International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental
87
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijmef
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue 05 2025
PAGE NO.
87-92
10.37547/ijmef/Volume05Issue05-18
Ways to Shape Systems in Response to Global
Environmental Change
Mamataliev Dilshodbek Khamidovich
Andijan State Technical Institute, Department of Accounting and Management, Senior Lecturer, Uzbekistan
Received:
31 March 2025;
Accepted:
29 April 2025;
Published:
31 May 2025
Abstract:
Global environmental change has a direct impact on human life. Climate change, ecological degradation,
and the depletion of natural resources are major contributing factors. This article explores the development of
information systems based on ICT to monitor, analyze, and forecast global environmental issues. The structure of
ecological information systems and technologies for data collection, processing, and visualization are examined.
Furthermore, the integration of artificial intelligence, big data, and geographic information systems (GIS) in
identifying and mitigating environmental threats is discussed. The article also addresses the challenges and
solutions in implementing such systems in developing countries. The findings highlight the role of digital
technologies in ensuring environmental sustainability.
Keywords:
Information systems, environmental monitoring, global warming, artificial intelligence, big data, GIS,
sustainable development.
Introduction:
In the 21st century, environmental
problems on a global scale have become one of the
most important and urgent issues of human progress.
Factors such as climate change, global warming,
melting glaciers, biodiversity loss, emissions of harmful
gases into the atmosphere, and water and air pollution
pose a direct threat to human life. In particular, the
rapid development of these processes requires the
introduction of new approaches and technologies in
the field of environmental sustainability. Modern
information
and
communication
technologies,
especially information systems, play an important role
in this.
Information systems can be used to collect, analyze,
visualize and forecast environmental data in a
comprehensive and accurate way. Also, through such
systems, states, international organizations and the
public will be able to identify environmental risks and
take prompt action. In particular, the integration of
artificial intelligence, big data (big data) and geographic
information systems (GIS) will increase the
effectiveness of environmental monitoring.
Relevancy of the article
. The formation of information
systems in the fight against global environmental
change is important not only scientifically, but also
practically. Today, every state is striving to introduce
digital technologies to ensure environmental security.
This is especially important for the regions most
affected by climate change. Also, these systems serve
as an important tool in environmental policy-making,
decision-making, and environmental awareness of the
population.
The purpose of the article
. The main goal of this study
is to identify ways to form information systems that
allow monitoring, analysis and forecasting of changes
in the global environment and to develop proposals to
improve their effectiveness.
The functions of the article
. analysis of the main
direct
ions of global environmental change; • Studying
the structure of environmental information systems;
assessment of the capabilities of artificial intelligence
and GIS technologies; Identification of problems
encountered in the formation of information systems;
To offer a customized model for developing countries.
METHODOLOGY
In the study, systematic analysis, comparison, model
creation, statistical data analysis, visualization and
forecasting based on GIS technologies were used. It is
also carried out comparative analysis based on
advanced foreign experience and practical projects.
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental
88
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijmef
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental (ISSN: 2771-2257)
Scientific novelty
. As a result of the study, an
integrated information system model was proposed
that serves to identify and forecast global
environmental problems. This model serves to increase
the effectiveness of environmental monitoring by
combining artificial intelligence, big data and GIS
technologies. Moreover, practical proposals have been
developed for the implementation of such systems in
the context of developing countries.
The broad goal of sustainable development is to meet
the needs of current and future generations.
Supporting this goal requires knowledge generation
and close attention to the nature of the processes
involved in the creation and validation of knowledge
claims. There is a strong consensus that scientific
knowledge has played an important role in shaping
global sustainability problems and that it plays an
important role in informing society's responses to
these problems, attracting significant research
investment and scientific efforts around the world. Yet,
to a large extent, older knowledge systems are still
applicable to these emerging social and environmental
problems. This means that urgent knowledge needs are
not well met, resources are at risk of being depleted,
and vital skills and capacities are not developed or
adequately supported. Here, we identify how
structures and processes at interfaces between issues
identification, production, and knowledge use can be
modified to encourage a more active and reflexive role
of science in a "knowledge democracy" more focused
on sustainability in the context of accelerating global
socio-environmental change. This paper builds on work
done at the European Science Foundation/COST
Frontiers of Science Forward Look at "Responses to
Environmental and Social Challenges for a Sustainable
Earth" [RESCUE;www.esf.org/rescue, 2009
–
2011]. It
builds on discussions by an international working group
engaged in reviewing the current state of interactions
and looking at improved approaches at the interface
between science and politics, communication and
advocacy.
[Meadows et al. 1982] observed: 'It is better to express
your own biases than to think you don't have one'. We
can't easily list them all, but we can say that we had a
wide variety of biases in this working group, and we had
to confront our own profound differences in worldview
throughout our discussions. In this article we will try to
reveal the main areas of discussion. In terms of our
early scientific formation, our group had an equal
number of social scientists and natural scientists, but
we all now work across disciplinary divisions and work
at the interface between science, politics, and society
at large. We work with the general assumption that
research can and should be expected to have a positive
social impact.
Before proceeding, some initial explanations are
needed. First, we use the wordCatechism In a sense, it
involves both the div of knowledge about the world
we live in and the systematic and accumulated research
processes to achieve that knowledge. This meaning
encompasses all scientific disciplines of the natural,
physical, and social sciences. The defining feature of
this knowledge (and the practices that underpin it) is
that it is "belonged" to universities and other
specialized
knowledge
institutions
that
have
traditionally been "owned". It is in these areas that
procedures are designed to select, produce, document,
discuss, and ultimately accept or reject what is
understood as true knowledge. In this traditional
system, interfaces with other actors in society are
geared towards the post-hoc dissemination of this
knowledge. There is growing top-down pressure from
funders and research policymakers who want to have
more impact on social and economic research for
change in this regard [Einon, 2012But this has not yet
led to widespread changes in practice. Therefore, one
of our main areas of focus in this article is the
institutional aspect of research.
Creating Knowledge Fields for Sustainability
. Open
knowledge systems capable of addressing the complex
socio-environmental challenges of global change and
addressing sustainability require broad social
participation, ideally through all existing avenues of
participation, rather than changes in practices and
assumptions in the scientific community. The
institutional structures of science within the current
disciplines and boundaries affect the relationship
between science, politics, and society, and many of the
shortcomings are now well known. Before addressing
the barriers to these changes, our priorities for
modified participation processes are outlined below.
Ensuring accountabilityIt is important among actors
involved in knowledge fields because it lies at the heart
of building the trust and legitimacy necessary for
effective negotiation and inclusive processes in
environmental decision-making [Munton, 2003 yil]. We
need to recognize the deep-seated norms and power
relations of scientific institutions within knowledge
systems, while also paying more attention to the
individual responsibilities of scientists in these systems.
Facilitating participation and communication includes
using spaces and forms that are familiar and open to
participants from different communities, and taking
time to learn and reflect. Knowledge fields can take
many forms, depending on the actors involved and the
issues and interests at stake. They should be focused on
achieving credibility, legitimacy and fairness for the
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental
89
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijmef
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental (ISSN: 2771-2257)
most participants.
Innovation for communication and communication
involves experimenting with new social media and
technologies such as visualization and miniaturized
sensing technologies. These offer many new ways to
engage people in knowledge spaces in ways that
emphasize collaboration and co-design solutions and
reduce barriers to participation and learning.
Strengthening the competencies of 'knowledge
integrators'
includes
the
recognition
and
institutionalization of more resilient mechanisms in
education and research to support the understanding,
assessment, and management of complex socio-
ecological systems.
Barriers affecting science in general
. Much of the
current scientific practice is organized in what we
describe as a closed knowledge system: self-governing;
organized by subjects; independently set the research
agenda; and significantly disconnected from society,
politics, and the media. In this mode, science has
specific, limited ways of dealing with societal demands
on knowledge and social discourse, but usually on its
own terms and through intermediaries, including
through
the
media
and
think
tanks.
Transdiscrimination, a vital condition for participation
in the fields of knowledge, is still poorly
institutionalized compared to traditional discipline
[Scholz et al., 2006], and is indeed seen as contrary to
the basic principles of the closed model.Figure 3It
shows an "institutional roadmap" to help remedy the
situation.
1.
Download: Download a full-size image
Figure 1. An institutional roadmap for unlocking knowledge systems for sustainability.
Many of the structures and beliefs inherent in the
"closed" model of science seem to be open to stability,
diverse, but at odds with the development of
integrated science. Practical, policy-oriented, and user-
engaged research is often seen as a low-value activity
than basic science, which is why academics nowadays
put relatively little effort into advocacy and
engagement.
Addressing
procedural,
political,
institutional, and cultural barriers requires a change in
the mandate of science. We need to see science as
more than just a set of rules and practices set up to
understand the world, but rather as part of a chain of
thinking, interaction, and action within knowledge
systems. To address sustainability challenges, the
purpose of these systems is to create robust and valid
representations of the many constraints that affect
socio-ecological systems and to negotiate informed
pathways through them.
Evaluating
research
that
crosses
disciplinary
boundaries is problematic when existing scientific
cultures agree on established criteria for quality. There
is a general tendency toward using fixed quantitative
indicators to assess the quality of a research, and the
"impact agenda" for publicly funded research is now a
growing trend (e.g.,Filipp, 2010 yil,Einon, 2012), but the
current assessment indicators do not correspond to the
open knowledge system. They are controversial even
for the existing system (e.g.Kapeller, 2010 yil-
Bibliometrics, for example, shows a weak correlation
between publication results and research budget - and
the expansion of impact factors already threatens
sustainability research (e.g.,Monasterskiy, 2005
yil,Holden et al., 2006). The focus on impact brings new
challenges and new opportunities for sustainability
science. Assessing the "research impact" in economic
terms is difficult for individual projects; A strong focus
on short-term technological or economic advances
favors certain types of technologically oriented
research, as well as prioritizing private incomes over
public benefits that provide sustainability. In many
cases, sustainability research relies on the resources of
various public and private organizations, resulting in
the decentralization of research funding. This is not an
undesirable situation (synergies are possible, and the
commitment of multiple actors fits well with our
conceptualization of knowledge areas), but it does
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental
90
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijmef
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental (ISSN: 2771-2257)
introduce new challenges for assessing cost-
effectiveness and requires a different set of skills when
accessing resources from such different funding
streams. If "political influence" is sought, then the
research-driven links are to some extent weak and
difficult to observe. For example, a study in the United
Kingdom (Eftec, 2006 yil), in terms of ecosystem
services, which are the "poster child" for evidence-
based policy, policymakers address information gaps
through "informed assumptions" and conversations
with peers, rather than reviewing existing research.
We believe that the evaluation of research and
scientific institutions should include useful measures of
public participation outcomes. In particular, they must
recognize that changes in attitudes, behaviors, and
policies may not be obvious in the short term.
Incentives should reward academic faculty and
corporate researchers for their significant and good
engagement with the public and policymakers. In short,
an open knowledge system requires:
−
to consider processes that go beyond and
expand beyond traditional disciplinary introductions;
−
broader
and
more
sophisticated
but
transparent indicators for assessment over time that
better reflect social learning and change processes;
Barriers affecting scientists
. The skills of many
academic scientists are unsuitable to contribute to
sustainability [Corcoran va Uols, 2004]. We need
researchers and practitioners who are skilled in dealing
with the diversity and complexity associated with fields
of knowledge as we have described, but for decades
university education in most countries has been a
funnel towards specialization. Academic scholars are
rewarded for being narrow and specialized, and are
often ill-equipped to go beyond the boundaries of their
specialties. In addition, many scientists often have a
superficial understanding of politics, business, and the
ways in which society and science can impact society.
In this regard, scientific education usually instills
professional scientists in the field of their activities,
values, and ethics (Stauffacher et al., 2006). The
scientists' work concludes with the publication of their
findings and does not address the potential
implications of applying their research to socio-
ecological systems. We argue that the scientific
community needs to recognize and accept their social
responsibility (indeed, society is already calling for it,
and it can go even further in imposing these
responsibilities). It involves acknowledging the political
nature of knowledge systems that deal with global
change.
In terms of the competencies required, scientific and
methodological excellence remains important for
researchers, but additional skills are needed (Figure 4).
Based on our experience, we determine:
−
the humility to recognize the limitations of
one's own knowledge and perspective in dealing with
complex issues;
−
active research and openness to other thought
systems, disciplines and worldviews, and other sources
of knowledge and learning;
−
Ability to listen to others, communicate in
genuine, multifaceted dialogues;
−
A willingness to recognize that the researcher's
partial knowledge that leads to the dialogue table
changes in the process and gives latitude to the other
participants;
−
procedural, facilitation, and management
skills;
−
The ability to share and learn from knowledge
rather than the application of knowledge.
1.
Download: Download a full size image
Figure 2. A roadmap for scientists working in the field of sustainability knowledge.
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental
91
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijmef
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental (ISSN: 2771-2257)
In general, everyone's educational experience, from
childhood to university level and beyond, should
develop the skills, inclinations and capacities to deal
with complex and socially important issues; With
training that includes not only academic theory,
methodology, and techniques, but also skills such as
negotiation, communication, and integrative research
methods and practices. There is a need for training that
covers the key problem areas seen as part of
implementation-oriented
sustainability
research
projects. Important areas include:
−
the powers to see and anticipate the future;
−
to manage projects or programs efficiently and
effectively;
−
specific work on the integration and synthesis
of knowledge;
−
improve scientific communication;
−
long-term continuity of research outcomes and
relationships in implementation-oriented work.
CONCLUSIONS
Operating at the interface between science, policy, and
society at large, and the incentive for academic
participation with sustainability-oriented science is
weak and generally temporary
—
a function of the
demand-based nature of transdisciplinary work. The
benefits for this kind of work are usually strong and
deeply ingrained in an academic culture. There are
clear needs for a new phase of "democratizing science,"
but there is also opposition in the research community.
Barriers that arise at the individual level include
language
and
terminology, methodology
and
techniques, norms and expectations for research
development and dissemination, and criteria for
reputation and self-expression. Individual scholars
working outside the boundaries of discipline must rely
on some important features of an academic culture
that is still established to secure their reputation and
position. It is intellectually and practically difficult to go
beyond one's own scientific field. Finally, there are still
very few career opportunities for individuals who
choose to engage and participate in the risky venture
of participatory, integrated, user-engaged research.
Academic institutions and science funders have been
slow to provide job security to ensure that the skills
needed for this job develop throughout their careers.
As part of research funding, support is needed to
develop strong interpersonal relationships in more
open fields of knowledge that involve scientists and
researchers from all disciplines that address
sustainability issues. Without these connections,
sustainability research efforts run the risk of becoming
fragmented and impede the effective dissemination of
best practices through the research community. For
the necessary interpersonal connections to flourish in
these new open spaces, it is critical that improved
measures of the quality of meaningful collaboration
across science-society interfaces be agreed upon and
established to enhance the mobilization of science
knowledge into action. Without such measures, there
is no cover for academic or agency or corporate
managers involved in sustainability processes to justify
supporting public engagement and engagement. The
formulation of these new assessment criteria is itself a
major challenge, as locally tailored solutions are more
likely to be optimal for semi-automated quantitative
measures of impact than the current trend.
Sustainability science benefits from a shift away from
focusing on the support of "more knowledge"
(information
technology
can
now
deliver
instantaneously around the world), which includes the
targeted participation of the research community in
social information spaces organized around social
issues.
Comprehensive and transformative institutional
change is needed to ensure effective interaction
activities to translate knowledge into action. That is
why we call for well-designed, properly resourced
international
education
programs.
Established
structures, institutions, funding channels, and career
strategies are at odds with the goals of an active,
responsive knowledge system for the sustainability
sciences. Today's partial approach should take a step
towards broad cross-sectoral collaboration between
government, business, industry, civil society, and
environmental
organizations
to
support
the
implementation-oriented nature of the new knowledge
system (1). Sustainability has a long-term perspective
(decimal and longer), which is at odds with the pace of
research strategies and policy cycles. Striking a balance
between basic research and science that clearly
addresses social needs requires procedures to involve
a wide range of social actors in the process of
prioritizing research. An effective and fair evaluation
system is needed for integrative research on social
topics. Engaging in knowledge generation, learning,
and evaluation will require a variety of mechanisms to
link them to place-based needs and global
sustainability challenges. Science still needs to consider
the challenges posed by the growth of new information
systems and technologies as a means of access to
knowledge, a repository of knowledge, a research tool,
and an agora, all of which are of profound importance
for the production, dissemination, and use of
knowledge in responding to social problems.
Profound changes in the ability to study sustainability
begin "at home" with the commitment of individual
scientists (Figure 2). For sustainability, more integrative
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental
92
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijmef
International Journal of Management and Economics Fundamental (ISSN: 2771-2257)
and negotiation approaches are needed to address the
uncertainty and multiplicity of perspectives in all
engagements. It involves the constructive sharing of
experience and expertise. Support for the development
of scientific literacy and critical assessment of science
should be strengthened and expanded to include a
more
comprehensive
and
interdisciplinary
understanding of global change issues.
Suggestions
1.
Creation of integrated ecological information
systems. It is desirable to develop and adapt to the
conditions of each region the integrated ecological
information systems combining artificial intelligence,
big data (big data) and GIS technologies.
2.
Implementation of national platforms on
environmental monitoring. Each country should have
its own environmental monitoring platform through
which a system of collecting, analyzing and making
available to the public information in real time should
be established.
3.
Strengthening public-private partnerships. In
the
development
and
implementation
of
environmental information systems, it is necessary to
create effective mechanisms for cooperation between
government agencies, research centers and IT
companies.
4.
To ensure the transparency of environmental
information. Creation of public access environmental
information portals should provide transparent and
accessible sources of information for citizens,
businesses and researchers.
Global environmental change is one of the major
challenges facing sustainable development today. The
use of modern information systems to effectively
manage these processes and ensure environmental
safety becomes relevant. During the study, it was
revealed that with the help of integrated
environmental systems based on information and
communication technologies, it is possible to monitor,
predict in advance and identify problems in an early
manner. It's also in developing countries that
convenient and economical technological solutions for
their implementation of such systems. The results of
this scientific work prove the importance of digital
approaches to ensuring environmental sustainability
and also contribute practical recommendations to real
socio-technological processes.
REFERENCES
Hasanov, B. (2021). The role of information systems
and technologies in environmental monitoring.
Tashkent: Economics and Innovation Publishing House.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
(2023). Climate Change 2023: The Physical Science
Basis. Cambridge University Press.
Usubaliev, D. & Tursunova, M. (2020). Ecological
information systems and their integration with GIS
technologies. Journal of the Academy of Sciences of
Uzbekistan.2, 45
–
52.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
(2022).
Harnessing
Big
Data
for
the
Environment.https://www.unep.org
Karimov, A., & Salimova, D. (2022). Models for
Environmental Risk Forecasting Based on Artificial
Intelligence. Journal of Innovative Development, no4,
32
–
39.
