By Joern Fischer
Does this quote seem suitable for current discussions on climate change you may be following? Probably — as well as for lots of other public discussions about sustainability that you read about. And for the record: This quote is by Barack Obama, from his book “The Audacity of Hope”. When it comes to climate change, and sustainability issues more general, is there still room for hope? Is there any sign that the “smallness of our politics” will somehow change in the foreseeable future?
It is difficult not to be disillusioned when looking at the public discourse on climate change. Germany is sometimes hailed as a positive example of real progress on this front, partly because it decided to phase out fossil fuels within the medium-term future. But a closer look at Germany, to me at least, does not reveal big and bold politics either — sustainability here is more of a mainstream issue than in some other countries, but the dominant set of drivers that Germany is fundamentally based on seems just as unsustainable as elsewhere.
That said, ranting about this is not terribly helpful, and a more meaningful question may be to ask what scientists can do. Not very much perhaps, because decisions are not made by scientists (though civil society can be critically important!). But still, scientists can, and ought to, do more than provide just “data”. Most importantly, we should be questioning the world, and asking fundamentally important questions. That is, I see an urgent need for us scientists to look beyond the proximate causes of climate change and biodiversity loss, and instead open our eyes to the ultimate drivers underpinning these global trends. To me, too much of sustainability science is occupied with tangible solutions to tangible problems — when it’s the nasty, big, intangible problems that we most urgently need to grapple with. It’s for this reason that I previously put together an open letter (already signed by over 200 fellow scientists) stating the need to reflect on society’s core values.
Is there room for hope? To my mind, not unless we start asking fundamental questions related to global equity, our core values, and what it is to lead a good life. It’s not just the smallness of our politics, but also the smallness of our “science” (in a broad sense) that needs to change. As Donella Meadows pointed out long ago: the most influential way to change complex systems in a big way is to transcend the paradigms underpinning the system. Based on this, we should ask (prominently!): which paradigms underpinning our modern global society remain largely unquestioned, but ought to be challenged?
Hi. Great post and great thinking, thank you for sharing. I’ve just been to a captivating talk by Donnie Maclurcan on the not for profit sector and it’s potential ability to transcend (to some degree) the capitalist mode of business as usual. I recommend looking into his stuff as it’s all along the lines of your blog post. He is definitely championing social equity, core ethical and moral values, and wanting a new economic system that’s not about profit maximisation. He’s on twitter @donmacca I think you’ll find him interesting!
Thanks for the mention Elizabeth!
Joern, more about our work on the emerging not-for-profit world (challenging the underpinning paradigm of ‘private profits’) can be found here: http://postgrowth.org/learn/how-on-earth/.
Naomi Klein has the guts to sum up to a simple observation: it is „Capitalism vs. The Climate”. I think, most of actors, in the science and society sections, they do see the systemic interconnections. It is a question of each’s political position how to judge situation and possible escapes. That is what makes it hard.
Indeed, Therese, though I haven’t read Klein’s recent book yet, it seems perfectly matching this post and very worth reading (main title “This Changes Everything”). To my mind, it’s not sufficient (for scientists and everybody) to ask “fundamental questions related to global equity” etc., but we might also need to better connect with governance and economics people to understand the mechanisms behind why decisions are made, or not made, the one or other way. Barack Obama might want to do more ‘good’, but there are all kinds of (business, church, etc.) groups putting pressure on him- just like everywhere else around the world. As system scientists it would be interesting to visualize, understand, and disentangle the mechanisms behind decision making across various scales, in order to find possible leverage points and at least narrow the ‘challenge-politics’ gap. I sincerely hope the leverage points project gets funded!!
Pingback: What we’ve been reading this week – One Billion Hungry: Can We Feed the World?