Argument for Convergence: Sustainability Diaspora to Corrective Transdiscipline

Future energy scenarios usually show pathways to green energy futures are possible. However, since the 2015 Paris Agreement, scientific scenarios show human activity is accelerating toward catastrophic failures and loss. A group of transdisciplinary thinkers discussed the history of sustainability and contemplated how a disruptive shift could occur in time for energy decarbonisation and climate stabilisation. How have transitions occurred in the past, particularly those that involved corrective transdisciplines like fire safety, emergency management, food safety, or waste management? After man-made disasters, engineering and operations fundamentally change through duty of care. Corrective shifts in economic, policy and cultural paradigms seem to follow the evolution of engineering practice. Over time, the prevention of harm and loss is manifested in technological enterprise, infrastructures, energies, and behaviour. The only way the whole-system transition changes the trajectory from danger of catastrophic failure to survivable and thrive-able future is that a corrective transdiscipline evolves now. We followed a logic process, framing an argument, developing a supporting theory, and brainstorming the methods involved. The argument is that since 1970 millions of people have gained awareness of future risks, and a sufficient number have focused their working careers on sustainability. The sustainability-active people are not having sufficient impact to cause a corrective transition, because they have become a diaspora. Our reasoning follows that just transition will eventuate when the diaspora converges to a corrective transdiscipline and create training and research programmes which are valued by industry and policy.