This may be dangerous, but not going may be dangerous too, so here I go.
There's understanding systems, and there's changing them.
To understand a system, we'd need to know it's elements and the relationships between them; the levels, flows and delays; the units and numbers and how they relate to units and numbers we know; the feedback loops and the overall mode of behaviour, growth and failure; and maybe other things I don't know about.
To change a system (both to improve and protect it, and to guide it in the direction of becoming something else), we'd need to know its strengths and vulnerabilities; our strengths and vulnerabilities; our allies and counter-allies; and maybe other things I don't know about.
We could crowdsource the understanding part using some sort of wiki: ask the questions, look for the answers, link to the answers, make the pages known for others to double-or-triple check, tag the answers as (non-)checked, etc. If different models exist, then fork the page (maybe keeping most links).
Similarly, once sufficient understanding emerges, we might ant-ize the movement. Possible actions are wikified, each ant decides what's in our power to do, and we do it.
Imagine this for (renewable) energy.
Is this silly?