The fires in Los Angeles represent a catastrophic failure to anticipate and respond to environmental threats. In the aftermath of such devastation, an obvious question looms: How did we miss the warning signs?

The answer is clear. Unlike other feedback systems designed to drive immediate response — think of the life-saving equipment in intensive care units, or even a car’s fuel gauge — the tools we use to monitor climate resilience and risk are dangerously, and indefensibly, outdated. 

Take the Planetary Boundaries framework, one of the most recognized global indicators of humanity’s transgression of critical ecological thresholds, such as climate stability and biodiversity. Despite its importance in signaling the health of Earth’s living systems, the Boundaries graphic is a 2D, static radial chart that’s updated once a year and buried deep on the Internet. 

This is mid-20th century data visualization technology.

Unlike even the most basic consumer stock market apps, which digitally connect people to the signals that matter most to them, the Boundaries remain static and untethered, offering no built-in response mechanism for the billions of people whose actions could materially affect the status of its critical signals.

This is not just a technological failure; it’s a failure of vision. Evolutionary systems — whether biological or technological — thrive by minimizing the lag between signal and response. 

Markets, in particular, are mercenary about reducing this lag. Traders famously spent hundreds of millions of dollars to lay 827 miles of fiber-optic cable from Chicago to New Jersey to reduce data transmission time from 17 milliseconds to 13. Why? Because the smallest delay in responding to a signal can mean the difference between profit and loss. Markets function as they do because the feedback loop is instantaneous, enabling small actions to amplify through networks. This principle of live signaling is foundational to any system that aims to adapt and survive.

Hedge funds aren’t executing trades based on annual reports, so why are climate leaders reliant on such outdated tools?

In Los Angeles, indicators of the co-factors fuelling the flames in any live signal system would have all been flashing red: prolonged drought exacerbated by the climate crisis; growing urban encroachment into the wild; depleted water reserves; invasive species that created highly flammable conditions; aging infrastructure; poorly maintained evacuation routes; unprepared communities; underfunded fire departments, and of course the approaching Santa Ana winds. But these risks were fragmented, invisible, and unaggregated into a single, actionable live signal. There was no easy way for residents, governments, or organizations to see the cumulative danger or to proactively mitigate it.

The Case for Live Signals

What we need is a live data signaling system — akin to a stock ticker for the planet — that aggregates diverse climate and ecological data points into a unified, real-time visualization. 

Such a system could be applied at different scales to allow people to see, at any given moment, the current resilience or vulnerability of their city, ecosystem, or even the entire world. For Los Angeles, this could mean a dashboard that integrates dozens of fire-relevant co-factors, visualized dynamically, to provide a clear, actionable picture of how close the city is to a disaster. 

Crucially, a live signal does more than inform. It engages. When people have access to a dynamic digital signal — one they can see and understand — they feel a sense of agency. Just as a car’s fuel gauge prompts a driver to refuel, or a stock ticker prompts a trader to buy or sell, a live environmental signal would enable individuals and organizations to take specific, measurable actions to boost their community’s resilience and see their efforts register immediately in the signal.

If Los Angeles residents had access to a live signal showing their city’s contextual vulnerabilities, they could have acted in ways that materially affected the outcome: reducing water consumption; removing flammable brush; or advocating for increased fire department funding. They most certainly would have done whatever they could to ensure the Palisades fire hydrants — which ran dry due to the overwhelming demand on the water system and the unavailability of key water resources — were better maintained.

These kinds of live signals don’t just engage individuals; they unlock what are known as scalar dynamics — interconnected mechanisms within complex systems that amplify small actions into large-scale outcomes. This principle is what allowed the GameStop short squeeze of 2021 to ripple through global markets, driven by real-time signals and networked decision-making. Imagine applying that principle to improve climate resilience.

This isn’t theoretical. Signaling systems powered by live data already exist in other domains — such as healthcare (tracking patient vitals in real-time to prevent crises), logistics (optimizing supply chains to adapt to disruptions), and finance (enabling instant trading decisions through live market data).

Pushing the Boundaries

One year ago, the Planetary Boundaries group published a paper calling for a new form of global commons governance, recognizing the urgent need to integrate resilience and unlock scalar action at a biospheric level. 

Yet in the year since, no meaningful progress has been made. Instead, the group released a simplistic, and yes non-dynamic, thermometer graphic. They went from a sleepy circle to a dead rectangle — a perfect signal of the flatline of creativity in climate leadership.

This failure of imagination underscores a broader problem. Climate scientists have not yet embraced the tools and systems necessary to engage the public and catalyze action. Instead of static, disengaging visuals, we need dynamic, interactive systems that empower individuals to act and see the impact of their actions in real time.

The Los Angeles fires are a stark reminder that we can no longer afford to rely on outdated tools. Resilience cannot be built on annual reports or static graphs; it requires live, actionable signals that connect people to, and mirror the living complexity of, the systems they inhabit. By creating these signals, we can transform how cities, governments, and individuals respond to threats, making resilience a shared responsibility and a tangible, collective achievement.

Imagine a world where environmental dangers are monitored and communicated with the same immediacy and precision as financial markets. A global live signaling system would aggregate real-time data on critical ecological factors — such as deforestation rates, greenhouse gas emissions, and biodiversity loss — into a dynamic, interactive platform accessible to all. This system would be managed by an international consortium of governments, research institutions, and technology companies, ensuring transparency and broad participation. Funding could be secured through a combination of public investment and private partnerships, recognizing that safeguarding our planet is a shared responsibility with mutual benefits.

The impact of such a system would be revolutionary. Policymakers could enact data-driven environmental regulations, businesses could adjust practices to align with sustainability goals, and individuals could make informed choices to reduce their ecological footprints. This collective awareness and action would harness scalar dynamics, where small, individual efforts coalesce into significant, systemic change. Climate and environmental scientists are increasingly recognising the need to think in such scalar terms, as demonstrated by Professor Karen O’Brien’s recent work on fractal agency and quantum social change.

A Call to Action

Historically, the establishment of global weather monitoring systems offers a compelling precedent. In the 1960s, the World Meteorological Organization initiated the Global Observing System (GOS), creating a network of land-based, maritime, and atmospheric weather stations equipped with automatic recording instruments. This collaborative effort allowed meteorologists to monitor weather conditions in real-time, even in the most remote corners of the world.

Similarly, the advent of the electric telegraph in the 19th century enabled simultaneous weather observations across vast regions, leading to the creation of synoptic weather charts. Vice-Admiral Robert FitzRoy leveraged this technology to set up 24 weather stations across Britain and Europe, allowing for the prediction of storms and laying the foundation for modern weather forecasting.

Dramatically expanding this legacy by implementing a live, dynamic global environmental signaling system would not only provide real-time data but also serve as an objective foundation for policy discussions and negotiations. By offering transparent, up-to-date information, such a system enables stakeholders — including policymakers, industry leaders, and the public — to engage in informed debates grounded in shared data. This transparency is crucial for building trust among parties with divergent interests, such as climate advocates and industries reliant on fossil fuels.

Moreover, a live signaling system can facilitate scenario modeling and simulations, allowing stakeholders to visualize the potential impacts of various policy decisions. For instance, tools like MIT’s En-ROADS platform have been used to test how different actions affect global temperatures, providing a common ground for discussions. By integrating such capabilities, the system can help bridge gaps between opposing viewpoints, fostering collaborative efforts toward sustainable solutions.

In essence, establishing a live environmental signal would not only enhance our ability to monitor and respond to ecological threats, but also transform the landscape of climate governance. It would create a shared, objective basis for negotiation, enabling diverse stakeholders to align on strategies that balance economic and environmental priorities. This approach is vital for developing policies that are both effective and equitable, ensuring a resilient future for all.

The tools exist, the data exists, and the infrastructure exists. What we lack is the courage to move beyond static charts and outdated paradigms into a world where resilience is alive, dynamic, and actionable. 

The time for live signals is now.

Stephen Marshall is group leader and system architect at ora.systems.