Overview of complex systems in sport

The complex systems approach offers an opportunity to replace the extant pre-dominant mechanistic view on sport-related phenomena. The emphasis on the environment-system relationship, the applications of complexity principles, and the use of nonlinear dynamics mathematical tools propose a deep change in sport science. Coordination dynamics, ecological dynamics, and network approaches have been successfully applied to the study of different sport-related behaviors, from movement patterns that emerge at different scales constrained by specific sport contexts to game dynamics. Sport benefit from the use of such approaches in the understanding of technical, tactical, or physical conditioning aspects which change their meaning and dilute their frontiers. The creation of new learning and training strategies for teams and individual athletes is a main practical consequence. Some challenges for the future are investigating the influence of key control parameters in the nonlinear behavior of athlete-environment systems and the possible relatedness of the dynamics and constraints acting at different spatio-temporal scales in team sports. Modelling sport-related phenomena can make useful contributions to a better understanding of complex systems and vice-versa.

Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world

Personal and political action on climate change is traditionally thought to be motivated by people accepting its reality and importance. However, convincing the public that climate change is real faces powerful ideological obstacles1, 2, 3, 4, and climate change is slipping in public importance in many countries5, 6. Here we investigate a different approach, identifying whether potential co-benefits of addressing climate change7 could motivate pro-environmental behaviour around the world for both those convinced and unconvinced that climate change is real. We describe an integrated framework for assessing beliefs about co-benefits8, distinguishing social conditions (for example, economic development, reduced pollution or disease) and community character (for example, benevolence, competence). Data from all inhabited continents (24 countries; 6,196 participants) showed that two co-benefit types, Development (economic and scientific advancement) and Benevolence (a more moral and caring community), motivated public, private and financial actions to address climate change to a similar degree as believing climate change is important. Critically, relationships were similar for both convinced and unconvinced participants, showing that co-benefits can motivate action across ideological divides. These relationships were also independent of perceived climate change importance, and could not be explained by political ideology, age, or gender. Communicating co-benefits could motivate action on climate change where traditional approaches have stalled.