For this learning log I focused on twoarticles: (1) Coevolutionary ecological economics by Giorgos Kallis andRichard B. Norgaard, and (2) Innovation Versus Environmental Protection Presumptionsby David L. Hawk.In the previous learning log we were talkingabout resilience, about how a system continues existing after a disturbance, byadapting and overcoming difficulties without losing its function. This learninglog is, for me, an addition to the previous one. In the first article, theauthors present issues on how different systems evolve together; therefore, itis a broader view on what the previous learning log was focusing on (theevolution of one system). Here the authors present the feedback concept.They say that systems coevolve according to the feedbacks that they receivefrom other systems. In this case, in order to keep coevolution, they argue thatdiversity is a key issue. Allowing diversity includes having respect fordifferences, which needs the non-selfish behavior that is also shown in thefirst article.This took me to a reflection about our societytoday, where differences are not well accepted. I mean real differences. Onemay say that we have cultural differences, and so on, however, we all live inthe same market centered model, pursuing the similar goals, with the samevalues. Therefore it is just a slight variance, not a diversity of models andvalues. If therewas a respect for different values, different views on development, there wouldnot be such a thing as Globalization. And now we see that our economic model isstarting to fail in the entire world, as it is the same model all around theglobe, we are all fighting for the same set of resources to reach the samegoal, and as it is cited in the second article: (...) with a resource availableto all, the greediest herdsmen would gainfor a while. But mutual ruin was justaround the corner. ( op cit Hardin op cit Lloyd)So, could we state that the unsustainability ofsociety (in cultural, economic and ecological levels) is due to lack of respectand selfish behavior, which, as a result does not allow the existence or realdiversity and therefore, coevolution and resilience of the systems? IBMs Smart Planet project is astep forward in a backward moving model; it is a step sideward. First of all, the goal of theproject, as shown in their website, is to increase the Planets efficiency by increasing value, reducing costs andreduce waste of products and services. This efficiency is achieved by a systemicapproach; by identifying and organizing the connections between differentsectors (transportation, health care, commerce, business and products &services). In this approach they pretend to predict consumer behavior in theabove mentioned sectors in order to map the modus operandi of a society. Oncethey have mapped it, they can articulate an improvement on the model, whichwill be coordinated by a centralized power (such as the city hall). A say that it is a step forwardin a backward moving model because at the same time that they are realizingthe systemic way that our society work; they are not changing our failing societalmodels. What I mean is that, to achieve a balanced society as they want throughtheir project, the improvement should be applied to every city so