Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article argues that the persistent insufficiency of environmental policy reflects not merely weak political will or regulatory ambition, but a structural mismatch between planetary risks and modern decision architectures. It synthesises evidence from three methodologically independent fields: Earth System Science, cognitive and decision psychology, and environmental history. Each points to the same problem: planetary risks unfold across long time-scales, cross borders, involve thresholds and irreversibility, and exceed the motivational range of ordinary political attention. The article's central claim is that biospheric integrity is not an external policy sector, but a material precondition of legal, political, and economic order. It does not propose a full constitutional design. It identifies functions any adequate institutional response must secure: temporal durability, cross-border binding force, threshold-based precaution, and protection from ordinary political reversal. It concludes that stronger environmental policy remains necessary, but insufficient without constitutional protection of biospheric integrity. Preprint, not peer-reviewed. Manuscript completed in April 2026. Its argument was subsequently developed into the Declaration for an Earth Constitution, version 1.6.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Donald Jacob (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: