Civilizational Continuity & Resilience Architecture
Civilizational Continuity & Resilience Architecture
- Time-horizon declaration: 10, 50, 100, 500-year frames—explicitly separated.
- Unit-of-analysis clarity: Humanity, civilization(s), institutions, ecological systems, techno-systems.
- Threat model completeness: Catalog of existential and civilizational degradation pathways (ruin, collapse, lock-in).
- Mechanism articulation: How the proposed causal pathways operate (not metaphors).
- Irreversibility & lock-in identification: One-way doors, path dependence, value-lock, infrastructure lock-in.
- Tail/ruin gating: Handling fat tails, unknown unknowns, and discontinuities.
- Uncertainty taxonomy: Risk vs deep uncertainty vs ignorance—handled differently.
- Scenario discipline: Scenarios as bounded explorations, not predictions.
- Evidence posture: What is historical inference, what is model-derived, what is speculative.
- Moral premises disclosure: Intergenerational ethics, value assumptions, discounting stance.
- Governance feasibility: Institutions capable of sustaining long-horizon commitments (without authoritarian drift).
- Incentive realism: Why current actors would invest in long-horizon goods; how free-riding is handled.
- Robustness over optimality: Strategies that survive model error and surprise.
- Monitoring & early warning: Sentinel signals for slow-burn degradation and fast shocks.
- Failure and misuse risk: Doomism, techno-utopianism, coercive policies justified by “the future.”
- Decision/action translation: Clear levers, constraints, and staged interventions; not just worldview.