Our Planet, Our Future: An Urgent Call for Action by Nobel Laureates and Other Experts


National Academies of Science, Engineering, Medicine - TRANSCEND Media Service


29 Apr 2021 – This statement was inspired by the discussions at the 2021 Nobel Prize Summit and issued by the Steering Committee.



The Nobel Prizes were created to honor advances of “the greatest benefit to humankind.” They celebrate successes that have helped build a safe, prosperous, and peaceful world, the foundation of which is scientific reason.

“Science is at the base of all the progress that lightens the burden of life and lessens its suffering.” Marie Curie (Nobel Laureate 1903 and 1911)

Science is a global common good on a quest for truth, knowledge, and innovation toward a better life. Now, humankind faces new challenges at unprecedented scale. The first Nobel Prize Summit comes amid a global pandemic, amid a crisis of inequality, amid an ecological crisis, amid a climate crisis, and amid an information crisis. These supranational crises are interlinked and threaten the enormous gains we have made in human progress. It is particularly concerning that the parts of the world projected to experience many of the compounding negative effects from global changes are also home to many of the world’s poorest communities, and to indigenous peoples. The summit also comes amid unprecedented urbanization rates and on the cusp of technological disruption from digitalization, artificial intelligence, ubiquitous sensing and biotechnology and nanotechnology that may transform all aspects of our lives in coming decades.

“We have never had to deal with problems of the scale facing today’s globally interconnected society. No one knows for sure what will work, so it is important to build a system that can evolve and adapt rapidly.” Elinor Ostrom (Nobel Laureate 2009)

The summit has been convened to promote a transformation to global sustainability for human prosperity and equity. Time is the natural resource in shortest supply. The next decade is crucial: Global greenhouse gas emissions need to be cut by half and destruction of nature halted and reversed. An essential foundation for this transformation is to address destabilizing inequalities in the world. Without transformational action this decade, humanity is taking colossal risks with our common future. Societies risk large-scale, irreversible changes to Earth’s biosphere and our lives as part of it.

“A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels.” Albert Einstein (Nobel Laureate 1921)

We need to reinvent our relationship with planet Earth. The future of all life on this planet, humans and our societies included, requires us to become effective stewards of the global commons — the climate, ice, land, ocean, freshwater, forests, soils, and rich diversity of life that regulate the state of the planet, and combine to create a unique and harmonious life-support system. There is now an existential need to build economies and societies that support Earth system harmony rather than disrupt it.

Our Planet

“It seems appropriate to assign the term ‘Anthropocene’ to the present.” Paul Crutzen (Nobel Laureate 1995)

Geologists call the last 12,000 years the Holocene epoch. A remarkable feature of this period has been relative Earth-system stability. But the stability of the Holocene is behind us now. Human societies are now the prime driver of change in Earth’s living sphere — the biosphere. The fate of the biosphere and human societies embedded within it is now deeply intertwined and evolving together. Earth has entered a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. Evidence points to the 1950s as the onset of the Anthropocene — a single human lifetime ago. The Anthropocene epoch is more likely to be characterized by speed, scale, and shock at global levels.

Planetary health

The health of nature, our planet, and people is tightly connected. Pandemic risk is one of many global health risks in the Anthropocene. The risks of pandemics are now greater due to destruction of natural habitats, highly networked societies, and misinformation.

The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest global shock since the Second World War. It has caused immense suffering and hardship. The scientific response in the face of catastrophe, from detection to vaccine development, has been robust and effective. There is much to applaud. However, there have been clear failings. The poorest and most marginalized in societies remain the most vulnerable. The scale of this catastrophe could have been greatly reduced through preventive measures, greater openness, early detection systems, and faster emergency responses.

Reducing risk of zoonotic disease like COVID-19 requires a multi-pronged approach recognizing “one health” — the intimate connections between human health and the health of other animals and the environment. Rapid urbanization, agricultural intensification, overexploitation, and habitat loss of large wildlife all promote the abundance of small mammals, such as rodents. Additionally, these land-use changes lead animals to shift their activities from natural ecosystems to farmlands, urban parks, and other human-dominated areas, greatly increasing contact with people and the risk of disease transmission.

The global commons

Global heating and habitat loss amount to nothing less than a vast and uncontrolled experiment on Earth’s life-support system. Multiple lines of evidence now show that, for the first time in our existence, our actions are destabilizing critical parts of the Earth system that determine the state of the planet.

For 3 million years, global mean temperature increases have not exceeded 2°C of global warming, yet that is what is in prospect within this century. We are on a path that has taken us to 1.2°C warming so far — the warmest temperature on Earth since we left the last ice age some 20,000 years ago, and which will take us to >3°C warming in 80 years.

At the same time, we are losing Earth resilience, having transformed half of Earth’s land outside of the ice sheets, largely through farming expansion. Of an estimated 8 million species on Earth, about 1 million are under threat. Since the 1970s, there has been an estimated 68% decline in the populations of vertebrate species.


“The only sustainable prosperity is shared prosperity.” Joseph Stiglitz (Nobel Laureate 2001)

While all in societies contribute to economic growth, the wealthy in most societies disproportionately take the largest share of this growing wealth. This trend has become more pronounced in recent decades. In highly unequal societies, with wide disparities in areas such as health care and education, the poorest are more likely to remain trapped in poverty across several generations.

More equal societies tend to score highly on metrics of well-being and happiness. Reducing inequality raises social capital. There is a greater sense of community and more trust in government. These factors make it easier to make collective, long-term decisions. Humanity’s future depends on the ability to make long-term, collective decisions to navigate the Anthropocene.

The COVID-19 pandemic, the largest economic calamity since the Great Depression, is expected to worsen inequality at a moment when inequality is having a clear destabilizing political impact in many countries. Climate change is expected to further exacerbate inequality. Already, the poorest, often living in vulnerable communities, are hit hardest by the impacts of climate, and live with the damaging health impacts of energy systems, for example air pollution. Furthermore, although urbanization has brought many societal benefits, it is also exacerbating existing, and creating new, inequities.

It is an inescapable conclusion that inequality and global sustainability challenges are deeply linked. Reducing inequality will positively impact collective decision-making.


The accelerating technological revolution — including information technology, artificial intelligence, and synthetic biology — will impact inequality, jobs, and entire economies, with disruptive consequences. On aggregate, technological advancements so far have accelerated us down the path toward destabilizing the planet. Without guidance, technological evolution is unlikely to lead to transformations toward sustainability. It will be critical to guide the technological revolution deliberately and strategically in the coming decades to support societal goals.

Acknowledging urgency and embracing complexity

The future habitability of Earth for human societies depends on the collective actions humanity takes now. There is rising evidence that this is a decisive decade (2020-2030). Loss of nature must be stopped and deep inequality counteracted. Global emissions of greenhouse gases need to be cut by half in the decade of 2021-2030. This alone requires collective governance of the global commons — all the living and non-living systems on Earth that societies use but that also regulate the state of the planet — for the sake of all people in the future.

On top of the urgency, we must embrace complexity. Humanity faces rising network risks and cascading risks as human and technological networks grow. The 2020/2021 pandemic was a health shock that quickly cascaded into economic shocks. We must recognize that surprise is the new normal and manage for complexity and emergent behavior.

Our Future

A decade of action

Time is running out to prevent irreversible changes. Ice sheets are approaching tipping points — parts of the Antarctic ice sheet may have already crossed irreversible tipping points. The circulation of heat in the North Atlantic is unequivocally slowing down due to accelerated ice melt. This may further affect monsoons and the stability of major parts of Antarctica. Rainforests, permafrost, and coral reefs are also approaching tipping points. The remaining carbon budget for a 67% probability of not exceeding 1.5°C global warming will be exhausted before 2030. At the same time, every week until 2050, the urban population will increase by about 1.3 million, requiring new buildings and roads, water and sanitation facilities, and energy and transport systems. The construction and operation of these infrastructure projects will be energy and emissions intensive unless major changes are made in how they are designed and implemented.

In 2021, major summits will generate political and societal momentum for action on climate, biodiversity, food systems, desertification, and the ocean. In 2022, the Stockholm+50 event marks the 50th anniversary of the first Earth Summit. This is an important opportunity to reflect on progress to meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), due to be completed by 2030. Yet a disconnect exists between the urgency indicated by the empirical evidence and the response from electoral politics: The world is turning too slowly.

Planetary stewardship

“We must break down the walls that have previously kept science and the public apart and that have encouraged distrust and ignorance to spread unchecked. If anything prevents human beings from rising to the current challenge, it will be these barriers.” Jennifer Doudna (Nobel Laureate 2020)

Effective planetary stewardship requires updating our Holocene mindset. We must act on the urgency, the scale, and the interconnectivity between us and our home, planet Earth. More than anything, planetary stewardship will be facilitated by enhancing social capital — building trust within societies and between societies.

Is a new worldview possible? 193 nations have adopted the SDGs. The global pandemic has contributed to a broader recognition of global interconnectivity, fragility, and risk. Where they possess the economic power to do so, more people are increasingly making more sustainable choices regarding transportation, consumption, and energy. They are often ahead of their governments. And increasingly, the sustainable options, for example solar and wind power, are similar in price to fossil fuel alternatives or cheaper — and getting cheaper.

The question at a global systems level today is not whether humanity will transition away from fossil fuels. The question is: Will we do it fast enough? Solutions, from electric mobility to zero-carbon energy carriers and sustainable food systems, are today often following exponential curves of advancement and adoption. How do we lock this in? The following seven proposals provide a foundation for effective planetary stewardship.

  • POLICY: Complement GDP as a metric of economic success with measures of true well-being of people and nature. Recognize that increasing disparities between rich and poor feed resentment and distrust, undermining the social contract necessary for difficult, long-term collective decision-making. Recognize that the deteriorating resilience of ecosystems undermines the future of humanity on Earth.
  • MISSION-DRIVEN INNOVATION: Economic dynamism is needed for rapid transformation. Governments have been at the forefront of funding transformational innovation in the last 100 years. The scale of today’s challenges will require large-scale collaboration between researchers, government, and business — with a focus on global sustainability.
  • EDUCATION: Education at all ages should include a strong emphasis on the nature of evidence, the scientific method, and scientific consensus to ensure future populations have the grounding necessary to drive political and economic change. Universities should embed concepts of planetary stewardship in all curricula as a matter of urgency. In a transformative, turbulent century, we should invest in life-long learning, and fact-based worldviews.
  • INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: Special interest groups and highly partisan media can amplify misinformation and accelerate its spread through social media and other digital means of communication. In this way, these technologies can be deployed to frustrate a common purpose and erode public trust. Societies must urgently act to counter the industrialization of misinformation and find ways to enhance global communication systems in the service of sustainable futures.
  • FINANCE AND BUSINESS: Investors and companies must adopt principles of recirculation and regeneration of materials and apply science-based targets for all global commons and essential ecosystem services. Economic, environmental, and social externalities should be fairly priced.
  • SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION: Greater investment is needed in international networks of scientific institutions to allow sustained collaboration on interdisciplinary science for global sustainability as well as transdisciplinary science that integrates diverse knowledge systems, including local, indigenous, and traditional knowledge.
  • KNOWLEDGE: The pandemic has demonstrated the value of basic research to policymakers and the public. Commitment to sustained investment in basic research is essential. In addition, we must develop new business models for the free sharing of all scientific knowledge.


Global sustainability offers the only viable path to human safety, equity, health, and progress. Humanity is waking up late to the challenges and opportunities of active planetary stewardship. But we are waking up. Long-term, scientifically based decision-making is always at a disadvantage in the contest with the needs of the present. Politicians and scientists must work together to bridge the divide between expert evidence, short-term politics, and the survival of all life on this planet in the Anthropocene epoch. The long-term potential of humanity depends upon our ability today to value our common future. Ultimately, this means valuing the resilience of societies and the resilience of Earth’s biosphere.


Brian Schmidt,* Australian National University
William E. Moerner,* Stanford University
Linda Buck,* Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Diana Liverman, University of Arizona
Elizabeth H. Blackburn,* University of California, San Francisco
Thomas Lovejoy, United Nations Foundation
Deliang Chen, Gothenburg University
Peter Agre,* John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Klaus von Klitzing,* Max Planck Institute
Göran Hansson, KVA (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences)
Stephen Carpenter, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Frances Arnold,* Caltech
Charles Rice,* The Rockefeller University
Simon Levin, Princeton University
Oliver Hart,* Harvard University
Lisen Schultz, Stockholm Resilience Centre
Magdalena Skipper, Nature
Eric Lambin, Stanford University
Joern Fischer, Leuphana University
Frank Geels, Manchester University
Henrik Österblom, Stockholm Resilience Centre
Jacques Dubochet,* Lausanne University
Gary Hoover, Tulane University
Karen Seto, Yale University
Rainer Weiss,* MIT
Johan Rockström, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Holger Hoff, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Carl Folke, Stockholm Resilience Centre and Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics
Owen Gaffney, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Stockholm Resilience Centre
Joseph Stiglitz,* Columbia University
Sir Richard Roberts,* New England Biolabs

*Nobel Laureates

Go to Original – nationalacademies.org



Share this article:

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

One Response to “Our Planet, Our Future: An Urgent Call for Action by Nobel Laureates and Other Experts”

  1. My attention has gone towards the writings of Our Planet, Our Future: An Urgent Call for Action by Nobel Laureates and Other Experts, and I was compelled by myself to share my views with them on the issues they raised and solutions made for the benefit of all mankind.

    I would like to start my reactions with my submission on the theme: Education for Survival to the Third World Congress of the International Association of Educators for World Peace held from November 23-27, 1982 at Georgetown University, Washington D.C., USA, which was published also in two issues of University News – A Fortnightly Chronicle of Higher Education (Currently A Weekly Journal of Higher Education), Vol. XXI, No. 10, May 15, 1983, and Vol. XXI, No. 11, June 1, 1983.

    Survival is the basic innate desire of all species. But question arises which way survival is needed or desirable: Survival through struggle or survival through mutual sharing, cooperation and altruism? In animal world, only fittest can survive; but in human world, weak also survive due to the human nature of mutual sharing, love and altruism. If man is only animal, he might also choose struggle for his existence. Hermann Hesse also says, “In so far as man is animal, he lives by struggle, he lives at the expense of others, whom he fears and hates. Life is then war.” Man is not animal. Hence human survival is desirable or needed through mutual sharing, cooperation and altruism. Charles Darwin himself stressed this law of cooperation and mutual aid, side by side with that of the struggle for existence, although for some time this aspect of his theory was neglected by Darwinians. In 1880, the Russian Zoologist Kessler made it clear that the law of mutual aid and cooperation is as fundamental as that of the struggle for existence. Later on Peter Kropotkin, in his ‘Mutual Aid’ then in his ‘Ethics’, demonstrated this principle convincingly. Since that time an enormous body of evidence has been produced showing that the principle of cooperation has possibly been even more important in the evolutionary process than that of egoistic struggle for existence. Richard Leakey and Roger Lewin in their book ‘Origins’ have set out to show, “…that humans could not have evolved in the remarkable way in which we undoubtedly have unless our ancestors were strongly cooperative creatures. The key to the transformation of a social ape-like creature into a cultural animal living in a highly structured and organized society is sharing: the sharing of jobs and sharing of foods.”

    There is no doubt that “The Nobel Prizes were created to honor advances of ‘the greatest benefit to humankind, and they celebrate successes that have helped build a safe, prosperous, and peaceful world.” But the benefits of advances do not reach to all mankind. Hence the wealthy live with every comfort and convenience while in many parts of the world people live and die in the streets without even the basic of food and shelter, unwanted, uncared for and without home.

    Though human beings evolved from primitive virus to modern Homo sapiens and highly developed scientifically and technologically but still at the primitive stage and barbarous in the sense of behavior and dealing with each other because vested interests in every civilization, misused the fruits of science and technology and used them for their own gains. Thus development band progress do not do not denote civilization if their gains do not reach to all in each civilization. In every civilization, a minority of uncivilized persons exploits and oppresses a majority of people of their own civilization, and tortures, murders and kills creators of their civilization. For more details, one may refer to my Wrap-up Speech, the reference cited below:

    A Wrap-up Speech
    At the International Academic Peace Conference on 28 September 2001 in Commemoration of the 20th UN International Day of Peace, Kyung Hee University, Republic of Korea
    Dialogue among Civilizations for Peace
    By Surya Nath Prasad, Ph.D. – TRANSCEND Media Service

    Truly Nobel Laureates, scientists, creative persons in different disciplines, innovators, and distinguished professors are living civilizations, therefore they deserve national and global praise and honor. In the last World War, a University Professor of Great Britain, when asked what he was doing when the fight for civilization was on, replied, “I am the civilization you are fighting for.” And we can see the true spirit of a university in Rector John Huss, who was one of the early rectors of Prague University. In him, there was the true symbol of the university spirit. Faggots were piled up to his neck and the magistrate was there saying, “If you withdraw your statements, you’ll be let off, otherwise I’ll light the fires.” His answer was, “Light the faggots.” And the last word which he uttered was one which crosses frontiers of race and nation. He stood for universal humanity which he said, “I prefer a good German to a bad Czech.” I salute the Nobel laureates.

    There is no doubt that “The Nobel Prizes were created to honor advances of ‘the greatest benefit to humankind, and they celebrate successes that have helped build a safe, prosperous, and peaceful world.” But the benefits of advances do not reach to all mankind. Hence the wealthy live with every comfort and convenience while in many parts of the world people live and die in the streets without even the basic of food and shelter, unwanted, uncared for and without home.

    No doubt, science has facilitated many things for human prosperity but it has also helped to lose humanity’s peace of mind. Science alone cannot bring peace within the individual and in the world as a whole. No doubt, science enables man to be free from the tyranny of the environment but it fails to free him from the tyranny of his own nature.

    Religion searches beyond science and wants to probe in to the ultimate origin of the universe and the man. Therefore science and religion both are essential for the full development of man. Human well-being and all human progress”, said Millikan, a Nobel Prize winner in Physics, “rest at bottom upon two pillars: (1) the spirit of religion and (2) the spirit of science or (Knowledge)”. Alexis Carrel Nobel Laureate in Medicine expresses similar views, “None of the acquisitions made by humanity must be set aside. By utilizing at the same time intellect and faith, science and religion, mathematics and love, we shall be able to do what science and religion acting separately, has been incapable of doing.”

    Albert Einstein rightly observed, “Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.” Here we may explain this by narrating a story. There was a big fire in a village. All able persons saved their lives by leaving the village for the safe places except two disabled lame and blind. However, lame and blind also succeeded to save their lives by taking the help of each other as the lame sitting on the shoulders of blind. Hence science and religion both are essential for peace. Bhagawad Gita rightly proclaims, “There is peace and prosperity on the earth for those who will learn and follow the laws of inner and outer life.” For more details, one may refer to:

    Integrated Science and Religion for Peace
    By Surya Nath Prasad, Ph. D. – TRANSCEND Media Service https://www.transcend.org/tms/2016/08/integrated-science-and-reli

    And also:
    Science, Religion and Peace – A Series in Peace Education
    Surya Nath Prasad & Suman Shukla (Eds.)
    Nagpur: IAEWP, 2002
    Foreword for this book was written by Prof. Johan Galtung, Pioneer of Peace Studies and Founder Rector of Transcend University.

    Comments on “Our Planet – Planetary Health and The Global Commons”

    On the observations of the Nobel Laureates on “Our Planet – Planetary health and The global commons”, I would like to comment that all types of economics, politics, sociology, culture, laws and even religions (sects) must be based on ecology because every man and woman everywhere without any discrimination are in ecological form or they themselves are ecology. Ecology consists of five elements, viz. earth, air, water, fire and space. These elements are in scattered form in the universe, but they are in consolidated form in every man and woman. This is why every man or woman is a miniature universe. Ecological ignorance about the humanity and the universe is the main reason of exploitative economics, politics, sociology, culture, laws and religions (sects), which leads to destruction of ecology and humanity. Therefore ecological elements in every man and woman need outside ecological elements as food to grow integrally and harmoniously. And perpetual knowledge and practice of ecological elements inside the human beings and outside in the universe is a must for all types of people everywhere for their healthy lives. Professor of Environmental Studies at Oberlin College Orr says, “What is missing in the liberal arts curriculum is not computers, but food; not science, but water; it is not economics, but wildlife.”

    For more detail, one may refer to my writings on the theme: Education for Environment and Peace delivered as Presidential Address at the Euro-Asian Congress, Giresun, Turkey on 2 August 1997, which was published by School of Education, Lund University, Malmo, Sweden under its scheme of Peace Education Miniprints, No. 92, April 1998, distributed by U. S. Department of Education (ERIC), and Available in National Library of Australia to borrow, the whole writings were discussed and explained under different 7 captions and concluded under the caption: “Ecological Literacy for All for Peace”, and brief of this writing was published in Transcend Media Service on 30 November 2015.

    Presidential Address
    Education for Environment and Peace
    By Surya Nath Prasad, Ph. D. – TRANSCEND Media Service

    Comments on Inequality

    On their findings and submission on inequality, I would like to advise to refer my Presidential Address on the theme: Education for Eradication of Poverty for Peace at the Eighth Indian National Convention of IAEWP at the Government College of Education, Ujjain, M. P., India on 22 June, 1996, and the Address was published in International Educator, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1996.
    The Speech was delivered under the main four captions, viz. Poverty and Prosperity for a Few lead to Violence, Prosperity for All: A Road to Peace, Present Education: Helping the Rich only, and Education: A Way to Eradicate Poverty for Peace
    And my speech on the theme: “Food for Peace through Education” may also be referred to be enlightened more in this regard of inequality:

    Presidential Address
    Food for Peace through Education
    By Surya Nath Prasad, Ph.D.
    At the IAEWP Second World Congress on 29 December 1978
    (Duration of the Congress: 29 December 1978 – 2 January 1979)
    Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India
    The Secret of health is to be fit physically, vitally, mentally, intellectually and spiritually to survive

    On Global Health: Safe for All

    The Secret of health is to be fit physically, vitally, mentally, intellectually and spiritually to survive.
    Health for a few or even for many is a danger for them also unless all would not be able to attain health. Like illness, health is also infectious in good sense. Hence there is a wish and prayer for health, happiness and peace not for a few or many but for all cited in ancient Indian holy book: Brihadaaranyaka Upanishad as:
    “May all be happy,
    May all be free from diseases.
    May all attain welfare,
    May none be in grief.
    Om peace, peace, peace”
    Coronavirus Pandemic Disease: The Role of Universal Peace Education in Its Remedy
    HEALTH, 29 Jun 2020
    Surya Nath Prasad, Ph.D. – TRANSCEND Media Service

    On Global Sustainability

    In my view, only global man (human) can help in building a global common society for peace among all humankind. This does not mean that global man (human) will have to go to all of the different parts of the world to make a global community feasible, but rather it is a matter of thinking and understanding that we are the world, and this will mold our behavior for the benefit of all humanity.

    According to Chhandogya Upanishad, a great ancient intellectual book, man (human) is able to declare, “I, indeed, am this whole world”. And Socrates of ancient Athens declared, “I am not a citizen of Athens, or Greece, but a citizen of the world”. For more details, one may refer to my Special Speech delivered in 1998:

    Special Speech:
    Global Man as the Vision for the Third Millennium
    By Surya Nath Prasad, Ph. D.
    Delivered on 24 September 1998 on the occasion of 17th Anniversary of the un International Day of Peace at Seoul, Republic of Korea organized by Kyung Hee University
    Published in Peace and Conflict Monitor – a Journal of UN Mandated University for Peace

    To Set Right the Man for to Set Right the World

    It is foolish to talk world unity without attaining world peace, and it will be more foolish to talk world peace without attaining peace at the individual level. And there is possibility if man is set right, the world would automatically be set right. For more details, one may refer to:
    Peace and Nonviolence
    Focus Article
    By Surya Nath Prasad, Ph.D.
    Sang Saeng, A UNESCO-APCEIU Magazine,
    27 Spring, 2010, pages 8-11 http://www.unescoapceiu.org/board/bbs/board.php?bo_table=m411&wr_id=57
    About Education

    Education as a discipline is cosmopolitan because there is no Chinese mathematics, Russian physics, American chemistry, and Indian biology; and also education as perpetual integral manifestation of universally inherent five elements, viz. physical, vital, mental, intellectual and spiritual in every man and woman everywhere without any discrimination. And both the educations are must for all leaving none to be just and peaceful, and also for remedy of all sickness and preservation of health in global society. For more details, one may refer to:

    The Chapter on “Universal Peace Education: Concept, Meaning and Practice” By Surya Nath Prasad, Ph.D. included in the book: Pour une éducation à la paix dans un monde violent (For Peace Education in a Violent World) Edited by Obrillant Damus, Christoph Wulf, Joseph P. Saint-Fleur, Denis Jeffrey Published by L’Harmattan, 2017: Paris, France
    Financing Higher Education to Build Non-exploitative Society for Peace
    By Surya Nath Prasad
    University News – A Weekly Journal of Higher Education
    Vol.32, No. 52, December 27, 2004 – January 02, 2005

    By Prof. Surya Nath Prasad

    Enough Resources Available to Meet the Demands of People for Sustainable Healthy and Peaceful Society

    It is learnt that the world has the enough resources to meet the demands of more than today’s 7.9 billion people.