Bring digital twins back to Earth

Andrea Saltelli, Gerd Gigerenzer, Mike Hulme, Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos, Lieke A. Melsen, Glen P. Peters, Roger Pielke, Simon Robertson, Andy Stirling, Massimo Tavoni, Arnald Puy
{"title":"Bring digital twins back to Earth","authors":"Andrea Saltelli, Gerd Gigerenzer, Mike Hulme, Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos, Lieke A. Melsen, Glen P. Peters, Roger Pielke, Simon Robertson, Andy Stirling, Massimo Tavoni, Arnald Puy","doi":"10.1002/wcc.915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We reflect on the development of digital twins of the Earth, which we associate with a reductionist view of nature as a machine. The projects of digital twins deviate from contemporary scientific paradigms in the treatment of complexity and uncertainty, and does not engage with critical and interpretative social sciences. We contest the utility of digital twins for addressing climate change issues and discuss societal risks associated with the concept, including the twins' potential to reinforce economicism and governance by numbers, emphasizing concerns about democratic accountability. We propose a more balanced alternative, advocating for independent institutions to develop diverse models, prioritize communication with simple heuristic‐based models, collect comprehensive data from various sources, including traditional knowledge, and shift focus away from physics‐centered variables to inform climate action. We argue that the advancement of digital twins should hinge on stringent controls, favoring a nuanced, interdisciplinary, and democratic approach that prioritizes societal well‐being over blind pursuit of computational sophistication.This article is categorized under:<jats:list list-type=\"simple\"> <jats:list-item>Climate Models and Modeling &gt; Earth System Models</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Climate Models and Modeling &gt; Knowledge Generation with Models</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Climate, History, Society, Culture &gt; Disciplinary Perspectives</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":501019,"journal":{"name":"WIREs Climate Change","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WIREs Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.915","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We reflect on the development of digital twins of the Earth, which we associate with a reductionist view of nature as a machine. The projects of digital twins deviate from contemporary scientific paradigms in the treatment of complexity and uncertainty, and does not engage with critical and interpretative social sciences. We contest the utility of digital twins for addressing climate change issues and discuss societal risks associated with the concept, including the twins' potential to reinforce economicism and governance by numbers, emphasizing concerns about democratic accountability. We propose a more balanced alternative, advocating for independent institutions to develop diverse models, prioritize communication with simple heuristic‐based models, collect comprehensive data from various sources, including traditional knowledge, and shift focus away from physics‐centered variables to inform climate action. We argue that the advancement of digital twins should hinge on stringent controls, favoring a nuanced, interdisciplinary, and democratic approach that prioritizes societal well‐being over blind pursuit of computational sophistication.This article is categorized under: Climate Models and Modeling > Earth System Models Climate Models and Modeling > Knowledge Generation with Models Climate, History, Society, Culture > Disciplinary Perspectives
让数字双胞胎回到地球
我们对地球数字双胞胎的发展进行了反思,并将其与将自然视为机器的还原论观点联系起来。数字孪生项目在处理复杂性和不确定性方面偏离了当代科学范式,也没有参与批判性和解释性社会科学。我们质疑数字孪生在解决气候变化问题上的实用性,并讨论了与这一概念相关的社会风险,包括数字孪生可能强化经济主义和数字治理,强调了对民主问责制的担忧。我们提出了一个更加平衡的替代方案,主张由独立机构开发多样化的模型,优先使用基于启发式的简单模型进行交流,从各种来源(包括传统知识)收集全面的数据,并将重点从以物理学为中心的变量转移到为气候行动提供信息。我们认为,数字孪生的发展应取决于严格的控制,倾向于采用细致入微、跨学科和民主的方法,优先考虑社会福祉,而不是盲目追求计算的复杂性:气候模型与建模 > 地球系统模型 气候模型与建模 > 利用模型生成知识 气候、历史、社会、文化 > 学科视角
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信