Dear Tihamer,
Thank you so much for your kind comments and useful criticism.
I agree that science is not the only steering mechanism, but I believe it had the biggest impact on our present progress. For example, the economy of many countries is primarily based on technology, including Japan. In this essay I didn't only discuss how to produce new scientific knowledge more effectively, but also how to apply this knowledge to solve humanity's problems and improve its conditions.
The problem you mention of authors rating each other is a problem in the current peer review system. However, in the current system, new controversial ideas may go unpublished, but if the peer review happens after publishing those ideas will be available for those who appreciate it.
As for publishing negative results, you are right that positive results are more interesting, and that's why most journals don't publish negative results. But that's the point; negative results are useful, at least for those who pursue the same topic, and they must be published. I disagree that boycotting some journals is a problem. Currently there are tens of thousands of journals, boycotting a few hundred is not that difficult.
I agree that environmental and sustainability problems might not be the biggest problems, but they are very important, and science is the key to solve them. We seem to disagree about the meaning of "sustainability"; it is not the same as "going green", sustainable development means "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[scientific American] Thus, it includes agriculture, economy,...
You are right that it is a bit idealistic to think that governments will follow scientists, but who do you think are in power? They are the people not the government.
Finally, I would like to thank you again for your encouraging words, and valuable comments.
Best regards,
Mohammed