 So the world is facing major issues to ensure future human well-being and ecosystem integrity. And the Sustainable Development Goals are one attempt to address the most pressing ones. However, past experience has shown that proposed solutions often don't deliver, while solving one issue, they make another one worse. So why do economic or technological solutions often fail? For many years I've worked at or studied what some call the world's largest environmental catastrophe, the desiccation of the air or sea, and the economic, ecological, and health consequences of decades of water overuse for cotton production. I was puzzled by the persistence of unsustainable practices, despite massive international assistance. So the region still has enough water, so why is there no solution? So I once said we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. Historically development is based on a thinking and on a quest to analyze, understand, and predict nature. It was believed that we could predict nature and control and manipulate it like a machine, thus reducing uncertainty. The human environmental systems we live in are not simple machines. They're systems of humans embedded in ecosystems that are characterized by high levels of interconnectedness, uncertainty, and abrupt change. We saw fisheries collapse or the resistance of management, like in the air or sea basin. So solutions that don't address those interconnectedness lead to unexpected outcomes. In my project, Muses, we developed computational models that actually capture human nature interdependencies to serve as a laboratory for virtual experiments and to identify key mechanisms that actually might underlie and propose leverage points for solutions. So one of those mechanisms is reinforcing feedbacks, as we've seen in backgrounds, for example, where the expectations of bank failure leads to the withdrawal of money that leads to collapse. Balancing feedbacks, on the other hand, stabilize systems like the fox and the hare. One example of the importance of feedbacks or actually the lack of feedbacks is the collapse of the cod fishery in the Baltic. A fate that actually happened to many cod fisheries around the world. So there was a boom of cod in the early 1980s and it suddenly disappeared and basically not recovered until today. So what were the ecological and social processes that led to that collapse? So in an ideal world, like with the fox and the hare, a reduction in fish would actually lead to a reduction in fishing. However, in reality, those feedbacks are often delayed or even absent because of market dynamics, because of incorrect beliefs of fishermen. So we use the model to kind of understand how the lack of adaptation of fishermen interacted with ecological dynamics to actually produce that collapse. Feedbacks often underlie also persistent poverty, so-called poverty traps. Here it is reinforcing feedbacks of low levels of production leading to low savings, which even decrease production even more, leading to kind of a downward spiral into poverty. So solutions to move out of poverty or to prevent collapses need to take these feedbacks and tipping points into account. That could mean managing feedbacks by turning them around, turning a downward spiral into an upward one, or introducing, creating feedbacks where they're missing, like information about the cod stock. So smoking, for example, is an example where feedbacks helped change a very persistent norm of smoking indoors. So while most people were smoking indoors, non-smokers didn't disapprove much of smoke exposure. However, once a law made more people smoke outside, disapproval of smoke exposure by non-smoker actually increased and reinforced that new behavior. Lacking feedbacks and that downward spiral of poverty is also what underlies many interventions to alleviate poverty. For example, through providing asset inputs such as fertilizers. However, with our models we could show if these interventions neglect feedbacks with the environment, like the effect on soil quality, they can make poverty even worse. So in summary, environmental problems are created by complex interactions between humans and the environment, and we need to take these complexities into account. However, we don't need to be overwhelmed by them. Identifying key interactions can really help us to find leverage points to move towards more sustainable management. So the new thinking or new mindset that might help us address global problems need to acknowledge that people are a part of ecosystems and that there's limit to prediction and control. Tackling those issues really needs collective action by everybody involved. So from the fisher, the trader, to the consumer and the government, because management becomes a process of identifying and manipulating or changing those interdependencies to watch more sustainable pathways. So I've tried to briefly explain how feedbacks can actually prevent change or they can accelerate change and help us to move forward. Another way might be to think about the social norms underlying our eating habits. How could we change those to move towards more vegetarian diets and address climate change?