write about Earth Systems Engineering and Management and compare to guest speaker power point

Write about Earth Systems Engineering and Management and compare to guest speaker PowerPoint

A single sentence or two summarizing the student’s understanding of the speaker’s talk
Talk assessment
• What was the engineering or technological system that the speaker discussed?
• What were the main technological/non-technological challenges and considerations that were
presented in the talk?
Lessons learned
• lessons learned by the student from the guest lecture (not just the lessons learned as presented
by the speaker)
• Identify 2 to 3 ESEM principles that are potentially present.
• How can these ESEM principles be applied to potentially improve the technological/engineering
system being discussed in the talk?

Earth Systems Engineering and Management (ESEM) principles are: Theoretical Principles (TP), Governance Principles (GP), Design and Management Principles (DMP) The principles are listed below in bold

Governing principle (GP)1: Transparent Governance: ESEM initiatives by definition raise important scientific, technical, economic, political, ethical, theological, and cultural issues in the context of an increasingly complex global polity. Given the need for consensus and long-term commitment, the only workable governance model is one which is democratic, transparent, and accountable.

DMP1: Establish metrics that determine whether the system is indeed moving along an appropriate path to achieve the
desired outcomes.

GP2: Multicultural Dialogue: If any ESEM project is to achieve public acceptance and social legitimacy, it must at all
stages be characterized by an inclusive dialog among all stakeholders.

GP3: Embrace uncertainty and unpredictability: ESEM governance models, which deal with complex, unpredictable systems, must accept high levels of unpredictability and uncertainty. Thus, ESEM policy development and implementation is a dialog with the relevant systems, rather than finding a “solution” to a “problem”.

GP1: Transparent Governance: ESEM initiatives by definition raise important scientific, technical, economic, political, ethical,
theological, and cultural issues in the context of an increasingly complex global polity. Given the need for consensus and long-term commitment, the only workable governance model is one which is democratic, transparent, and accountable (The
governance of the Aral sea in the USSR lacked transparency)

GP4: Continuous learning: The ESEM environment and the complexity of the systems at issue require explicit mechanisms for assuring continual learning, including ways in which assimilation of the learning by stakeholders can be facilitated. (There was no feedback or learning from the stakeholders)

GP5: Long-term Investment: There must be adequate resources available to support both the immediate ESEM project and the science and technology research and development necessary to ensure that the responses of the relevant systems are
understood. (There was a lack of sufficient investment in preventing damage to the Aral sea ecology in the past and currently)

DMP2: Part of the system: Rather than attempting to completely define or dominate a system, the ESEM professional will have to see themselves as an integral component of the system, coupled with its evolution and subject to many of its dynamics. This will require a completely different psychology of engineering. (policy that led to the drying up of the Aral sea was effectively top- down with no stakeholder feedback and a lack of accounting of the negative ecological impact)

DMP 3: Incremental and reversible: ESEM projects should be incremental and reversible to the extent possible. Avoid premature lock-in. (efforts to revive the South Aral sea in Uzbekistan not very effective due to dependence on cotton/agriculture for the economy).