A. My Research Trajectory Embraced the Following Conceptual and Methodological Areas

(1) Somatic cell genetics – from cells to in vitro regeneration
– biochemistry and genetics of amino acids and nitrogen metabolism
– plant cell totipottency and nuclear organization
– haploid cell culture to generate mutant lines and whole plants

(2) Flower development and evolution
– reproduction systems and sex chromosomes (backwards evolution)
– flower morphogenesis, sexual dimorphism, and evolution
– gene transfer and cloning

(3) Flowering plants as matrix and engine of complex food systems
– biomass control and flowering time
– agriculture as an integrated soil-water-biomass system

(4) Global resources and the commons
– resources as matrix and engine of history
– resources according to planetary, societal, and time boundaries
– resources and planetary health narrative and methodology

B. I Concentrate below on the Resources-Planetary Health Approach, a Social-Ecological Framework

Here are three concepts that mobilize essential methodological instruments within the socioecological approach. Taken together, the elaborated system has systemic transformative potential.

This approach illustrates the work carried out at the Michel Serres Institute, École Normale Supérieure (ENS) de Lyon. It is mainly inspired or reinforced by Michel Serres’ Natural Contract, Elinor Ostrom’s work on resource governance systems and the Resources Management Act 1991, the supreme law of New Zealand. To this must be added new work on carrying capacity, the HANDY model (Mote et al, 2020) and the 2022 report "Earth for All – A Survival Guide for Humanity" of the Club of Rome (Dixson-Declève et al, 2022).

Resources as a social construction of socioecological systems evolve with the cultures, organization and techniques of societies. The physical resources resulting from the cycles and functions of the Earth system are finite or exhaustible and represent the nutrients of social "ecosystems". The dynamics of this socioecological whole are translated into states of health of environments, societies and people. They are inseparable. This is why the “systemic health - resources” approach aims at socioecological robustness as a radical change in the relationships between humans and between humans and nature.

Read more on https://institutmichelserres.ens-lyon.fr
The following references illustrate work on concepts, methods, and toolboxes.

What is agriculture ?

Negrutiu, I., Frohlich, M. W., & Hamant, O. (2020). Flowering plants in the Anthropocene : A political agenda. Trends in Plant Science, 25(4), 349-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2019.12.008

Soil-water-biomass – an evolutionary perspective on agriculture and biotechnology by explaining why flowering plants are the supportive architecture of the biosphere and the backbone of agro-ecosystems.

Honet, C., Negrutiu, I. (2012) De l’agriculture comme problème à l’agriculture comme solution : des plantes et des hommes. In : Le végétal saisi par le droit (Coordination Dross W), Ed. Bruylant, Bruxelles, pp 7-46

Negrutiu, I., Pamfil, D. (2017) Paun Ion Otiman si agricultura : cum trebuie regandita relatia romanilor cu natura si securitatea resurselor tarii. In : Omagiu PI Otiman, Ed Academia Romana.

Anthropocène à l’école de l’indiscipline (2018) Eds Hamant O, Le Gall J, Negrutiu I. Edition du temps circulaire. https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/olivier-hamant/anthropocene-digest/paperback/product-1kk9rm5k.html

Anthropocene – from excess to sobriety, rethinking food and agriculture first ;
Agri-food resources : global issues and tools for understanding and action.

50 years of semantic confusion and international inaction

Pincemin, B., & Negrutiu, I. (2024). Cinquante ans d’un discours institutionnel socio-écologique qui se cherche encore. The open archive HAL SHS. https://shs.hal.science/halshs-04550985

On why systemic health is becoming the unavoidable narrative, following decades of shifting agendas (from the Stockholm Declaration, Brundtland Report, Rio conferences, United Nations Development Programme-UNDP reports and Nobel Prize Statements, and more).

The main concepts – on slow, systemic, cumulative risks

Acunzo, D. J., Escher, G., Ottersen, O. P., Whittington, J. D., Gillet, P., Stenseth, N. C., & Negrutiu, I. (2018). Framing planetary health : Arguing for resource-centred science. The Lancet Planetary Health, 2(3), e101-e102. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2542-5196(18)30023-8

The paper articulates for the first time the Planetary Health approach to the global resources stewardship.

Negrutiu, I. (2025). The interaction of food systems and global pollution in crossing planetary boundaries. In Encyclopedia of Food Systems and Agriculture (3rd ed.). In press, Elsevier.

Aggregating Planetary Boundaries pays off : two interacting grand stressors, Food Systems and Global Pollution, generate the Planetary Health Bubble. Measuring what counts by setting the baseline on the food-pollution-waste-health nexus, while making recommendations on how to address them in a social-ecosystemic perspective.

The systemic health concept in brief

Negrutiu, I. (2022). A compass for resource justice and planetary health : Food systems and global pollution. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 181, 106229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106229

The framework for resource justice within ecological limits is the entry point for addressing other grand challenges (poverty, hunger, climate).

Arguello Velazquez, J. A., & Negrutiu, I. (2019) Intersecting planetary health and planetary boundaries reveals the double challenge of agriculture and global physicochemical deregulation. The Lancet Planetary Health, 3(1), e10-e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2542-5196(18)30235-3

Individual boundary assessment is articulated into a two component matrix : food systems and the global physico-chemical pollution.

Extended analysis of the concepts

Negrutiu, I., Escher, G., Whittington, J. D., Ottersen, O. P., Gillet, P., & Stenseth, N. C. (2023). The time boundary 2025-2030 : The Global Resources and Planetary Health Toolbox. Proceedings Romanian Academy Series B, 25/2, 117-135. https://acad.ro/sectii2002/proceedingsChemistry/doc2023-2/Art.4.pdf

Humans do not frame resources properly, illustrated by predatory economic practices and poor governance across sectors and institutions. The consequence is convergence of cumulative social and planetary crises translating into state shifts defining the 2025-2030 time boundary.

Negrutiu, I. (2024). Global resources and resource justice—Reframing the Socioecological Science-to-PolicyLandscape. Resources, 13(9), 130. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources13090130

The central role of resource stewardship, according to nature’s physical limits, is highlighted in the context of the boundary systems for the biosphere and societies, and the carrying capacity and inclusive systemic health (One Health, Planetary Health, …). The prioritization of resource justice and responsibility becomes a societal project, embedding the economy in social and ecological frames through institutional reframing. This is supported by assessing the costs of implementation against the cost saving generated by planetary health improvements.

Practicing with resources-planetary health : the ecosystem capital health

Argüello, J., Salles, J. M., Couvet, D., Smets, B., Weber, J. L., & Negrutiu, I. (2025). The Landscape of Environmental Evaluation Methods : Measuring what Counts for Ruling What Matters. In press, Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg.

This article seeks to categorize a range of environmental evaluation approaches wherein scholars have endeavored to encapsulate GDP within ecological limits of varying strictness. The primary objectives are to delineate their scope, compare them, and address the overarching question : Can current methodologies effectively guide decision-making processes with an ecosystem-based perspective, aiming for "no net ecosystem degradation" ?

Argüello J, Weber J-L, Negrutiu I. Ecosystem natural capital accounting : The landscape approach at a territorial watershed scale. Quantitative Plant Biology. 2022 ;3:e24. doi:10.1017/qpb.2022.11

On a non-monetary acounting approach of the ecological capital at watershed scale, the Rhône river basin. Discussing current limitations, with emphasis on the data issue and policies (or non-policies). Also, why the approach avoids directly assessing biodiversity and ecological services, with recommended proxis.

Legal aspects

Negrutiu, I., Escher, G., & Dutilleul, F. C. (2019). Alimentation - agriculture - territoires : Les difficultés d’un dialogue entre le droit et les sciences de la nature. Droit et société, 101(1), 87-99. https://doi.org/10.3917/drs1.101.0087

Food systems, food democracy, agricultural exception, adjustment of resources and needs are framework principles to serve as a guide for public action. The authors show how to establish plural food systems adapted to each territory, but in connection with each other.

Taking the health-resources message to the society and the governance circles
Negrutiu, I. (2022) https://www.larrierecour.fr/2022/08/25/pendant-la-guerre-en-ukraine-la-chine-met-la-main-sur-la-siberie/

Collart, D. F., Hamant, O., Negrutiu, I., & Riem, F. (2024). Manifest pentru o sănătate comună. București, Editura Academiei Române.

A conversation between natural sciences and legal studies on why systemic health is a political narrative and an actionable instrument for the economy and society at large. An antidote to social and ecological dumping.

Mosoia, C. (April-May 2024). Spiritul socio-eco-sistemic modelează viitorul. Interviu cu Ioan Negruțiu, membru de onoare din străinătate al Academiei Române. Știință & Tehnică, 129, 69-71.

Science and Society : There is no society outside nature - Dealing with the widening social-ecological gap

The AI approach and stress test

Negrutiu, I. (February 2025). Questioning Artificial Intelligence on human-sensitive issues. A comparative conversation with the American Chat-GPT and the Chinese DeepSeek-r1. Institut Michel Serres. https://institutmichelserres.ens-lyon.fr/spip.php?article753&lang=fr

C. Definitions of “Systemic Health” – a Clarification

Lerner, H., & Berg, C. (2017). A comparison of three holistic approaches to health : One health, EcoHealth, and planetary health. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 4(163). https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00163

De Castañeda, R. R., Villers, J., Guzmán, C. A., Eslanloo, T., De Paula, N., Machalaba, C., Zinsstag, J., Utzinger, J., Flahault, A., & Bolon, I. (2023). One health and planetary health research : Leveraging differences to grow together. The Lancet Planetary Health, 7(2), e109-e111. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2542-5196(23)00002-5

Morand, S., Guégan, J.-F., Laurans, Y. (2020). De One Health à Ecohealth, cartographie du chantier inachevé de l’intégration des santés humaine, animale et environnementale. Iddri Décryptage N°04/20.

The current inclusive health landscape

It consists of frameworks known as One Health, Ecohealth, Planetary Health, or Global Health. One Health and Planetary Health stand out as two competing programs in science, economy, and policy areas developed in the last decade.
Both One Health and Planetary Health present themselves as holistic and systems-based approaches, allign with SDGs and climate agendas, and ambition integrating policy, legislation, finance, sectoral activities and institutions, and coordinate capacity building, knowledge, and data spheres.

Comparing One Health and Planetary Health

The definitions and action plans they propose evolve and change over time (Lerner and Berg, 2017 ; de Castaneda et al, 2023).

One Health tends to be exhaustive essentially on the public health aspects (human and animal health priority area) and has recently integrated broad range environmental aspects. The program is carried out by a quadripartite cooperation between the global international organizations WHO, WOAH (animal health), FAO, and UNEP. This is a political network operating in association with governmental, financial, economic partners, civil society organizations, joint program networks, education and training activities, with national targets and priorities across sectors. For example, the 200 research networks - concentrated so far in Europe - investigate emerging infections and novel pathogens, endemic infections and NTDs, antimicrobial resistance, and extreme weather, water, environmental degradation, food safety, and food and nutrition security.

Planetary Health has been initiated by the Lancet-Rockefeller Foundation commission and the Planetary Health Alliance is built on a strong academic network (400 universities, among which Harvard, Oxford Martin School, Western, London Scool of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Sydney, California, Sunway), US and Chinese Academies, but also world leaders and experts from business, government (60 countries), and civil society organizations. The program is focused on teaching and training activities, and targets several environmental and health challenges (e.g., food systems and water, global pollution, climate, human pathologies).
The comparison highlights the fact that the main dimension that is apparently lacking or at least is not directly addressed is the social health per se. This is where our approach comes in (Manifeste pour une santé commune).

1) The health of nature over the long term. Examples concern biosphere functions and cycles within the critical zone as matrix of ecosystem services and externalities, and food chains as energy and biomass balance systems ;

(2) Social health by guaranteeing equitable access to resources, the foundation of fundamental rights and social cohesion ;

(3) Human health as a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being.

General references

Dixson-Decleve, S., Gaffney, O., Ghosh, J., Randers, J., Rockstrom, J., & Stoknes, P. E. (2022). Earth for all : A survival guide for humanity. New Society Publishers. https://newsociety.com/book/earth-for-all/?srsltid=AfmBOoq9z6SHK7amPJvDEemNilBTLiHJ_EtJ2LT1FC-SS7H5a_hgPMsz

Gow, L. (1997). New Zealand’s Resource Management Act. Australian Planner, 34(3), 132-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/07293682.1997.9657767
Hulme, M. (2020). One earth, many futures, no destination. One Earth, 2(4), 309-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.03.005

Mote, S., Rivas, J., & Kalnay, E. (2020). A Novel Approach to Carrying Capacity : From a priori Prescription to a posteriori Derivation Based on Underlying Mechanisms and Dynamics. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 48(1), 657-683. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-053018-060428

Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325(5939), 419-422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133

Resources Management Act, New Zealand (1991-to present), https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html AND
Resources management system reform (2023), https://environment.govt.nz/news/rm-reform-update-may-2023/

Serres Michel (1990) Le Contrat naturel, François Bourin Ed., and 1992 with Flamarion. Champs/Flammarion).