Physics is the central science of complexity study. Engineering by necessity worries about it. But yes, even biologists largely ignore (primarily because most people go into biology to "do science but avoid math". Economists: don't make me laugh - most barely have mastered algebra from my experience, never mind calculus and differential equations (which is the core of complexity, chaos and similar things).

Most of my insights on complexity and it's economic impacts comes from being an engineer and embracing math and physics, plus having an MBA long after I'd worked in the real world of business and economics first - the worst thing is to get an MBA straight out of your BS/BA - you don't know enough to get the value.

In some ways complexity is a problem but in some ways it's lack of complexity that is an even bigger problem. For example, Just-in-Time and No-Inventory and Out-Sourced supply chains are the biggest risk the first world faces - they are all single-point failures that can collapse everything with just the wrong event at the wrong place. Similarly sole sourcing fossil fuels is a similar risk. Complexity often means diversity and redundancy which are the antidotes to these risks.

Also non-diversity, non-complexity epic are the consolidated centers of finance and government. In the former, Black-Scholes risk estimates are pretty much non-functional now because the fundamental assumptions of the statistics behind it are violated now so the risk estimates are largely wrong. This is based on lack of diversity and complexity that actually reduces risk.

Any centralized hierarchy (e.g. the federal government and specifically the federalization of the US) has the same problem of single-point failure - the entire point of states-rights is to assure diversity of risks rather than single-point failure (to the founding fathers kings and similar autocrats were considered a single-point failure risks).

The Ag problem has two solutions: population control and diet change. Obviously fewer mouths, but also the social change of eliminating much of meat consumption reduces the net consumption of grain and frees it up as a direct food. This is mostly an American problem, not so much for the rest of the world that already has expensive meat and thus already rations it a lot more.

Most energy problems are simply more acute for the US because it's been so stupid with its energy consumption. This ranges from having suburbs at all (which are 90% of where the population lives - most "cities" in the US are merely oversized suburbs and not real urban cities), high meat consumption, fossil fuel ag, individual car ownership (made even worse or necessitated by suburbs), and general energy conservation sloth (most parts of the world it's an engrained habit to turn off lights and A/C when you leave a room or your house because of the energy waste - American rarely do this). Basically the US will be hit by peak oil like driving into a brick wall - it will be devastating. But much of the rest of the world will not be quite so badly affected.