Toward planetary engineering: discipline building and practice pathways for Earth system engineering

Confronting the global environmental crisis of the Anthropocene—characterized by climate change and biodiversity loss—the traditional “mitigation-adaptation” governance paradigm exhibits inherent limitations: temporal misalignment, linear thinking constraints, and systemic perspective deficiencies. Given the Earth system’s high coupling and nonlinearity, localized measures prove inadequate for planetary-scale challenges. Humanity must transition to proactive shaping through Earth system engineering, employing systematic diagnostics and management of complex planetary systems to drive civilization’s transformation toward security, justice, and resilience. This paper systematically proposes and validates the framework, theoretical system, and practical pathways of this discipline for the first time, advancing its institutional development to provide comprehensive solutions for addressing Anthropocene challenges. The article first elucidates the historical inevitability of establishing Earth System Engineering as a discipline, positioning it as a systematic response to the fundamental challenges of the Anthropocene. In defining its essence and positioning, the discipline adopts a socio-ecological-technological composite system as its research focus, emphasizing four core attributes: interdisciplinary integration, systems thinking, design-based interventions, and normative values. It further clarifies the distinctions and connections between Earth System Engineering and Earth system science, traditional engineering disciplines, and the narrow definition of “geoengineering.” The discipline is positioned as a strategic hub supporting national and global sustainable development. Regarding its core knowledge framework, three theoretical pillars are proposed: Planetary System Cognition and Regulation Theory, Sustainable System Design and Engineering Implementation Theory, and Planetary-Scale Governance and Ethical Responsibility Theory. Building upon this foundation, the article establishes a collaborative action network comprising five practical subfields: Climate System Guidance Engineering, Ecosystem Restoration and Enhancement Engineering, Socio-Technical Metabolic System Reconstruction Engineering, Earth System Information and Simulation Engineering, and Planetary Engineering Governance and Policy Design. At the methodological level, a multi-layered nested integrated research framework was constructed, comprising the core layer of system modeling and digital twins, the intermediate layer of interdisciplinary design science and transformation experiments, and the top layer of technology evaluation and adaptive governance research. The practical approach adheres to the principle of prudence and gradualism, designing a three-stage ladder path from “regional comprehensive solution demonstration zones” to “cross-regional/national strategic projects and knowledge network expansion,” ultimately leading to “the formation of global public goods management and governance mechanisms.” The article also traces the evolution of the discipline and proposes a near-, medium-, and long-term development roadmap. Finally, it emphasizes the paradigm shift in talent cultivation for the “planetary generation” and the necessity of global collaboration networks, while exploring the strategic role China can play in this process. Earth systems engineering constitutes a strategic intellectual and capability response to the challenges of the Anthropocene, representing a profound revolution from cognitive foundations to practical paradigms. By integrating systems science, engineering design, and governance ethics, this discipline is dedicated to the conscious, reflective, and responsible design and adaptive management of socio-ecological-technological composite systems under planetary boundaries. Its development not only involves the integration of technical solutions but also signifies humanity’s transition from being a “passive passenger” to a “responsible steward” and “co-evolutionary partner” within the Earth system. The study establishes a framework to address systemic cognitive deficits, breaking down disciplinary barriers to foster unified understanding with cognitive integration value. Technologically, it drives engineering technology toward systemic synergy and negative emissions, guiding adaptive infrastructure transformation. In governance innovation, it provides multi-level institutional frameworks and design principles for managing planetary-scale intervention technologies, offering pivotal capabilities for national development and global governance to enhance resilience with strategic significance. Educational reform focuses on cultivating talents with systemic thinking and planetary responsibility. As a civilization-oriented approach, it provides intellectual weapons and practical guidelines for humanity to proactively shape its path, achieving co-evolution for the future.