In fact, most are paid NOT to look at those things beyond 'short-term'.
Who, for example, is seriously considering the viability of ANY policy in the context of social-ecological systems collapse?
Who is seriously considering bioregionally-based food security?
This is the realm of post-normal science: where the Decision Stakes are High (there is a possibility that the damage is irreversible, even if system uncertainty is low) AND the Systems Uncertainty is High (risks cannot be quantified). The range reflects the fact that in some policy processes where the decision stakes are very high (e.g. when an institution is threatened by a proposed policy) a defensive strategy will involve challenging. Every step of a scientific argument, even if the systems uncertainties are actually quite small. (Funtowitz & Ravetz, 2003)
