The 33rd International Geological Congress was held in Oslo, Norway in August 2008. As part of the congress program, a panel debate was held on the topic “Geosciences – Providing Resources and Protecting the Environment”.
The panel featured five experts across various geoscience fields:
- Professor Eystein Jansen, a geologist from the University of Bergen, Norway, whose research focuses on mineral exploration and resource estimation
- Henrik Svensmark, Head of Sun-Climate Research Centre, at Danish National Space Center (DNSC), Copenhagen, Denmark
- Dr. Anne Jones, a geophysicist from the University of Oslo who models seismic activity and studies natural hazard risks
- Jørn Harald Hurum, Associate professor in Paleontology at the University of Oslo
- Ms. Fatima Hassan, an environmental scientist and policy advisor to the United Nations Environment Program
The 90-minute debate was moderated by Dr. David Richards, the outgoing president of the International Union of Geological Sciences. Each panelist was first given 10 minutes to present their perspective on the importance, challenges and conflicts inherent in managing Earth’s resources in a sustainable manner. This was followed by questions submitted from the audience, interjections and lively discussions between the panelists.
Key discussion points included responsible mining practices, groundwater protection, understanding earthquake and volcanic risks, the costs and tradeoffs of resource development, and policy approaches to balance economic progress and environmental stewardship. The experts brought a range of viewpoints from industry, government, NGOs and academia. While consensus was not reached across all issues, the respectful exchange of ideas, expertise and perspectives made for an engaging and thought-provoking debate.
The session highlighted that providing resources for human progress while protecting the environment requires input from geoscientists across many disciplines as well as collaboration with policymakers, the private sector and local communities. Overall, the debate served as a microcosm of the critical conversations that need to continue globally on sustainable development.