Saloff-Coste's international NGO, "Design Me a Planet," creates global scenarios and develops a systematic process for implementation beginning at the regional level and sustained through global level information sharing. In this talk, Saloff-Coste compels the audience to "generate intelligent change together." Saloff-Coste is an artist, global futurist, business adviser, and entrepreneur. He seeks to discover the technological, economic, social, and ecological processes related to the passage of the "Industrial Society" to the "Information Society." 

Related Event: Passport for the Future: 
Why We Need to Re-Design the Planet 

Transcript of the video

Lauren Kuby:

To introduce our speaker today, Michel Saloff-Coste. He's president of Design Me a Planet, planets—not Planets R Us, it's Design Me a Planet. He's worked as a consultant in communication strategy and management for many years. From 1985 to '87, he directed a permanent, multi-disciplinary workshop on societal change at France's Ministry of Research. In 1991, he joined Bossard Consultants, a leading European consulting firm, as head of R&D.
In 1993, he created his own research and consultancy firm specialized in global governance, information society, and sustainable development. He's co-founded a New Cap Invest; it's a venture capital company that's dedicated to promoting highly innovative companies. Saloff-Coste is recognized in Europe, America, and Asia as a vanguard artist, global futurist, business advisor, and entrepreneur as he seeks to discover the technological, economic, social, and ecological processes related to the passage of the industrial society to the information society. With that, we present Michel Saloff-Coste. [Applause]

Michel Saloff-Coste:  

Thank you. I am very happy to be with you. It is my first talk in America, not ever, but on this subject. It is a kind of historical presentation. I am very happy you called me in the State University of Arizona, because I'm really convinced that the future of mankind depends on our ability to apply systemic approach. I work a lot about those issues. I was really amazed by the fact that a university want to be systemic, not only your department, but really all the university. That seems to me a very important state to our next civilization.

Thank you to the president, Dr. Michael Crow, to invite me to do this presentation. Also, Dr. Sander van der Leeuw, who is the dean of this department. Lauren Kuby, Teresa Ootzen and Marisa Preacher, Marisa introduced me to the president, Michael Crow, and we have a very nice dinner in Paris, and it is because of Marisa I am here. Perhaps you don't Marisa, but she is a very well-known writer in USA. In France, she's considered to be one of the—probably the most important living writer in USA. Perhaps Marisa, you can get her, because these people know you, and she's in your university. [Applause]
Thank you. I am just want ask you a question to begin. You can just talk one minute with the next person near you, one minute, about this question. It is why we need to redesign the planet? From your point of view, why we need to redesign the planet, so just talk a few minutes with the next person about this question. [Background talking] Then we will go around asking. [Background talking]
Perhaps you want come with me, yeah? [Background talking] So everybody is speaking very [laughter], so I don't know, you can use a bowl Sherry. Cannot stop.
Lauren Kuby: Attention, we're ready to go. [Laughter] That's how you do it.
Michel Saloff-Coste: Yeah, yes. Okay. There are a lot of reasons. Why do we need to redesign the planet all for you? What did you discuss with your—
Audience Member 1: Well I think resources, pollution, economics. I think we have to take population, all of those things, growing food, etc. I think those are some of things we discussed.
Michel Saloff-Coste: Yeah, so we had a lot of reason on why this field, why food? You say food, but why food? Do you need—do we need food?
Audience Member 1: Of course. [Laughter]
Michel Saloff-Coste: Yeah.
Audience Member 1: That's very important, at least a couple times a day. [Laughter]
Michel Saloff-Coste: Perhaps we will not have food in the future; it is what you mean in a way?
Audience Member 1: Well, yes, yes. If we don't pay attention to what's happening, climate, things like that, we won't have food. Some areas already don't have food.
Michel Saloff-Coste: Okay. Thank you very much. There are already a lot of plan who show that we need to think about the future on redesign because we may—don't have enough food, for example. There are some other reason, if somebody have some other reason to redesign the planet, could you speak? Yes?
Audience Member 2: The planet's fine, I think we need to redesign humanity. [Laughter]
Audience Member 1: Right. Human systems and human relationships.
Michel Saloff-Coste: Yeah, we were speaking about this. That is a very important point. It is not the planet we are endangers, but it is mankind. Actually, we all live already the desperation of the complexity of the living sphere, the biosphere. Already six time, 90 percent of the biodiversities up here, but because the microbe are so resistant, then after some millions of years, life flourish again. It takes time. The planet is not endangered, we say—sometimes say it's the planet, but it is not the planet, it is mankind as a species. So those are reasons?
Audience Member 3: You look at the planet from the photographs out in space and this little blue ball [cross talk 00:10:56].
Michel Saloff-Coste: Yeah.
Audience Member 3: This is—I think we've come to think so frequently terms of systems. Right? Systems, defining systems, really the human impact on the system. You look at it from outer space, and it is a single system, where it is a system of the world. Whether or not the planet itself is in good shape and is one with humanity, though it is under threat, is sort of the question of do you look at the—sort of the—accelerate the self-accelerating nature of that method which further accelerates it? If we—if the new balance of the—this view of the systems off kilter, then it's not just humanity that is under threat. I think if we understand, if we can mobilize on the—on what we know now and continue to learn about this [cross talk] of world that we can build.
Michel Saloff-Coste: Yeah. The fact also to see to the planet as a system is a very new thing. We need to redesign the planet because we are confronted to very new situation, whichever man have confronted. You have said already, you see there our general source. Everybody now care for the planet, or for mankind future. For example, who in the room want make a better world? Who in the room, yeah I wanna make a better world? Everybody then. Who in the room consider that the side will be in a better world? The side, the future side. Who consider—so there are these situations of very special work, even within this room want make a better world, but very few consider we would have a better situation in 50 years.
That is quite new, because when I was young, it was exactly the contrary. If I would have say make these test, perhaps we would have less people wanting make a better world. Perhaps, I don't know. Everybody will agree that they will leave it in a better world. That is—it is really the good reason why we launch this project. Even you have some scientists who say—me, I'm always working future students for 30 years, so there are a lot of scientists who just consider that the dangers was very far. One of that century, we were speaking 30 years ago that perhaps we will have a problem next century. It was very far.
Then we began to see the danger come to us more and more quickly. Now we know more or less, that we have only 10 years to really make a big turn. It is a very short time. A lot of people have spoke about the fact that perhaps the check are not absolutely true, that there are no really—the planet is not getting more hot and everything. Who knows how old this question about is it true or not?
Even in America now, the post-centurial people who see that they're already a problem is shrinking. In fact, when you look at the data, it is even worse than what this group of 2,000 scientists have said, and nobody says this. Actually, if you go in the data, in the last data, you discover that it is worse. You arrive to these convictions that either you accept to die, except you have to do something. I am very concerned by the fact that all of over the planet, a lot of people, thousand of people, million of people are being—investing time, money in sustainable development. The company of interest, each of us, we began to try to save the water, everything. There a lot of people, but when you see—when you look at the data, we are just business as usual.
At the end of the day, all the reform we have made are none, in fact. Now all we have, only 10 days, 10 days, which means our—it is 10 days, 10 years is really 10 days in this few to make the big turn. It is why we decide, and of course we are also some people say, "Okay, all over the time, change arise. Mankind go choose a difficulty. You have the black beast." Sincerely, when you look at the population curve, you see that we are really in a very special time.
Now a good image of this, which is even the kind of Bible he mentioned is more living people now on Earth than ever. It is incredible. We are in a very special time, and when you see this of course you understand that we have an impact on the planet, before we don't. We don't have to care about these data, or these data, or these data. At the end of the day it is clear that we have a big impact.
Business as usual is a dangerous trap, especially—it is a kind of paradox because mankind was animal who was the best to make trap. Even in the West, we are very—we are in the far West, and so you have trapper. How would you say? You speak about trapper, trapper? Mankind was very good to make trap. He knew how to trap any animals. The thing which is kind of paradox, it is that we are doing the most big trap for our species. [Laughter] A trap, what is a trap? It is somewhere the animal go inside, and he say, "I'm caught. I'm going to have a lot of food. Oh, this nice food." He arrives at trap, and then he cannot go out. Actually, it is exactly what happened to Earth.
Business as usual, we do business as usual, okay. Everything is fine. Then the climate began to have big hurricane and everything. I say, "Ah, we should have gone back." You would be too late. All our technology, which is the base of the trap, we did—mostly our technology to make trap for animal at the beginning. Then now, we are building our own trap, see what I mean?
We need to grow global, long-term, positive scenario to get organized. It is—I—really me, I have been working for 20 years on long-term scenario, new strategy for big company. I was really passionate about those question. What surprised me it is that even if you are in the board of a big company, you always look at your context, on strategy, on to your other plan. You have a long-term plan, middle-term plan, and a short-term plan. Of course, just last year company get more and more short-term, but even in other business schools they tell how much it is a mistake.
When you make survey about how people in all the history of mankind were successful, you discover that people who seek long—long period of time who are able to think long period of time, see large space. They are the most efficient people. Even when you do spot—me, I love ski, but I also, how you say, horsey, horsey? When you are on a horse, if it goes slow, you don't know—you don't need to see far. If you begin to go quick, then you have to see long.
Another civilization, and the how—our civilization is so fast. We do exactly what everybody do when he's not used to do sport. You just say, "Oh, I am try. I do ski. Oh, it is more and more and quick." They look to his shoes, because he's a little afraid by the wheel and the—but then he make mistake and he fail. More you will go quick, more you will need to see the horizon. We need a long-term, positive scenario.
I speak with a lot of politicians. Personally, they know very well that we going to war, that they're no hope. They say, "Okay." Me, my problem is not that, it's to be elected. That is a short-end question. When I am elected, I have no time to worry about five year, ten years of big problem. It is impossible. Even if they wish that the person will ever do something, they cannot. They cannot because they don't have positive, long-term scenarios. They have no plan. Nobody—everybody do business as usual, and see business as you dealt with care. We have learn, as a mankind, we live alone, as a mankind to care for the planet on the long-term. It was not a question. We are not bad people. It was not a question before. Now, it is a question for the first time in my encounter, it is a question.
We need to have a long-term vision. We need to have a plan, a strategy, a past. We need, of course, a way to make the transition to business as usual, A plan to the B plan. When will we have this B plan? We need the vision, we need the journey, we need the narrative, and we need also a driver. When you look and you speak with only on the different agencies who are supposed to take care for the planet, they don't take care for the planet. They are just a platform where people say, "Okay, take the picture of Alaska." Me, I take this—I take the tree there. It is as in a family where, or business where each person is just care for himself. That there’s a planetary labor, each country care for himself. It is the best of the—all the political organization who come from the vast [inaudible 00:24:07] treaty, perhaps somebody's more good than me politic, but it a base of our global organization.
That has to be shared, because we need a driver, and we need even more a wheel. Even if we see the past, we don't have even a wheel. Everybody's speaking about a big turn. We in our car, we go in the wall. When you look really at the global situation, we don't have even the wheel to make a turn. Even we can ask if the driver is not drunk, [laughter] 'cause it's not necessarily—to be in a car with no wheel, or with no driver.
We are not a bad species. Mankind have never had to care on a long-term, on planetary scale. That is totally new. We should not be ashamed that we are in this situation. Seems there a lot of shame around sustainable development, what we have done worse. Why we are in this so bad situation. No, we should not be ashamed because actually we are in so bad situation because we was very successful. We trap all the animal. [Laughter] We get some food. We learned a lot. It was a great journey. Now, the program is a long-term on the planetary scale. That has never been the problem of mankind.
We obligate to innovate in a radical way on the work all together. What is completing you, it is that we are to reinvent our planetary saddle, and also we have to do it all together. Obviously, if you see—seeing about the next year, if we began to say, "Okay, America need water. They need pitchforks; they need this, and this. China needs a—they need also and Africa, and they need it too." Then we go directly to the worst war ever. It'd be the last war. If you are a little cynical, if you are a little Israelis, we have to be aware that the global situation. If you don't move, we go to a last war, because each person, each country will want the last petrol. [Laughter] Good, how is that good? A little piece of petrol, you're up, even the Army need it.
On the other hand, it is a very good opportunity; it's the first opportunity ever that the mankind get aware and begin to work all together, all the culture together. Invent, because we have all the technology to invite the paradigm. We have all the technology or so to go far away, even the necessity to work because robotic is near to give us all the robots we wish. There are really new possibility to really for the first time of ever, mankind is in front of himself, either disappear, either to really say what's there. It is a very interesting situation.
Sometimes I'm desperate, I must say. Sometime I say, "Okay, but perhaps it is just the beginning of mankind now." Did you—perhaps just the beginning, before it was just kind of struggle for life, struggle for food, struggle for position. The people cannot really liberate their creativity now. We are now time where we need to liberate our creativity, each of us.
If you are thinking purely mechanically, scientifically, as you know most of the deep scientists of today consider it is finished, it is already finished. We cannot do anything. If you think at a mechanist way, the situation will go worse and when of course we awake, it will be too late. There are perhaps a hopes it is a fact that even that have been studied. It is—people when the—in the book of the war, they say never push your enemy to die. You never have to push your enemy to the point he's sure to die, because then everything is possible because his mind's changed completely.
My guess is that we are in a sort—special situation. I guess, is that the people began to feel even if they don't think that they feel the situation. What I observe all over the world it is that they begin—so people can begin to work up, because they are so aware of the desperate situations and the intellectual characters, everything is up here, and this just began to create, and all this creator may create on the same wheel. I observe this, because I travel a lot and most of those people who are really invest in this transformation and change of paradigm, they act even without knowing exactly what he's doing, but it is a brash proposal, and perhaps the new Earth is already in the process of birth.
Design Me a Planet is just to—the idea is just to help this birth processing. Let's say is that we hope that there's something is acting all over the planet. We need civil society. We need public effort. We need economic world. We need think tank. We need all those people work together on a very collective base. It is really not just the kind of innovation—incremental innovation, you need a road to innovation. We have tried incremental innovation, means just a myriad of things, use less water, use—try to have better car. That is not the issue anymore. We need a route here. We need really to reinvent completely the planet and very quickly.
The thing which amaze me is the fact that at the same time all over the planet you are even talk operation is this new idea of open innovation. Open innovation is that there are no possible innovation, only incorporation. The people we know of the most—the corporation who are open and were all—we've all the restructure of the planet. The iPhone is a good example of this. iPhone was invented by Apple. It is a plugging of 100—more than 100 different innovation to make the best phone.
The objective of Design Me a Planet is to grow planetary awareness. That is what—we do this, but of course a lot of people are doing—you are doing this. The main issue is invent positive, long-term, planetary scenarios, that is our main objective. Of course, if you—we have those scenario, then we—that is mainly a work of a think tank. Then, because of the short time we have to implement, then we have to release their value and promote positive initiative, a different scale, and help to phone this thing [inaudible 00:33:23].
Why we have no impact until now, it is because we have no long-term, planetary scenario. For example, when you speak about you say—let's say, "Okay, we don't have petrol anymore. We don't have oil." It is of use that the future will be electric car. Then we begin to build electric car. If the electricity come from the carbon [inaudible 00:33:57] have a lot of coal—from coal, then really is a electric car just worse than the old car. It is a good example; it will show how we cannot have very impact without a larger plan. It is as when you make a house, even to make a house you have to have the plan. If you just begin to build your house, "Okay, I'm going to do this." Then your house just look wrong. [Laughter] We need really to think about the planet as a little capsule that we have to design.
We are arise between cooperation and catastrophe on the tightest out turning our response. We need to go back in sustainable development. We need to go back and look at incremental innovation, and even on the planetary scale. On how to do this, is to make a first orb of open innovation using the most advanced vanguard management tools. Open innovation to mitigate for planetary, sustainable development.
I think I'm on time. We made it. A lot of book—I was obliged to go out of my comfort zone coming to USA because of course this kind of work have no meaning at the regional scale. I have—I was in my comfort zone in France, well-known with all my books was a best seller, very well paid. [Laughter] I feel to do always strategy, how we are going to kill this planet, [laughter] because that began to make me feel this way. I feel bad. I began to work on this idea, Design your Planet. The—I don't know if it is the end of my life, or the beginning of my true life, you will tell me. [Laughter] Okay, so I have other Power Point. I have a thousand, hundred of Power Point—but I won't share with you. That is, for example, the Power Point where we explain the project in term of methodology.
You understand, I am passionate. I could really present 200 of Power Point, but I think it is a lot to better to exchange society for example this system. Is the fact that until now, most of us are against economy development, against this, against this, against this. I think we need really now to work all together to a solution. We have no time to war against each other, against this ideally. We have to find a positive solution. On the off—'cause this kind of project, have to be a network that's already—this project was support by for the Club of WFSF, the World Future Studies Federation, which is the largest organization in future studies in the world. We have also corporation as BSH, we have different kinds—that is just—now just those—since last days, we began to have the interest of the CNRS, of the Sorbonne.
More and more people will get interested and get—five years ago, when I began—actually I write the first paper on this question in South America working with the Rand Corporation. [Chuckle] At that time, even speaking with the Rand Corporation, who have a lot of contact with America. That period was a little difficult to push society of long-term. Everybody sees—feel, or views that we ought to be short-term oriented. For years, it was more and more short-term. Just now, because it begin to be obvious that we have to make a big change, but what change? We need the long-term plan.
Thank you very much. I am happy to answer your questions.


‎"Quand on considère cette incroyable aventure du passé, comment penser que l'aventure du futur serait moins incroyable ? Quand on pense qu'à chaque étape de ce passé l'étape suivante était inconcevable, impossible à imaginer comme à prédire, comment ne pas penser qu'il en ira de même pour notre futur ?" (Edgar Morin - La voie, Ed Fayard 2011)

Si tu veux construire un bateau, ne rassemble pas tes hommes et femmes pour leur donner des ordres, pour expliquer chaque détail, pour leur dire où trouver chaque chose... Si tu veux construire un bateau, fais naître dans le coeur de tes hommes et femmes le désir de la mer.
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

Quelle futur pour qu'elle planète ?
Notre modèle de développement n'est pas durable. 40 ans après la publication des "Limites à la croissance", rapport du Club de Rome et du MIT, leurs prévisions ont été confirmées. De nombreux experts jugent ce problème est extrêmement préoccupant !

Notre avenir est notre bien commun ! 
Pourtant notre avenir, selon les plus grands scientifiques, est si noir que les probabilités de survie de l'humanité s'amenuise chaque jour.
Paradoxalement, du fait même de notre toute puissance technologique et de la dictature du présent notre futur peu se refermer aujourd'hui sur nous comme un piège durable et implacable.

La Planète va mal et le développement durable apparaît de plus en plus comme une chimère.
Les négociations internationales sur le climat sont au point mort et il apparaît de plus en plus qu'un processus classique de marchandage sur la base d'intérêts contradictoires a peu de chances d'aboutir à des décisions suffisamment radicales. Au sein même de chaque pays, les remises en cause à opérer dans les modes de vie et l'organisation sociale sont d'une telle ampleur que seules un fort sentiment d'urgence pourrait les rendre acceptables. A elle seule, la raison économique est incapable de susciter les transformations nécessaires dans les comportements et les logiques d'action.
Les seuls scénarios d'avenir crédibles sont ceux qui intègrent des ruptures dans l'orientation du développement économique sous l'effet de catastrophes qui, selon toute vraisemblance, ne manqueront de survenir d'ici la fin du présent siècle. Mais, au pied du mur face au chaos quand nous nous voudrons réinventer notre futur, il sera trop tard et nos efforts serons vains du fait de l'emballement systémique des dérèglements et du décalage des effets dans le temps !

Les scenarios de prospectives standards nous amène tout droit dans une catastrophe annoncée, de longue date et pourtant, semble t-il, aussi inévitable que fatale. Au delà des régressions, des intégrismes et des populismes tribaux, religieux et scientistes susceptible d'engloutir  la planète dans la bêtise, sommes-nous capable construire un avenir viable, souhaitable et heureux?
Nombreux sont ceux qui pensent que le combat mondial contre les périls écologiques – au premier rang desquels le changement climatique – relève d'une logique de guerre, tant il semble impliquer un degré de mobilisation collective qui n'a été observée qu'à l'occasion des guerres modernes. Pour naturelle qu'elle paraisse, la métaphore guerrière est cependant problématique, car elle met en jeu la violence comme ressort central de l'action. Jusqu'ici, en effet, les hommes ont eu besoin d'ennemis ou de victimes émissaires pour transcender leurs intérêts individuels et unir leurs énergies en vue d'un même but. Or, la violence à grande échelle n'est plus seulement moralement inacceptable : c'est désormais une option suicidaire.

S'unir pour sauver ce qui nous est commun.
La guerre qu'il faut préparer est d'un autre type. Il ne s'agit plus de détruire et tuer mais de s'unir pour sauver ce qui nous est commun afin de rendre possible la poursuite de l'aventure humaine. Quels pourraient être les ressorts anthropologiques et les fondements éthiques d'une telle mobilisation ?
Une fois reconnue le caractère imprescriptible de nos responsabilités à l'égard de l'humanité présente et future, la réponse est à chercher dans une nouvelle compréhension de l'action humaine. Celle-ci n'est pas uniquement régie par la logique de l'accaparement, de la rivalité et de la violence ; elle est habitée par le projet de faire advenir un monde commun vivable et durable qui transcende nos destins individuels.
L'émergence de nouvelles problématiques philosophiques autour du « care » et de l'éthique de la vulnérabilité peut-être vue comme le signe précurseur d'une révolution des valeurs sous-tendue par une conscience plus aiguë de la fragilité de l'humain. Pour prendre pleinement corps, ce changement devra s'inscrire dans un projet politique et dans un horizon de sens. Pour la première fois dans son histoire, l'humanité doit créer consciemment et en peu d'années les conditions de changements anthropologiques et spirituels qui rendront possibles de nouvelles formes d'existence et d'action collective.

Devons‐nous attendre l'apocalypse avec résignation ?
Notre travail montre, au contraire, qu'il n'a jamais été plus urgent d'agir. Cinq idées importantes  guide notre action :
Regarder le danger en face. Ce que nous croyons être une solution au risque technologique sous forme de normes, lois, accords internationaux n'est qu'un moyen de nous le masquer. Un problème ne peut être résolu s'il est ignoré.  

Rien ne sera plus comme avant. Optimistes ou non, les scientifiques que nous avons consultés et les travaux que nous avons lus s'accordent sur la haute probabilité d'un choc dévastateur. C'est lui qui rend impérative l'action : il faut diminuer l'impact du choc, afin de pouvoir y survivre.
Résilience. Pour encaisser un choc, il faut être résilient, dit Donella Meadows. On entend par ce mot la capacité à se « réinventer ». La résilience est avant tout une interrogation sur le sens de notre vie : que voulons‐nous garder, si nous devons tout perdre ?
Systémique. Nous avons les moyens de remédier, au moins en partie, aux problèmes auxquels nous sommes confrontés. Ce qui manque à la planète, c'est une mise en oeuvre coordonnée, systémique, de ces moyens. Pour transformer notre système, nous avons besoin d'objectifs quantifiés dont nous pourrons contrôler l'atteinte, des moyens techniques de  les atteindre et une répartition de l'effort de mise en oeuvre qui paraisse équitable aux parties prenantes concernées.
L'idéologie comme frein au changement. Si Les limites à la croissance a suscité autant de bruit et si peu d'actions, c'est probablement parce que le livre semblait condamner la modernité occidentale. Comme pour une expertise, pour pouvoir résoudre un problème, il faut le dépassionner. Et pour cela, ici, il faut en venir à l'intérêt général de l'humanité : sa survie, dans des conditions acceptables.

Les améliorations introduites par le développement durable doivent être prolongées par une réflexion globale pour parvenir à une véritable transformation. Le virage qui s'impose nécessite non seulement des innovations incrémentales mais aussi des innovations de rupture à l'échelle de la planète.

Si nul ne peut ignorer les défis du futur, l'absence de visions prospectives interdit aux individus comme aux groupes, aux institutions publiques comme aux entreprises de bâtir projets et stratégies. De nombreuses initiatives locales émergent, cependant, en l'absence de scénarios prospectifs dans lesquels s'inscrire, elles peinent à gagner en visibilité et à se démultiplier.  

Les enjeux du futur sont complexes et leur appréhension nécessite une grande ouverture d'esprit, impliquant un dépassement des spécialités et des partis-pris. L'exercice de scénarios pour le futur requiert une pensée transversale, globale, qui fait appel à tous les champs de la connaissance et de l'expérience humaine, pour les mettre en situation de se confronter, d'échanger, et de se féconder réciproquement.
Ces défis nous imposent d'innover et constituent une opportunité sans précédent pour conjuguer nos forces, co-élaborer, et  initier ensemble les mutations intelligentes. 

Qu'est-ce que « Design Me A Planet » ?


Pour favoriser la libération de l'imagination créatice et la réalisation d'actions concrètes nécessaires à la transformation globale de nos sociétés, l'association Design Me A Planet (DMAP) s'est fixée 4 objectifs :

-        Favoriser la prise de conscience des enjeux planétaires.
-        Favoriser l'émergence de scénarios long terme et globaux diversifiés.
-        Repérer et répertorier les projets et réalisations innovants pour les diffuser. 
-        Développer un contexte permettant la rencontre de ceux qui ont des projets et ceux qui ont les moyens de les mettre en œuvre.

Design Me A Planet est le 1er hub d'innovation ouverte dédié aux enjeux de la planète : un espace, une plate-forme collective et collaborative fournissant un contexte décloisonnant pour faire émerger des solutions créatives et systémiques qui permettront une métamorphose planétaire.