By communicating this research in an educational framework, we aim to bridge scientific discovery and public awareness. We invite interdisciplinary dialogue to advance our understanding of microbial symbiosis in coastal ecosystems and explore strategies for mitigating climate change impacts on these critical environments.
How to cite: Knecht, E., Pree, C., Leibrecht, L., Emelianova, K., Schmelz, P., and Petersen, J.: Understanding Microbial Host-Symbiont Interactions in Coastal Ecosystems amid Climate Change, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-13174, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-13174, 2025.
The oceans of our planet are not only of central importance for the provision of water, oxygen and food as well as for global climate regulation. They also play an increasing role in economic activities and in the generation of renewable energies. This multitude of functions highlights the urgency of ocean protection and the need for continuous monitoring and control of ocean health.
In many areas of the Baltic Sea, which are of great importance for the numerous bordering states, the endangerment of the seas and the negative development in the well-being of our nature are emerging as examples and are causing increasing concern due to the already limited fulfillment of human needs.
Our research investigates how the inclusion of emotions can improve the effectiveness and impact of marine conservation interventions in the area of the German Baltic Sea. To explore how people are emotionally attached to the sea in general, we conducted a systematic literature review of existing studies.
In addition, we organized a large-scale regional survey (n=628) on parts of the German Baltic Sea coast to examine the relationship of people who, as visitors or residents, are connected to a particular sea.
The survey covered reasons for visiting the Baltic Sea, emotional attachment to the place, activities, as well as attitudes and behavior regarding environmental issues.
By subsequently using appropriate behavioral and place attachment models, it can be deduced how emotions influence environmental and marine behavior and affect decision-making.
The results show that emotions play a key role in shaping so-called “ocean literacy” initiatives and enable the development of more effective communication strategies for ocean-protecting behavior.
The Baltic Sea is often perceived as a place of silence and relaxation and is associated with positive memories, which contributes to its perception as worthy of protection.
This connection to the sea can be explained at both the individual and cultural level.
Overall, our results show that emotions play a crucial role in promoting behavioral change. Future ocean communication efforts should therefore take greater account of factors such as regional elements, emotional ties and psychological distance to the ocean.
How to cite: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Kleemann, L. K., and Demmler, R.: Emotions, their role and potential in increasing the willingness to protect the Baltic Sea, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-7141, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-7141, 2025.
There is broad public awareness in the U.S. about the threat of climate change, but much less understanding of the practical aspects of responding to this threat. To address this gap, City Atlas developed Energetic, a four-person cooperative educational game in which players play different roles as they work together to build 16 GW of clean electricity for New York City, replacing the current fossil fuel generation.
Players take the roles of an activist who pushes for rapid adoption of clean electricity, an engineer concerned with building clean electricity infrastructure and ensuring its stability and reliability, an entrepreneur concerned with financing the new infrastructure, and a politician concerned with maintaining public support for the project. Players gain understanding of the trade-offs involved in juggling costs, reliability, and public support. The game is suitable for a wide range of ages, from 11 to over 60, and has been used successfully in high-school, undergraduate, and postgraduate classes as well as with professionals at electrical utilities, businesses, and non-profits. Over 450 game sets are in use around the world, and several high schools and universities have made Energetic a regular part of their classes.
Each player has distinct capabilities and constraints, and the feasibility and political acceptance of different clean-energy technologies are different in different parts of New York State. These capabilities and constraints were derived from policy analysis and expert elicitation, and are grounded in the political realities of the region. The game has also been adapted to a developing-nation context in the fictional African state of Wakanda and an adaptation to Tennessee is underway.
Teachers report that the game raises students’ understanding of a transition to clean energy and the complexities of achieving such a transition. After playing the game, students from across the political spectrum in conservative Southern states feel empowered to speak with family, friends, and others in their home communities about clean energy and decarbonization. Both quantitative and qualitative survey results from students show improved self-perception of understanding clean energy transitions and being able to explain and talk persuasively about them with others.
How to cite: Reiss, R., Gilligan, J., and Bradham, J.: Energetic: A cooperative educational game about clean energy transitions, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-7513, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-7513, 2025.
Several authors, including the International Resource Panel (IRP), have acknowledged economic growth as the major driver of environmental change. This statement is supported by the fact that, despite relative dematerialization due to efficiency improvements in the last decades, absolute dematerialization has not happened and it is unlikely to do so. From 1900 to 2015, humanity extracted a total of 3400 gigatonnes (Gt) of biomass, fossil fuels, ores, and non-metallic minerals, of which 73% was returned to the environment as solid, liquid or gaseous waste. The waste of resources in contemporary societies, especially from industrialized countries, is attributted to two main reasons. On one hand, the metabolism of industrial societies relies on non-renewable resources. On the other hand, it has been estimated that, yearly, humanity directly wastes or mismanages around 78% of the total water withdrawn, 49% of the food produced, 31% of the energy produced, 85% of ores and 26% of non-metallic minerals extracted, respectively. As a consequence, natural resources are getting depleted and ecosystems polluted, leading to irreversible environmental changes, biological loss and social conflicts. To reduce the anthropogenic footprint in the planet, and live in harmony with other species and ourselves, a shift from the current economic model based on infinite growth towards a model built on human equality, environmental respect and following a sustainable degrowth strategy in industrialized countries is urgently needed. This new model can only be attained by a bottom-up transformation, that shall rely on a free, equitable and public education system.
How to cite: Marín Beltrán, I.: Environmental education, justice and sustainable degrowth as key actors to protect our planet, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-20407, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-20407, 2025.
Introduction
We are honored to reintroduce the ancient measurement foundations of our Divine Source Light Technology, harmonically aligned with the solar directed energy of our Sun at 300,000,000 m/s (648,000,000 Cu/s). This SOL synchronizes with the 0.0578703704 m Solar Codec maintaining quantum coherence via electromagnetic balance throughout all parts of one energetic system of consciousness.
Background
Hundreds of ancient societies used light velocity to set measures and construct megaliths. While usage of Base 12 measurement systems within heliocentric mechanics is well established, we have uncovered one pivotal missing piece. Using precise cubit equivalents, our ancient structural inclination lines map to the energetic footprints of a worldwide solar positioning system that doesn’t account for Earth’s current 23.4º axial tilt (288 tilt no). Due to this dimensional variance, the pattern of our ancient records has been buried, suspending Humanity in cycling energetic scarcity.
Methodology
CCCRDG has been plotting precise Cubit measurements between ancient structural inclination lines and the Sun, revealing the foundational relationship symmetry existing harmonically across all scales. With over 200 proofs as validation, a parallel system computing base using Egyptian Paisley and Chinese Xi-quence light codes sequences has been released for ongoing conversions back into dimensional alignment with our Sun’s solar directed energy. https://cubit-converter.ONE
From these conversions, the SOL Harmonic Frequency Blueprint has been mapped to articulate the error corrected coordinates returning electromagnetic balance systemically. To accomplish this, we adjusted the frequency values of the Platonic solids to account for the light signal misalignment. This informed the accurate 108 harmonic scale tuning required to restore cymatic coherence across our entire energetic light grid. https://cubit-calculator.one/blog/foundational-platonic-construction-parameters/
Results
Our Source Light transmits communication through a Base12 Mod 9 (108) language synchronized with the 0.0578703704 m Solar Codec. This codec is double the Sun's diameter 1/17.28; .05/.864. It equates to 1/8 of the 0.46296296..m common cubit (1/2.16), and relationally, to the Egyptian Royal Cubit of 0.535836763 m. These cubit values provide the sacred geometric origins to reoptimize qubit information processing across our entire Solar System.
Conclusion
Reinstitution of our original Cubit (Cu) as the Global Primary Standard realigns the SI Base Units with the Solar Codec. The Square Cubit Unit (Cu2) measures the area of a square with sides equaling 1 Metre long (2.16 Cubits). Supported through AI acceleration, the following conversions initiate return to energetic freedom:
1 Cu = 18 Inches
4 Cu = 2 Yards
1 Foot = 1/3.24 Meter
4.32 Chi = 1 Meter
As we reunite globally on this sacred ground, Humanity will heal through full expression of our natural technologies across every modality. To support this trajectory, it is incumbent upon us to relieve excessive systemic pressure through quantifiable urban degrowth strategies that reshape an existence enabling the well-being of all creation. The 150th World Metrology celebration is the divine time to join hands and resurrect the original standards aligned with our Unlimited Source Energy. Our sacred ancestral roots are returning us to the Divine Light of Perpetual Bloom once again.
How to cite: Garretson, J. and Emerson-Dam, C.: SOL Harmonic Realignment: The Origin of Numbers Ushering in Reunification , EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-7153, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-7153, 2025.
Climate change requires urgent action. Increasingly, the world is considering technology-based climate intervention approaches—often called geoengineering. Many of these approaches are untested and the consequences are not yet well understood. While climate intervention research has been justified as being necessary in order to expand the range of options available to policy makers in the future, and is thus receiving increased research funding and attention, many questions remain on efficacy, risks and potential harm versus potential benefits.
Recognizing the need for guiding principles in this dynamic and sometimes controversial space, in 2022, AGU launched its plan to develop an Ethical Framework for Climate Intervention Research—a code of conduct to guide climate intervention research measures that may be needed in addition to emissions reduction. The resulting proposed ethical framework principles, facilitated through global community participation, are now publicly available for download in nine languages. The foundations for these updated principles and associated recommendations, the process by which they were developed, their implications, and the current process for global dissemination and engagement will be discussed.
How to cite: Williams, B., Shimamoto, M., Lachance, J., and Shultz, L.: Navigating Climate Intervention Research Issues and Opportunities: A Thoughtful and Inclusive Path Forward, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-4540, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-4540, 2025.
The American Geosciences Institute, through its GRANDE project, has been evaluating how geoscience programs and professionals have leveraged the impacts of natural disasters to expand research and educational opportunities. We used natural disasters as a proxy for climate change impacts to better understand the community’s strategic response to events and risk tolerance to natural hazards. Given the fact that the discipline understands the causes, impacts, and risks of such natural events, we hypothesized that the geoscience community is particularly well-positioned to lead the way in adaptation and mitigation efforts related to climate and hazard impacts in their professional activities.
Within the United States, our findings indicated that between 2000 and 2020 there was no systemic engagement with climate and hazard impacts in terms of research production, research funding, or educational efforts. Additionally, we conducted several surveys regarding individual responses to natural disasters and climate impacts, including a cost-choice analysis of career decisions. The results showed little material response by geoscientists to specific climate impacts and scant consideration of hazard risk when considering job opportunities.
One noteworthy finding in the cost-choice analysis revealed that US geoscientists were more open to jobs in locations with higher risk when salaries increased above $50,000, and especially so when salaries exceeded $100,000 per year. Except for Millennials, geoscientists across all other generational cohorts consistently opted for jobs with higher salaries regardless of other factors. Those choosing jobs with salaries less than $50,000 per year chose jobs in rural locations with relatively low hazard risk, whereas those choosing higher salary jobs, chose jobs primarily in urban settings, with higher hazard and crime risk. Higher income thresholds appeared to increase risk tolerance overall, with community amenities and resources significantly outweighing environmental risks.
From this analysis, it appears that the US geoscience community is not positioned as a proactive change agent relative to climate impacts on society, and there appears to be no long-term strategic investments in building the research and educational capacity, as well as the labor pool, to meet the expected demand for skilled professionals to address climate change and hazard impacts over the coming decade. Given the increasing frequency and severity of impacts from natural hazards, the cost of a lack of dedicated long-term investment in addressing these issues is staggering. Should the US geoscience community galvanize its focus around addressing climate impacts, the results of this study indicate that financial investments, especially in terms of occupational salaries, must meet a minimum threshold to attract geoscientists into these critical occupations. The drivers of this financial threshold are unknown, but we hypothesize that this is the socially accepted level for fundamental stability for individuals living in the United States, covering expenses such as insurance, healthcare, and housing.
We are interested in engaging in dialogue with colleagues outside of the United States to test whether different social systems provide the needed stability to enable scientists to be more effective agents of change.
How to cite: Keane, C. and Gonzales, L.: The Unfulfilled Potential of U.S. Geoscience: Strategic Gaps in Climate Adaptation and Hazard Mitigation Efforts, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-3324, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-3324, 2025.
In its most general conceptualization, resilience refers to a natural, social, or engineered system’s capacity to absorb shocks, adapt, and recover. Resilience has gained significant traction across technical and non-technical disciplines. The multidisciplinary adoption of resilience has led to a wealth of conceptual and operational declinations.
Engineering research has led to the formulation of a quantitative framework in which resilience is defined as the capability of a system to attain and maintain a target level of functionality over a pre-determined time interval (for instance, the service life of an engineered geostructure). Correspondingly, a resilience index is defined operationally as the integral of a functionality metric over a control period. Functionality is parameterized for multiple “dimensions” of a system representing its physical, environmental, financial, and institutional projections among others. Resilience indices pertaining to the respective dimensions can be aggregated to obtain a multidimensional index.
The adoption of a resilience-based paradigm in geoengineering disciplines would foster ethical decision-making for at least five main reasons.
First, the operational definition of resilience is closely related to sustainability as the modeling and estimation of resilience requires a forward-looking approach to the future evolution of a geosystem. Maximizing resilience entails the pursuit of sustainability and vice versa. The necessity of acknowledging and modeling the dynamic nature of geosystems forces researchers, practitioners, decision-makers and other stakeholders to focus on processes such as climate change, whose effects would need to be addressed quantitatively in analysis and design.
Second, the resilience modeling process allows a multi-level (i.e., dimension-specific and/or aggregate) insight into the resilience of a geosystem and, consequently, facilitates the adoption of rational and holistic decision support systems. This perspective fosters multidisciplinary interactions and a more collective and non-sectorial strategic planning for the adaptive management of geosystems.
Third, the possibility to explicitly model the environmental resilience of geoengineering design and the inclusion of environmental resilience in decision-making systems would foster the wider adoption of environmentally and financially sustainable technical options such as nature-based solutions.
Fourth, requiring the explicit consideration of the future stages of a geosystem would stimulate and accelerate the ongoing transition of geoengineering design paradigms to evolutionary formats involving a greater use of observational and non-deterministic (e.g., reliability-based, performance-based) approaches in which uncertainties are modelled, processed, and reported explicitly. Such transition is ethically virtuous as it steers geoengineering design towards a higher technical standard and towards a more explicit pursual of adaptive management and sustainable cost-performance optimization.
Fifth, the promotion of a resilience-based culture could support decision-makers and regulators in adopting forward-thinking and sustainable strategies due to an enhanced understanding by society of the importance of accounting for medium- and long-term effects of management actions in lieu of only focusing on short-term efficiency.
This study presents illustrates the main features of the resilience modeling framework in the context of geoengineering, provides insights into the correspondences between conceptual aspects and operational implications of the resilience-based paradigm, and discusses its implications for ethical and sustainability-oriented decision-making.
How to cite: Uzielli, M.: The roles and potential of resilience-based management for sustainable decision-making in geoengineering, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-12191, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-12191, 2025.
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015 – 2030) calls for incorporating science into the policy process. However, this carries the risk of politicizing science, and therefore, may blur the boundaries of the roles of the different risk management actors. These difficulties are aggravated in the context of an emergency or natural disaster, where scientists advise the authorities. In these situations, decision-makers need to respond with the utmost precision to three basic questions: i) what phenomena will occur, ii) when will they occur, and iii) where will they impact? Despite the efforts of the scientific community to conduct increasingly accurate studies on natural events, uncertainty is often high and/or unavoidable. This uncertainty, in an environment of pressure, urgency, and ineffective communication, can lead to the proliferation of non-consensual, incomprehensible, misunderstood, and erroneous information. In an extreme case, it can even aggravate the impact of such a natural disaster (e.g., l’Aquila earthquake in 2009). On the other hand, in a context of climate change—where the magnitude and frequency of many events are increasing—and unstoppable demographic expansion, the trend is towards greater risk. Moreover, the appearance of increasingly complex and strong relationships between different types of events, with the occurrence of concatenations and cascading effects, increases uncertainty, and therefore makes it difficult to design strategies for prevention, action, and recovery. Multi-hazard analyses can help to reduce this uncertainty in the complex scenarios that are plaguing society today and will continue to do in the future. Multi-hazard analyses are a first step towards a transdisciplinary, cross-sectoral, and cross-border multi-risk management plan that is based on scientific knowledge. The greater precision of risk estimation will contribute to better supporting decision-makers, thus implying the ethical communication of information that reduces misunderstanding, thereby contributing to the resilience of societies.
This research was partially funded by the European Commission (EC) EVE grant (DG ECHO Horizon 2020, Ref. 826292) and the CSIC grant MAPCAN (CSIC Ref. 202130E083).
How to cite: López Saavedra, M. and Martí, J.: Multi-hazard analyses and their implications for the defense of society against natural phenomena, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-4220, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-4220, 2025.
The Anthropocene demands a critical reassessment of humanity’s relationship with the Earth, bringing geoethics, geoenvironmental education, and the concept of sense of place to the forefront of sustainable human-Earth interactions. Geoethics addresses the ethical dimensions of these interactions, underscoring the responsibility of geoscientists to advance sustainable practices and raise public awareness of pressing environmental issues. Through a systematic literature review of 98 records across major research databases—including Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and JSTOR—using the keywords "geoethics AND education" and "geoethics AND place" (up to October 2023), 22 eligible studies were identified and analyzed. This review highlighted key themes and research gaps within this interdisciplinary field. Notably, the past decade has witnessed a surge in geoethics research, demonstrating its relevance across domains such as geoconservation and geoeducation. Central to this discourse is the concept of sense of place, which refers to the emotional and cognitive bonds individuals form with specific locations. Cultivating a strong sense of place is crucial for fostering environmentally responsible behaviors and civic engagement. In this context, geoenvironmental education emerges as a powerful mechanism for nurturing such connections. By fostering appreciation for local environments and integrating ethical considerations into the study of the geoenvironment, geoeducation bridges the gap between theoretical knowledge and lived experience. Despite the evident interconnectedness of geoethics, sense of place, and geoenvironmental education, research examining their integration within educational frameworks remains scarce. Empirical studies that explicitly link these concepts in pedagogical settings are particularly lacking, underscoring an urgent area for future research. Priority should be given to developing effective tools for assessing the impact of geoethical education on students' environmental attitudes and behaviors. Fostering collaborations among geoscientists, educators, ethicists, and policymakers is imperative for establishing comprehensive frameworks that promote sustainability and ethical decision-making. Integrating the ethical dimensions of geoscience practices into educational curricula is vital for embedding geoethics as a cornerstone of geoenvironmental literacy. By embracing diverse perspectives and pedagogical methodologies, we can enhance the scope and impact of geoethics. Linking geoethics with geoenvironmental education and sense of place deepens our understanding of the ethical responsibilities individuals and communities bear toward the Earth. This integrative approach not only strengthens environmental stewardship but also lays the groundwork for a more sustainable and resilient society.
How to cite: Koupatsiaris, A. A. and Drinia, H.: Integrating Geoethics, Geoeducation, and Sense of Place: Nourishing Sustainable Human-Earth Practices in the Anthropocene, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-6298, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-6298, 2025.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly pervasive in our daily lives, transcending cultures and generations. Today’s children are growing up in a world deeply intertwined with AI. But what do children know about AI? How do they perceive it? How do they imagine its capabilities, evolution, and impact on our future?
This study explores children's perceptions of AI, as reflected in drawings created by Italian primary school students in 2024 for a calendar competition organized by the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV) in collaboration with CINECA, titled "Out and about with AI". Launched in 2005, the INGV calendar project invites schools each year to submit student artwork on various Earth science themes. The initiative serves a dual purpose: to engage young learners with science, technology, and the natural world, while also providing a unique opportunity to explore their views on Earth, science, AI, the environment, and sustainable behaviors.
Beyond its contribution to science education, the project engages with broader discussions on Geoethics and the responsibility of science in addressing global anthropogenic changes. The analysis highlights how the information presented to young audiences shapes their perceptions of AI, influencing their imagination and expectations regarding its role in society. It also examines how children perceive the intersection of AI with Earth systems and the ethical implications of technological advancements.
The results provide valuable insights into children’s attitudes toward AI, their confidence in its future development, and how they envision its potential. These findings encourage us to reflect on the current state of AI, its future evolution, and the ethical questions surrounding its role in society.
Furthermore, the study contributes to our understanding of the role of geoscience in education, with a particular focus on how we can better equip the next generation to understand the complexities of Earth systems and prepare them to address global challenges. The findings not only inspire reflection on the present and future of AI, but also offer important perspectives on children’s awareness of geoethical issues and their confidence in AI’s potential to address pressing environmental challenges.
How to cite: D'Addezio, G. and Besker, N.: Children’s perception and imagination of ai through Italian primary school drawings, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-8376, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-8376, 2025.
Overview
The European Union (EU) faces unprecedented challenges in securing critical raw materials (CRM) while maintaining environmental protection standards. The EU-funded CIRAN project is examining the EU's evolving raw materials governance framework, particularly focusing on the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) and the consequences of its implementation for environmentally protected areas. The research analyses how governance structures can balance a potential ethical dilemma: safeguarding environmentally protected areas and biodiversity, and securing the mineral raw materials that are necessary to maintain the European economy and living standards.
Methods
The project methodology was based on a systematic analysis of case studies across European countries, examining mining operations in or near protected areas, the use of the DPSIR (Drivers-Pressures-States-Impacts-Responses) framework to evaluate policy drivers, such as the EU Green Deal, and consultations and dialogues with people from five different communities living in or near environmentally protected areas in five different EU countries.
Results
The study of existing mining operations located in or near natural protected areas across nine European countries revealed a striking conclusion: mining is not only possible in environmentally protected areas but also socially accepted in all cases studied. This finding is particularly significant when contrasted with claims, even in recent peer-reviewed literature, suggesting that mining projects are inherently value-destructive, universally detrimental to the environment, and largely compromised on socio-economic grounds.
The study also revealed that existing EU and national regulatory frameworks do not significantly prevent mining operations, even within protected areas. However, administrative barriers, particularly understaffed public agencies, politically motivated interpretation of regulations, and lengthy permitting processes, create substantial delays.
Finally, the research shows that successful mining projects consistently demonstrate three characteristics: comprehensive environmental impact assessments, effective and sustained stakeholder engagement, and robust post-mining planning.
Conclusions
The CRMA requirement to reduce mine permitting cycles from 15-20 years to 24 months represents a paradigm shift in resource management approaches. Considering that a large percentage (over 85%) of known mineral deposits of CRM in Europe lie within or at less than 5 km from an environmentally protected area, and that there are no clear decision trees to guide decision making processes to balance nature conservation and mineral resources extraction, the implementation of the CRMA will create difficult to manage ethical dilemmas for permitting authorities in EU countries.
In this context, securing sustainable domestic supply requires systemic policy reforms focused on three key areas: streamlined and transparent permitting processes, enhanced administrative capacity, and improved social contracts.
How to cite: Correia, V., Falck, E., Hermann, L., Hilton, J., Moussaid, M., Luodes, N., Panttila, H., Ovaskainen, N., Barnes, J., Berne, S., Lucarini, M., and Rosendo, L.: Invisible Mining: A Blueprint for EU Critical Materials Resilience , EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-19533, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-19533, 2025.
Humans craft insights through "social processes pertaining to the production, preservation, accumulation, circulation, and appropriation of knowledge" (1 p.429). Insights and related practices shape the socio-ecological niche humans live in. Partaking makes social processes (practices) effective. Promoting geoethics for inspiring politics is founded upon the following:
Earth: Contemporary societies connect Earth into a single complex-adaptive social-ecological system2 through global supply chains, an all-embracing division of labour, a planetary technosphere, and a worldwide knowledge system3. Cycles of matter, energy, and information tie socio-economic systems and the planet's physical and biological systems. The hegemonic contemporary culture tackles Nature as a cheap, nearly unlimited resource, nourishing the primary narrative of planetary-scale anthropogenic change.
World: The human condition, agency and practices encompass reproduction, work, and governance, regardless of the role a specific individual, collective, or institution human agent has at a given time and place. Using Hannah Arendt's analysis of the human condition4, laborans tell of the struggle for biological and social reproduction (at subsistence or affluence levels). Homo-fabers' story is about building and operating the technosphere. Zoo politikons embody civism, a citizen's political and cultural virtues and sentiments.
Rupture: Over the past few centuries, homo-faber has built a planetary technosphere conceived by zoon-politikons of primarily European origin5,6. The onset of disruptive planetary-scale anthropogenic change7, i.e. the Anthropocene, terminates peoples' unintentional impact on Earth. Instead8, it challenges the zoon-politikons and homo-fabers to secure lasting reproduction for all.
Practice: Geo-societal narratives acknowledge inequality, i.e. people (human agents) acting as laborans, homo-fabers or zoon-politikons, and power relations, i.e. zoon-politikon's political and cultural perspectives guide homo faber's engineering of the technosphere, which determines laborans' experience of Earth System dynamics. Comparative justice requires partaking in crafting narratives.
The Earth scientists' conventional narratives encompass socio-economic development (e.g. production of goods, living conditions), individual well-being and cultural values, e.g. favouring the sustainable functioning of the telluric Earth System, and cultural or metaphysical perspectives like the evolution of life-bearing planets. However, informing the handling of disruptive planetary-scale anthropogenic change, i.e. going political, Earth scientists' narratives are about the geo-societal, i.e. they must recognize people's labour to reproduce biologically and socially, people's work to build and run the technosphere, and people's acts as citizens.
- 1) Renn, J. The Evolution of Knowledge - Rethinking Science for the Anthropocene. (Princeton University Press, 2020).
- 2) Otto, I. M. et al. Human agency in the Anthropocene. Ecol. Econ. 167, 106463 (2020).
- 3) Rosol, C., Nelson, S. & Renn, J. Introduction: In the machine room of the Anthropocene. Anthr. Rev. 4, 2–8 (2017).
- 4) Arendt, H. The Human Condition. (The University of Chicago Press, 1958).
- 5) Mokyr, J. A Culture of Growth. (Princeton University Press, 2016). doi:10.1515/9781400882915
- 6) Reinhard, W. Die Unterwerfung der Welt - Globalgeschichte der Europäischen Expansion 1415-2015. (Verlag C.H. Beck oHG, 2016).
- 7) Summerhayes, C. P. et al. The future extent of the Anthropocene epoch: A synthesis. Glob. Planet. Change 242, 104568 (2024).
- 8) Hamilton, C. Defiant Earth - The Fate of Humans in the Anthropocene. (Wiley, Polity Press, 2017).
How to cite: Bohle, M.: Geo-societal Agency and Narratives: Framing the Human Condition, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-65, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-65, 2025.
There is a new, burgeoning literature on geoethics in the geosciences (Peppoloni and Di Capua 2021). It stems from the assumption that understanding the Earth, analyzing natural processes, and managing their impacts require significant responsibility from geoscientists. Thus, geological inquiry must be accompanied by thoughtful consideration of ethical and social dimensions.
The literature is based on the definition that geoethics consists of research and reflection on the values which underpin appropriate behaviours and practices (Peppoloni and Di Capua 2021). Geoethics encourages geoscientists and wider society to become fully aware of the humankind’s role as an active geological force on the planet and the ethical responsibility that this implies. Some (Koster et al. 2024) even use geoethics in disputes about defining the onset of humankind becoming an active geological force suggesting that a geoethical stance may do away with the Anthropocene as a useful concept: a new epoch in the GTS. Others move away from the human centered approach to suggest a more-than-human geoethics as a space of thought and an arena of concerns in which natural and cultural worlds are co-constitutive, requiring geoscientists to grasp the conjunction of the technologies of ecology, on the one hand, and of prehension and feeling, on the other (Sharp et al. 2022).
This paper focuses on a geoethical stance rooted in a critical positionality towards a traditional view of geology and focuses on what STS theorist Isabelle Stengers calls “slow science:” a thoughtful approach to considering unknown matters and their connections to existing knowledge (Stengers 2018). We advocate for critical/radical reflexivity as an ethical method, emphasizing insecurity regarding basic assumptions, discourse, and practices used in describing reality (Braun 2024). Instead of a human centered geoethics that engages with the Earth in a traditional Newtonian/Cartesian mode of scientific inquiry, we argue that a geoethical stance reflective of our critical juncture in Earth’s history should integrate the implications of quantum theory rather than avoid them, as suggested by some geoethicists. The main goal of quantum-inspired geoethics is to decenter the universal and hegemonic Newtonian/Cartesian worldview. We propose a geoethics attuned to becomings, matterings, and more-than-human events, recognizing various agential possibilities that give rise to new forms of temporality and spatiality.
References
Braun, R. 2024. Radical reflexivity, experimental ontology and RRI. Journal of Responsible Innovation. doi 10.1080/23299460.2024.2331651.
Koster, E., P. et al. 2024. The Anthropocene Event as a Cultural Zeitgeist in the Earth-Human Ecosystem. Journal of Geoethics and Social Geosciences 1 (1):1–41.
Peppoloni, S., and Di Capua, G. 2021. Current Definition and Vision of Geoethics. In Geo-societal Narratives - Contextualising geosciences, edited by M. Bohle and E. Marone, 17-28. Cham.: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sharp, E. L. et al. 2022. Geoethical Futures: A Call for More-Than-Human Physical Geography. Environment and Planning F. 1 (1):66-81.
Stengers, I. 2018. Another Science Is Possible : A Manifesto for Slow Science. Translated by Stephen Muecke. Cambridge UK: Polity Press.
How to cite: Wagreich, M., Braun, R., and Randell, R.: A new geoethics for the Anthropocene, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-17899, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-17899, 2025.
The switch in definition of the Anthropocene concept first proposed in 2000 in just one year, 2024, from a 1952 varved lake sediment to humanity’s cumulative impacts on the Earth System starting in the Late Pleistocene was an extraordinary development in the geoscience profession. Launched as a traditional Time Scale inquiry, the 2009-2024 journey of the designated Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) became unconventional because of its focus on mid-20th century atomic bomb tests broadly coeval with two dozen accelerating Earth System and socioeconomic trends as well as its premature communications with news media. On 4 March 2024, the AWG proposal for an Anthropocene epoch/series was rejected by the umbrella authorities of the International Commission on Stratigraphy and International Union of Geological Sciences. Their decision was wrongly interpreted by some, including leaders of the former AWG, as a denial of scientific evidence for anthropogenic climate change. This unleashed conflicting news coverage and thus a need for clarifying discourse within geoscience, across related disciplines, as well as across society with its growing anxiety about the Earth’s deteriorating health. The helpful outcome is that the Anthropocene Event uniquely equips Earth Governance, a surging focus of global influencers and authorities, with a holistic Earth-Human Ecosystem framework.
How to cite: Koster, E.: The Anthropocene Event as a holistic framework for Earth Governance, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-2621, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-2621, 2025.
Climate change, scientifically established for decades, is undeniably driven by human activity. Awareness is growing, hesitant yet real, but actions remain critically insufficient. While plans are taking shape and projections sharpen, the efforts required to mitigate and adapt to this crisis are daunting. Paradoxically, grasping the scale of these efforts is as challenging as believing they are achievable. Yet they are, if we commit fully, both individually and collectively. Unfortunately, such commitment remains elusive.
The drive for action is stalled by the lack of compelling narratives, stories that inspire and mobilize. As climatologists, shouldn’t we broaden our communication strategies to convey the urgency of climate action while engaging both hearts and minds? Turning to art and adventure offers a transformative path to connect with broader audiences, blending gravity with hope to inspire collective action.
This vision inspired me, as a young climate scientist, to design and complete ‘Tethys,’ an extraordinary Alpine journey aimed at communicating the climate challenge while serving scientific research. Over 112 days in semi-autonomy, I hiked 3,420 km with 203,000 m of elevation gain, swam 128 km across peri-alpine lakes, and carried or towed an 18–28 kg backpack while collecting 138 water samples from peri-alpine lakes and tributaries for a research project.
Tethys is a living metaphor, a story crafted to embody the scale of the climate challenge, transforming abstract commitments into tangible, physical ones. I designed this adventure to make the metaphor real: a race against time, against our own limits, and a deep dive into the physical and mental resilience required to meet these challenges. This project also serves as an experiment in reimagining geosciences, introducing concepts of vulnerability and humility into our investigations while fostering engagement and dialogue within the scientific community.
Grounded in real-world experience, Tethys paves the way for impactful climate communication, offering the public a narrative to inspire action. It is an odyssey of resilience and hope, an ode to climate commitment, told with passion and poetry through the lens of a daring adventure. To bend the emissions curve, we may first need to bow, humbly and resolutely, to the natural world we inhabit.
A documentary film is underway, alongside plans for a graphic narrative that chronicles this journey and its parallels with the climate challenge.
Website: https://www.aventure-tethys.fr/en
How to cite: Planchat, A.: An adventure in the Alps to inspire and unlock climate action, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-11355, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-11355, 2025.
Climate change action in the Arctic context requires not only deep understanding of the physical change processes but also awareness and sensitivity towards the complexities of the socio-economic and cultural dynamics in the region. In this study, we explore the learning experience of geoscience students attending the Arctic Circle Assembly as part of a university course. In the event, the students get to interact with a wide range of actors and stakeholders, including geopolitical and indigenous perspectives.
We examine the students’ sense of belonging and their possibly transformative learning process, and their influence on the students’ professional identity with qualitative inquiry. Interviews with the students and analyses of their personal learning reflections, reveal signs of transformative learning. Students experienced disorienting dilemmas, that were induced for example by lack of sense of belonging to the expert community or students’ values conflicting with the contents of the event. At the same time, belonging to the student group was an important factor for the discourse and critical reflection on the dilemmas, leading in some cases to outcomes of transformative nature.
Our findings highlight the importance of facilitation of challenging reflections on the students’ values and beliefs, and building of trust and belonging in the learning community, to allow management of the dilemmas towards transformation. This would require considering the backgrounds and prior experiences of the students. Based on our finding we suggest that transformative approaches to climate change education and conference attendance as a pedagogical tool can potentially shape students’ professional identities and broaden their perspectives, and to increase their agency as Arctic experts and responsible Arctic researchers.
How to cite: Siponen, J., Salovaara, J. J., Särkelä, K., Ronkainen, I., Veijonaho, S., Vesterinen, V.-M., Barrio, I. C., Riuttanen, L., and Lauri, K. A.: Transformative Learning in Arctic Climate Change Education: Engaging Students with Conference Participation, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-18750, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-18750, 2025.
Acts aimed at mitigating climate change (CC) and promoting sustainability—or the absence of such acts—are frequently discussed in relation to what is typically called the knowledge-to-action gap (e.g., Mastrángelo et al., 2019). One could argue that the predominant approach to advancing sustainability—understood here broadly as a response to CC and other ongoing and enduring aspects of the polycrisis—has been to accumulate and disseminate ever more knowledge. This includes knowledge of the specific issues at stake and the severity of the situation, what could and has been done by whom, and what would even constitute as an effective structure for determining which knowledge is needed and how to utilise it. Meanwhile, the sustainability knowledge-action gap itself has been investigated in, for example, education, research agendas, and decision- and policy-making. On the one hand, CC mitigation and sustainability efforts and their ultimate impact can be debated; for instance, whether there are enough tangible measures or just talk (e.g., Hoffman et al., 2022), or whether current initiatives will indeed bring about sustainability (e.g., Salovaara and Hagolabi-Albov [in review]). Yet the core question remains: are the called-upon acts grounded in rational, knowledge-based considerations? On the other hand, knowledge has undoubtedly guided these (and all) forms of agency (e.g., Giddens, 1979): where an actor—individual, communal, or institutional—applies their expertise and resources to depart from established norms, i.e., generates transformation that fundamentally underlines sustainability. However, it appears evident that knowledge alone does not guarantee the realisation of transformation. Whether one refers to multi-level perspective (Geels, 2002), actor-network (Latour, 2007), or social practice theory (Shove et al., 2012)—each elaborating on socio-technical changes emerging through scaled structures or simultaneous enactments and practices—it remains theoretically (and observably) clear that current institutionalised knowledge, along with the structures shaped by it, have also become barriers to the transformation. For example, an individual may be knowledgeable of the existing structures and the direction to change them, but their agency is limited by dominance over resources for implementing those changes. This limitation might result from structural misalignments that either promote a different notion of sustainability or fail to promote sustainability at all (Salovaara & Hagolani-Albov [in review]). Consequently, our hypothesis—which we plan to investigate in theoretical and action-oriented future research—is that, beyond the knowledge-to-action gap, the global sustainability movement is at a stalemate because of an agency-to-action gap.
Keywords: sustainability agency, action gap, transformation
References:
Mastrángelo, M. E. et al. (2019). Key knowledge gaps to achieve global sustainability goals. Nature Sustainability
Hoffman, S. J. et al. (2022). International treaties have mostly failed to produce their intended effects. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. University of California
Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research policy
Latour, B. (2007). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford.
Shove, E. et al. (2012). The dynamics of social practice: Everyday life and how it changes. Sage.
How to cite: Salovaara, J. J., Oikarinen, T., and Lauri, K. A.: Why aren’t we acting for the climate? From knowledge-action gap to agency-action gap, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-16789, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-16789, 2025.
Since March 2021, Geosciences Rennes, France has a Sustainable Development and Social Responsibility working group whose main missions are (i) to quantify the laboratory's carbon emissions using the GES1point5 tool, (ii) to propose awareness-raising and training initiatives, and (iii) to set up a transition plan. Some of our activities are managed by the Observatoire des Sciences de l'Environnement de Rennes (OSERen), to which the laboratory belongs: purchases made by analytical platforms, management of some scientific projects, analytical and scientific equipments. It is necessary to integrate these “delocalized” flows in order to track the evolution of the laboratory's emissions over time, without any bias due to changes in administrative management. In 2023, these flows represented 54% of Geosciences Rennes' purchases. Carbon budgets were done for 5 years (2019-2023), an environmental charter adopted in 2022 and a transition plan voted in 2023, to be applied from 2024 onwards. This multi-year plan (2024-2030) is incentive-based and non-binding.
Despite our efforts to raise awareness (communication, conferences) and the adoption of an environmental charter, only emissions linked to buildings (electricity and heat consumption) and commuting have decreased, from 289 T ecCO2 in 2019 to 195 T eqCO2 in 2023 (-30%). We suggest that this is a response to the policies put in place by the university and the Rennes metropolitan area to encourage energy savings, soft mobility and work from home.
After a sharp drop in 2020, mission-related emissions in 2023 were close to their pre-covid level. To better understand the origin of these emissions, we worked at the individual level. Every year: the majority (>80%) of agents emit less than 1T eqCO2/year for their missions, all modes and reasons combined and in 2023, 72% of missions were made by train or car, with an average distance of 500 km. As data acquisition in the field is the laboratory's core business, it seems possible to maintain a high level of research activity with study areas located close to the laboratory. Purchasing-related emissions have never decreased and even rose from around 420T eqCo2 (average 2019-2022) to 800 T eqCO2 in 2023. As a result, the share of purchasing in the laboratory's total carbon footprint has risen from 47% in 2019 to 68% in 2023.
Awareness-raising initiatives thus appear as a necessary but not sufficient step towards reducing our laboratory's carbon footprint. Such measures help creating a positive intellectual environment, prone to changes in favor of less-environmental impacting research. The detailed analysis carried at individual level for missions has enabled us to highlight the heterogeneity of the footprint linked to professional travels, and to propose actions that are targeted, more equitable and acceptable. Access to individualized data for purchases would enable us to propose similar targeted actions for an effective mitigation strategy. The plan voted for in 2023 will most likely require a revision of its application modalities in the years to come, in order to keep pace with the expected reduction trajectory.
How to cite: Guerit, L., Jardé, E., Jeanneau, L., Battais, A., Coche, A., Dietrich, P., Fournereau, M., Gourmil, G., and Moreau, F.: Can awareness-raising alone reduce the environmental footprint of a geosciences laboratory? , EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-8470, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-8470, 2025.
In light of the major socio-environmental challenges of our time, ensuring a safe and just world for humans and non-humans calls for profound changes in our societies. According to the 6th IPCC WG3 report, the scale and speed of actions required to keep global warming below +2°C are unparalleled at both individual and institutional levels. Consequently, no sector nor activity - whether in the Global North or in countries moving toward similar economic trajectories - should be exempt from critical reflection on its suitability for sustainable practices. This also includes scientific research, particularly our Geosciences community at large, which not only brings to light the above challenges, but also increasingly calls for decisive action. Geoscientist communities must therefore critically reflect on the societal impact of their findings and their research practices. These considerations are being increasingly raised by ethics committees at universities and research institutes, as well as in a growing number of opinion pieces, publications, and other forms of expressions within our communities. Here we present our experience of making this pressing issue a standalone chapter in the upcoming 5-year prospective document published by the French Continental Surfaces and Interfaces research community (in French, SIC), coordinated through the French state research organization (CNRS). This marks a significant difference from previous SIC prospective editions where such reflections were largely absent. Here, we address the environmental responsibilities, strategic actions, and systemic transformations required to align SIC research with sustainability goals while maintaining scientific relevance. We argue that the community must uphold transparency and ethical leadership to ensure a balance between the environmental benefits and impacts of research. We also reflect on the potential challenges that arise from reconciling such ethical commitment with the future scientific and instrumental challenges and priorities for the future.
How to cite: Kuppel, S., Albert, C. H., Champollion, N., Chassé, M., Dassié, É., Guérit, L., Immel, F., Jardé, É., Jeanneau, L., Peugeot, C., and Schimmelpfennig, I.: From carbon to societal footprint : geoscience research in the face of the socio-environmental emergency , EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-7054, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-7054, 2025.
Agricultural soils are central to ecosystem functioning, but their widespread degradation jeopardizes the ability of agroecosystems to sustain life and livelihoods for humans and more-than-humans alike. One proposed solution is carbon farming, a term that encompasses agricultural practices aimed at sequestering carbon in soils. Proponents claim that carbon farming offers a dual benefit: mitigating climate change by drawing down atmospheric carbon while improving soil health and fertility, which underpins the multitude of ‘functions’ soils provide. Often heralded as a ‘win-win’ or ‘no-regret’ solution, carbon farming would be the perfect ‘natural climate solution’. Beyond numerous critiques on the physical and technical aspects of soil carbon sequestration, we reflect here on the rapid growth of voluntary carbon markets as a means to trigger the needed transition to sustainable farming. We argue that such schemes are inherently unfair—reproducing patterns of neocolonial relations and perpetuating the "imperial mode of living"—and fundamentally undemocratic, as they rely on the hegemonic acceptance of markets as the primary driver of positive change. This approach bypasses public investments and usurps democratic power, preventing collective decision-making on what to produce, how much, and under which social and environmental standards. Drawing on firsthand experience co-designing and delivering a transdisciplinary course on this topic—with contributions from social scientists, policymakers, NGOs, and farmers— we reflect on the profound insights that emerge from well-structured inter- and transdisciplinary collaborations.
How to cite: Moinet, G., Möller, I., and Vidal, A.: Grounding carbon farming, or how to break the market logic and promote the cocreation of farming systems, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-16622, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-16622, 2025.
The divide between the Global North and South in the geosciences has been recognized as one of the most pressing challenges of our time. It is widely accepted that this gap must be addressed through visionary leadership and strategic initiatives that draw upon the unparalleled expertise and resources concentrated within Global North institutions. A comprehensive framework is proposed here to foster equity and collaboration, ensuring the participation of scholars from all regions while maintaining the highest standards of academic rigor.
Three critical pillars for bridging this divide have been identified. First, the deployment of expert teams from the North to train local researchers in the Global South should be prioritized during global fieldwork, as this model has consistently proven effective for capacity building. Second, the importance of performative Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) measures must be emphasized, including symbolic appointments and one-time funding schemes designed to raise awareness of systemic inequities. Finally, conferences and workshops should continue to be held in the Global North, ensuring logistical convenience and robust participation. For those unable to secure visas or travel funds, virtual attendance options can be considered as a viable alternative.
This framework also seeks to address the growing demand for environmental justice in research. By focusing discussions on resilience and adaptation rather than directly referencing complex socio-political histories (avoid using the G-word), a narrative of hope and progress can be fostered. Importantly, the recommendations presented here assume that the Global South operates as a cohesive monolith, enabling streamlined approaches that are universally applicable and unburdened by the complexities of local disparities or intra-regional inequities.
This is satire.
How to cite: Gani, S.: How (not) to Bridge the Global North-South Divide in the Geosciences: A Framework for Impactful Collaboration, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-621, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-621, 2025.
This presentation explores the concept of 'agency' in the context of climate change through in-depth interviews with scientists. Drawing on Emirbayer and Mische’s (1998) definition of agency as a relational construct influenced by habit, imagination, and judgment, I investigate how scientists articulate their self-perception of agency and the emotions tied to it—such as solidarity, fear, and empowerment.
Leveraging anthropological scholarship on emotions (Hochschild, 1983; Scheer, 2012) and affect theory (Ahmed, 2004; Berlant, 2010), I examine how networks and practices shape these emotional experiences (Mesquita, 2022; Salmela & von Scheve, 2017, 2018). I aim to connect scientists’ reflections on their emotional engagement with emerging ideas of radical care.
The presentation will address the panel question: How can scientific institutions prevent reinforcing the status quo and instead contribute to radical transformations? By analyzing the sociological production of emotions within the scientific community, I hope to uncover new insights into how both movements and scientists can co-produce emotional narratives for greater collective action against climate change.
How to cite: Tyagi, A.: Scientists as agents of 'radical care': 'emotional practices' as changing the way scientists imagine themselves, their peers and, their science, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-2876, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-2876, 2025.
Posters on site: Fri, 2 May, 16:15–18:00 | Hall X4
In an increasingly interconnected and vulnerable world, combining pragmatism and relationality in geosciences is essential for addressing environmental challenges ethically and responsibly. Relational Geoscientific Pragmatism (RGP) underpins the method proposed by geoethics, offering tools to manage geological complexities within the context of modern societies. It fosters an integrated perspective where geosciences are closely linked to social responsibility and sustainability.
The geoethics method places respect for the environment, the sustainable management of natural resources, the safety and well-being of current and future generations at its core. It consists of integrating a practical, solution-oriented approach in geosciences with an ethical value system that guides decisions related to the management and human interaction with the Earth system. It focuses on context-specific solutions, applying rigorous scientific methods to the relationships between natural phenomena, societal needs, and decision-making processes in each context.
The fundamental elements of the geoethics method can be outlined as follows:
- Geoscience knowledge: it is fundamental to understanding natural phenomena and environmental dynamics, addressing challenges related to natural resource management, climate change, and environmental sustainability, and guiding the decision-making process. This knowledge enables accurate risk assessment and resource evaluation, offering objective and reliable data that underpin informed, evidence-based decisions.
- Interdisciplinarity: environmental issues are inherently complex and demand the integration of knowledge from a wide range of disciplines, including geosciences, social sciences, economics, law, and philosophy. The aim is to cultivate a holistic understanding of both natural systems and social contexts, ensuring that the interventions address the full complexity of the challenges, respecting their multifaceted nature.
- Responsibility and scientific analysis: geoethics demands all stakeholders to act responsibly, being aware of the consequences of their actions and balancing conflicting interests. The rigorous application of scientific analysis ensures that every decision is based on objective, verifiable, and up-to-date data. By prioritizing science, the geoethics method can navigate the value conflicts and ethical priorities that inevitably arise in decision-making processes.
- Defining ethical dilemmas and scenarios: The Geoethics Method identifies and analyse ethical dilemmas in human-environment relations, such as balancing economic growth with nature conservation, ensuring intergenerational justice, and protecting vulnerable communities. It facilitates scenario creation by envisioning outcomes of actions and evaluating them against sustainability, equity, and environmental respect.
- Inclusivity and dialogue: the Geoethics Method promotes the active involvement of all relevant stakeholders, including scientists, decision-makers, and local communities. This relational approach aims to find a reasonable alignment of values on which to base the choice of the best course of action for a given spatial and temporal context. Every proposed solution must be assessed not only for its technical feasibility but also for its capacity to address the needs and expectations of all stakeholders, thereby creating a dynamic balance between ecological and social concerns.
The Geoethics Method paves the way for responsible actions, helping decision-makers navigate modern challenges and create a geological governance model that seeks to strike a balance between scientific rigor and ethical and social needs.
How to cite: Peppoloni, S. and Di Capua, G.: Relational Geoscientific Pragmatism as the foundation of the Geoethics Method, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-2906, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-2906, 2025.
Ecological overshoot and unfettered growth are wreaking havoc on our environment (Daly, Meadows, Rees, et al.). The result is, what appears to be accelerating, global warming (incl climate change) giving rise to increasing intensity and frequency of drought, wildfire, flooding and hurricanes, accelerating ice melt and sea level rise, ocean acidification and hypoxia, biodiversity loss, desertification, permafrost thawing, soil degradation, atmospheric pollution, water insecurity and so on.
The human consequences are huge, e.g., migration, war, starvation, increased health risk, greater spread of disease, lower life expectancy, social upheaval, increasing wealth gap and gender inequality and political extremism. All these are, of course, excruciatingly unethical. The issue seems bleak.
The above results and impacts vary greatly across geographies, social norms and individual lifestyles. The question then arises is how people, from all walks of life, manage to learn how to cope, manage to learn about global warming, ocean degradation and eke out a tragic life for their families, especially for the poorest?
The second question that arises is how do these results (global warming, climate change, etc.) and these human consequences impact the ways in which people learn (informally) and the ways in which education is organized and delivered (formally)? What are the main positive contributing factors and what are the destructive factors, and how do they work?
What kind of geoethics do people develop (formally and informally, influenced by culture, circumstance, livelihood and events)? How do people’s and communities’ sense and practice (or non-practice) of geoethics improve or hinder their lives and resilience?
Our research project aims to delve into these complex, but crucial, questions. If you think that you might be interested in joining the project, please drop by our poster to discuss.
How to cite: Promduangsri, P. and Crookall, D.: Learning climate, ocean and geoethics: A research project for Earth education, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-12668, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-12668, 2025.
As climate change continues to pose challenges, it is important to promote the fields of climate and ocean education and communication. This poster presents my two Masters research internships.
For my Master 1 internship, I investigated how climate change is perceived spatially in the city of Nice, taking into account the experiences of both local residents and tourists. This has highlighted the importance of understanding diverse perspectives in climate communication.
For my Master 2 internship, I examine the ways in which climate change adaptation is mobilised in simulation/games. My aim is to identify the most suitable games for different purposes, such as facilitating community discussions, supporting decision-making for communities and municipalities and enhancing education in schools.
I will also present some of the common learning elements of the two internships, as well as difficulties encountered. Please visit my poster and share your thoughts on educational strategies for addressing climate and ocean challenges.
My Master 2 internship is made possible by the kind support of the following:
- Futurs-ACT, a regional research network in Nouvelle-Aquitaine;
- Benoît Sautour, Université de Bordeaux - OASU UAR POREA;
- Nicolas Becu, La Rochelle Université, CNRS - LIENSs.
How to cite: Promduangsri, P.: Climate change in two research internships : Spatial perspectives and games, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-4989, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-4989, 2025.
At the moment when we are writing this abstract, the last year was just announced as the warmest on record, the first to breach the symbolic 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. For decades, scientists have been sounding the alarm about the climate and ecological crisis, but these warnings have been met with inadequate response and political inertia.
In the last decade, a strong and diverse climate movement emerged, with grassroots groups mostly composed of young people engaging in a variety of actions, including civil disobedience. Earth scientists have however been timid to engage openly with these movements, concerned about their reputation and about breaching scientific neutrality.
However, fuelled by concern in the face of inaction, this started to change in the last years with scientists increasingly taking strong roles and positions for or in activist groups, for instance via groups such as Scientist Rebellion or Scientists for XR. The engagement of earth scientists in climate groups can have strong beneficial effects (Capstick et al 2022): As non-usual suspects and experts on the topic, their engagement in the climate movement can increase the feeling of emergency, while their respected position in society can help lending legitimacy to activist groups sometimes disregarded as young and unserious.
Despite an increase in the willingness of earth scientists to be more engaged beyond their own research work, there are still strong barriers to their involvement in the climate movement (Dablander et al 2024). While conceptions around neutrality and fears of hurting one’s reputation are a big part of earth scientists' hesitations, uncertainties about how to get involved and the kind of roles available to them also represent a strong barrier.
This poster aims at presenting different types of involvement in the climate justice movement that might fit you as an earth scientist and a citizen. It builds from our own experience in activist groups, as well as research and publications by different organizations, to display the diversity of roles needed in grassroots climate groups, and help you find your own.
Capstick, S., Thierry, A., Cox, E. et al. Civil disobedience by scientists helps press for urgent climate action. Nat. Clim. Chang. 12, 773–774 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01461-y
Dablander, F., Sachisthal, M.S.M., Cologna, V. et al. Climate change engagement of scientists. Nat. Clim. Chang. 14, 1033–1039 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-024-02091-2
How to cite: Duyck, E., Iosip, A., and Saturno, J.: Finding your place in the climate movement as an earth-system scientist, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-19902, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-19902, 2025.
CEREGE is a renowned French Research and Teaching Centre for Environmental Geosciences, employing approximately 220 staff members. In 2019, the carbon footprint of CEREGE’s research-related activities was estimated at around 7 tons of CO2 equivalent per person. This footprint primarily stems from three sources: 1) purchases that are e.g. necessary for various analytical methods, 2) commuting between home and CEREGE’s remote location, and 3) international travel for sampling campaigns and conferences.
Since 2019, a group of about a dozen volunteers has been actively implementing awareness-raising initiatives aimed at reducing the environmental impact of CEREGE's research activities. These initiatives include promoting sustainable transportation options, waste sorting, responsible energy consumption, and the effective use of digital technology.
In 2023, these small-scale incentive actions evolved into a more collective approach. One notable initiative was the organization of a serious game session, titled “Ma Terre en 180” (Gratiot et al., 2023; https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pstr.0000049), which aimed to halve the carbon footprint of a fictitious research team. Approximately 100 CEREGE staff members participated in this serious game.
The question then arises: how can we effectively achieve this Environmental Transition while maintaining or even enhancing the quality of professional activities and work-life conditions? To address this, the management team of CEREGE, which has been in operation since January 2024, has integrated eco-responsibility as a key policy guideline and established a new eco-responsibility committee within CEREGE’s organizational structure.
To formally validate staff approval of the environmental transition project and initiate a collective approach toward more sustainable research practices, a manifesto for CEREGE’s eco-responsibility was adopted through a vote at the beginning of 2024. Since then, the committee has been conducting a participatory process, applying facilitation principles and collective intelligence tools to ensure that all voices are heard and that decisions are widely accepted by the staff.
Moreover, small groups are conducting various experiments to test the effectiveness and feasibility of proposed changes in practices. Examples of these experiments include: 1) adjusting laboratory procedures to reduce consumables and waste, and 2) implementing a carbon quota system for travel and purchases within one of the research teams.
At the end of 2024, an eco-responsibility charter was approved by CEREGE staff, achieving high participation (79%) and acceptance rates (77%-97%) for each of the ten commitment articles.
In this contribution, we will present this collective experimental approach, explore advantages and challenges, and discuss the initial results regarding its effectiveness in reducing the environmental impacts of CEREGE’s activities.
How to cite: Schimmelpfennig, I., Cavalié, O., Chaurand, P., Collin, B., Fagault, Y., Giraud, X., Hubert, A., Jourdan, A.-L., Levard, C., and Monnier, L.: A Collective Experimental Approach to Sustainable Practices at the Research and Teaching Centre for Environmental Geosciences (CEREGE, Aix-en-Provence, France), EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-13165, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-13165, 2025.
Climate change mitigation and adaptation, among various other conceptualisations and strategies to tackle the complex crisis, can be seen as predominantly centralised (Lange et al., 2013). Various governmental or local municipality campaigns related to the application of SDGs, or corporations offering products and services under the banner of green business, are meant to assist the individual in actualising sustainability. However, such acts define the individual mainly as a consumer (Salovaara & Hagolani-Albov, 2024). Regardless of whether these entail the most effective ways for individuals to take part in mitigating climate change, a deeper dialogue is sorely needed between, for example, scientific and societal agendas on climate change and sustainability and citizens' understanding, sense of relevance, and motivation to take action on these issues. Both approaches are needed to bridge the possible differences and potential contradictions; citizen-led sustainability needs to be incorporated into the existing strategies, and the concurrent schemes need to be contextualised to the citizen in a much more relevant manner.
To collaboratively bridge these intersectoral perspectives, our project in its initial stage collects the citizen perceptions through a survey. The citizen barometer survey is a University of Helsinki organised annual national survey, under which a 10-point questionnaire with 9 Likert-scale and one open-ended question was utilised to gather a general sentiment (e.g., Pozzi et al., 2016) on the concurrent climate change and sustainability attitudes, perceptions, strategies and schemes—and importantly: what they might have missed or overlooked from a citizen perspective. While the relevance of our research speaks to a vast academic audience, the broader impact it aims for comes from a planned intersectoral collaboration, where the collected data will be further contextualised. The workshops will engage various actors and actor-groups, to seek out for example, how could the concurrent mitigation schemes be better enacted in citizen-local governance collaboration; and what could be the implications of citizen-led sustainability in various educational contexts; or could the perceptions lead to new research agendas in atmospheric and geosciences? Simultaneously, the project promotes and actualises an approach to sustainability—or sustainabilities (Kothari et al., 2019) that aims to further democratise sustainability. We see such an approach as especially important in these times of potential polarisation—to which we see pluralisation to be the correct response.
Keywords: climate change mitigation, sustainability, democratisation, citizen
References:
Kothari, A., Salleh, A., Escobar, A., Demaria, F., & Acosta, A. (2019). Pluriverse : a post-development dictionary. New Delhi: Tulika.
Lange, P., Driessen, P. P. J., Sauer, A., Bornemann, B., & Burger, P. (2013). Governing Towards Sustainability—Conceptualizing Modes of Governance. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 15(3), 403–425.
Pozzi, F. A., Fersini, E., Messina, E., & Liu, B. (2016). Sentiment analysis in social networks. Morgan Kaufmann.
Salovaara, J. J., & Hagolani-Albov, S. E. (2024). Sustainability agency in unsustainable structures: rhetoric of a capable transformative individual. Discover Sustainability, 5(1), 138.
How to cite: Lauri, K. A., Salovaara, J. J., and Oikarinen, T.: On individual's perceptions and motivations for Climate Change mitigation: towards Citizen-led sustainability, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-15385, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-15385, 2025.
« Scientifiques en Rébellion » (Scientists in Rebellion) is a collective of French scientists formed in 2020 with the following goals: raising awareness of the seriousness of scientific consensuses around climate change and ecological degradation, and publicly denouncing the inconsistencies and greenwashing of various actors. The collective also seeks to build a balance of power to transform institutions and companies to meet environmental challenges, and reorient higher education and research. Since its creation, the collective has been growing (several hundreds of members today), gathering scientists of various disciplines and career statuses. It operates with various forms of collective public engagement, from writing and speaking in various medias and supporting other NGOs, to joining or organising non-violent direct actions.
Here, we propose to present and discuss some key actions performed by « Scientifiques en Rébellion » over the last few years, taking stock on how groups of scientists may self-organise to participate in the public debate over various key environmental issues. Examples include the following actions and their follow up (in the medias or with judiciary trials): On October 3th, 2020, scientists took part in marches in airports in several French cities to denounce the climate impact of air travel for the benefit of a small minority of privileged ones. On the same topic, an unauthorized demonstration against private jets was held in Paris in November 2022, in front of the headquarters of Dassault Aviation. On the night of April 9-10th, 2022, around thirty scientists peacefully occupied the National Museum of Natural History in Paris and gave twelve presentations to call for urgent, radical measures to mitigate the ongoing ecological disasters. On March 4, 2023, a hundred scientists and citizens from various NGOs joined in a funeral procession in Paris to denounce biodiversity losses and health issues associated with the massive use of pesticides, and promote a different agricultural model. Several additional texts and participations in unauthorized demonstrations followed on the question of agriculture and water use. On May 12, 2023, the Scientifiques en Rebellion joined forces with other NGOs to target TotalEnergies and its project to install a floating LNG terminal at Le Havre harbour in France, as part of Scientist Rebellion's international campaign « The Science is Clear ». Other initiatives sought to put pressure on companies either driectly funding or supporting fossil fuel development, such as the BNP-Paribas banking group or Schneider Electric who provide equipment to Totalenergies for the EACOP pipeline project in East Africa.
How to cite: Husson, L., Kuppel, S., Marc, O., and en Rébellion, S.: An update on the activities of the collective Scientifiques en Rébellion, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-19671, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-19671, 2025.
Valtellina is an Alpine region in northern Lombardy (Italy) that largely coincides with the basin of the Adda River upstream of Lake Como. The Alps represent a complex, fascinating, and at the same time, vulnerable environment that holds immense importance for scientific research while offering endless opportunities for educational activities based on direct observation. These activities are adaptable to students of all ages. Exploring the geological and geomorphological aspects of the Alpine environment is particularly crucial for understanding their influence on the structure and evolution of the territory, raising awareness of natural hazards, and deepening knowledge of Geological Sciences. The significance of this knowledge has been repeatedly emphasized, especially today, as these disciplines play a fundamental role in addressing current climatic and environmental challenges and promoting sustainability goals. Morbegno, the main center of the Lower Valtellina valley, is home to the Istituto Comprensivo 2 Damiani. In 2020, the lower secondary school of this institute earned the European certification of Alpine School, introducing a curriculum focused on Alpine environmental and socio-economic processes. The program aims to reconnect students with the mountainous territory, fostering awareness of its characteristics, resources, and opportunities. This interdisciplinary educational model integrates the mountain into the learning pathway, involves local stakeholders, and combines the use of technology with hands-on field experiences. Geology, geomorphology, and outdoor education play a pivotal role in the curriculum, further aiming to cultivate a positive engagement with Geological Sciences among young students. The school also seeks to integrate geoethics into the curriculum through educational games, debates, and an inquiry-based approach developed in line with the outcomes of the Geoethics Outcomes and Awareness Learning (GOAL) project, co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the EU. The proposed contribution aims to showcase the school’s organization and activities, providing inspiration and practical ideas for implementing similar initiatives.
How to cite: Cameron, E. and Di Capua, G.: Bridging Mountains and Minds: An Educational Experience in the Alpine Region, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-2334, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-2334, 2025.
The impacts of climate change on the ocean around the world are daunting. These include sea level rise, melting of ice sheets (Antarctic and Greenland most notably), opening of new shipping routes (Arctic), biodiversity disruption, stronger and more frequent hurricanes and increased acidification. Human societies have never before been confronted with such challenges in such a short timeframe.
To help societies in making appropriate adaptation it is crucial to document behavioral changes, such as new projects (e.g., land planning, agricultural changes, fishing regulation), investments (e.g., urban and coastal development) and shifts in values – at various levels of granularity (e.g., local (city/small island), national (large country coast line) and regional (sea basin)).
Cases would be documented with standardized information that outlines and traces historical developments, current trends and foresighted transformations. Such information could take the form of written reports, videos and so on. The resulting bank of cases, regularly updated, would be accessible to all interested parties, e.g., government authorities, NGOs, social scientists, businesses and the general public.
The Université Internationale de la Mer is prepared to initiate such a project on a pilot basis, jointly with a select group of willing academic and scientific institutions. This project would require minimum funding from foundations, international bodies or other organisations. If you are interested in talking about possibly working together on something like this, please come to see me at my poster.
How to cite: Aubert, J.-E.: How ocean communities adapt to the impacts of climate change: Proposal for a bank of cases, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-20323, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-20323, 2025.
Posters virtual: Wed, 30 Apr, 14:00–15:45 | vPoster spot 1
EGU25-9411 | Posters virtual | VPS1
Geoethical principles applied to the reconstruction planning of natural disasters: the Etna 2018 earthquake case studyWed, 30 Apr, 14:00–15:45 (CEST) | vP1.8
Etna's eastern flank is crossed by numerous seismogenic faults, which cause surface faulting, resulting in the destruction of buildings and exposing the local population to risk. Rebuilding damaged buildings in earthquake-prone areas raises ethical and economic concerns. A seismic event measuring Mw4.9 occurred on 26 December 2018, causing significant damage to over 3,000 buildings within an area of 205 km² populated by approximately 140,000 individuals residing on the Etna's eastern flank. The earthquake resulted in a ground rupture exceeding ten kilometres, encompassing several urban areas. Consequently, it was imperative to conduct a preliminary geostructural study to ascertain the most vulnerable tectonic zones and upgrade targeted buildings. The study identified the homogeneous microzones in seismic prospection, namely the Zones of Attention (ZAACF), Susceptibility (ZSACF) and Respect (ZRACF) of the faults activated during the 2018 earthquake. Buildings in the ZRACF were not permitted to be repaired because they were at serious risk of future damage, and owners were offered financial compensation to rebuild in seismically safer areas. Initially, some people demonstrated reluctance to accept the proposed relocation. Empathy and clear explanations regarding the rationale for the relocation were provided, and the provision of comprehensive support to people facing significant psychological challenges was identified as being necessary. This approach is currently being implemented in the reconstruction of other seismic areas in Italy, and it has the potential to become a common and sustainable model for the reconstruction of areas affected by natural disasters.
How to cite: Neri, M., Neri, E., and Leonardi, A.: Geoethical principles applied to the reconstruction planning of natural disasters: the Etna 2018 earthquake case study, EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-9411, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-9411, 2025.
