Reflection

Throughout this course I have been reminded of the meaning of the term "wicked problems".  Wicked problems are dilemmas in which the requirements continuously change or are in contradiction to one another, as such, there is no answer, no true or false, no right or wrong.  Indeed everything is only a question of better or worse.  During this class we have read about and discussed many of the small infinity of moving parts that make the environmental crisis what it is today, government, economy, and civil society in particular.  We have also been asked to think in terms of action.  Instead of considering environmental problems for their own sake, this class has taught us to engage with problems and evaluate solutions based on their effectiveness. 

From a personal perspective, I am very glad that I waited to take this class until my senior year. Having studied environmental science and policy throughout my college career, I have noticed that students are rarely given the opportunity to step back and take a look at the big picture, where we are forced to grapple critically, philosophically, and emotionally with the challenges we now face.  I have also been reminded of how important it is to truly understand the social, political, and economic context behind the environmental crisis, and the way in which each of the individual problems relate to each other.  Contextual knowledge and big-picture thinking are both necessary if we are to identify what we can aspire to, and hopefully how to get there. 

This class has also shaken some of my most fundamental beliefs about the environmental crisis.  First, studying environmental political history has given me a better understanding of how long to takes to effect significant, positive change; and, conversely, how quickly we can cause irreversible damage.  Being only 21 years old it seems like global environmental problems - climate change, world hunger, etc. -  have always been around, when in fact we have only recently as a species had to deal with problems of such grad scale and rapid rates of change.  I'm often shocked to think that we are still having many of the same conversations about the environment that we were having thirty years ago, but this is also a very new kind of problem requiring dramatically new ways of thinking about ourselves and the world we live in.  While I have come to understand the reasons for our inability to change quickly, this class has also been a constant reminder that the environment does not operate on the same schedule.  McKibben's 15 year prognosis is particularly haunting. 

Secondly, I have been asked to question the basic assumptions I make when trying to develop solutions for environmental problems.  The democracy assumption is probably the best example of this.  Perhaps it's a cultural thing, but a concern for democracy and fairness tend to permeate the American environmental movement.  However, this is not necessarily conducive to effective problem solving.  Maniates echoed this frequently, democratic, individualized change is unlikely to create a movement with sufficient alacrity and weight to confront the mess we've made for ourselves.  What we need instead is well organized, leveraged change, presumably led by experts and political elites.  While I have yet to fully explore what I really think about this, the idea has nonetheless made me think in new ways about political and social change. 

"Intro to Doom", "Despair 101", and other such epithets are all somewhat appropriate descriptions of our class on a day-to-day basis, but I leave invigorated.  As insoluble, heart-wrenching, and huge these challenges are, they are equally important.  It's going to be a long fight, a hard fight, and we're unlikely to see any cathartic conclusion in our lifetime.  Dig in.  Happy Holidays, I leave you with these:

 

 

I have to say that I got more out this class than I expected.  I took it because International Environmental Politics is an SIS core class, and I wanted something a bit different as I have taken economics-based classes before and have studied conflict on a number of times as well.  I have also always been a bit embarrassed about my lack of knowledge of environmental issues all the while claiming to be quite concerned with the world's growing environmental challenges.  As such, this class appeared to offer a good opportunity for me to learn exactly what I was concerned about.

This class has left me more concerned, and now, I can pinpoint some of the things that concern me the most.  For instance, I am now nearly certain that we genuinely need to dramatically alter our society and culture to address climate change and its broader effects.  Even from a strict fiscal point of view, general lifestyle choices in the U.S. are not sustainable (many people and our government face nearly insurmountable debt), but the environmental issues that we currently face cannot be overcome without seriously reevaluating and reordering our priorities and making substantial changes to how we live.  As Maniates stresses, it isn't enough to change some light bulbs or to take public transportation instead of driving; we need to collectively make a concerted effort to enact real change on a community, state, national, and international level.

There were definitely days that I left class feeling as though my hope for the future had been effectively destroyed and as if we really could not overcome the challenges that we face going forward.  However, it does give me some hope to hear the different perspectives on environmental issues outside of the way it is framed in the media.  Also, hearing about new technology and the different initiatives that are either out there already or being developed has made me feel that, while we face enormous obstacles, we can avoid disaster.   After this semester, I can say that I view climate change and the environment more broadly as the biggest issues that we presently face.  That climate change has become a politicized debate about whether or not it is even happening or, if it is happening, about who is responsible rather than a conversation about what we can and must do to fix the problem is disturbing.  With that in mind, I'm apprehensive about the future but not completely without hope.

If only some men just wanted to watch the world burn

Wouldn't it be easier if the were some clear bad guy, whose sole purpose was mayhem and destruction? Then it'd be easy, we could point at that person or entity and say, there, that's the root of our troubles and getting ride of that will make everything better. Unfortunately  we have nothing of the sort. Our biggest identifiable enemy is probably the fossil fuel industry. The issue is that they are not totally evil. We need fossil fuels to function.

If we extrapolate this, the real problem is us. There are too many of us, living too extravagantly to keep up our life style. Sure, we do great things, but so much damage can be linked back to us. We are a utilitarian species that has developed into colonies that use up the resources around it at a rate that we cannot replenish. We are that big bad enemy when it comes to earth, and our institutions stand in the way.

What I have taken away from this course is the need for a massive intellectual and societal shift. I have also been solidified in the idea that it'll take something substantial to spark this shift. Substantial could be innovative, but it could also be destructive.

The Last Post...

Like most, if not all, of my peers, my reason for taking this class was to expand my knowledge of one of the most challenging and pressing problems of our generation. Unlike our parents who had very limited access to information about this issue, our generation suffers the opposite fate. We have too much information. Everywhere we look from the toothbrush made of recycled yogurt bottles in Whole foods to the recycling bins on campus, there are daily reminders of our current crisis. My initial reaction after the first few classes was complete and utter despair. We’re screwed was something I replayed in my head over and over again. Over the course of the class, however, I can say that at the most it helped me become a bit more hopeful about the future and at the very least it encouraged me to explore the issue in depth. Listed below is what I have taken away from all of the course readings and class discussions (because we are a culture of sound bites):

1. The world is changing and we are the reason.

2. Most of the changes are not a result of the current situation but a delayed reaction to past   activities. 

3. That does not absolve us from blame or responsibility. 

4. There is no single perfect solution that will save us from imminent destruction. 

5. The answer might be a composition of different ideas. 

6. Individual action is great but things need to happen on a global scale if we ever want to seriously tackle the problem. 

7. The Earth is worth fighting for. 

While reading Paul Hawken’s “The Most Amazing Challenge”, two simple sentences stood out to me because it so perfectly described the wave of emotions that I experience every single time I think of the environmental challenge. “If you look at the science about what is happening on Earth and aren’t pessimistic, you don’t understand the date. But, if you meet the people who are working to restore this Earth and the lives of the poor, and you aren’t optimistic, you haven’t got a pulse.” 

Going Rogue

Food and Water Watch - Longmont, CO Bans Fracking in City Limits

Boulder, CO is famously one of the most liberal places in America, and is also my home.  About half-an-hour from downtown Boulder is another small, largely liberal town, Longmont, CO.  Longmont doesn't typically feature in national debates about much of anything, even the attention drawn to the town due to CO's position as a swing state this election cycle was a bit of a surprise.  This November changed things.

This November, Longmont passed Ballot Initiative 300, which made the process known as "fracking" illegal within city limits.  The measure to put the ban in the city charter no less, passed with 60 percent of the vote.  Longmont is not the first town to establish such measures, but its story is certainly remarkable.  Over the past few years, the natural gas industry has been paying more attention to similar, citizen-initiated measures, which would piecemeal eliminate the development of new fracking sites.  In Longmont , the natural gas industry invested heavily to defeat the measure - I've heard figures that range from between $300,000-$500,000 - in quantities that dwarf fundraising from grassroots advocacy groups.  

Criticism of Ballot Initiative 300 has focused on its inability to stand up to the inevitable wave of litigation from the natural gas industry, state, and federal government.  The Daily Times Call quoted Governor John D. Hickenlooper in September 2012 saying, "'There's nothing worse than being a governor in a legal battle with one of your own municipalities,' he said. 'But I don't see any alternative.'"  


It is unlikely that the initiative will be able to stand up in court; but despite its lack of long-term effectiveness, the initiative has other values.  First, the ban is a new, unprecedented example of locally based action overcoming large industrial investment.  Second, the ban has started new discussions, and rekindled existing debates over the expansion and development of fracking sites in and around residential areas.  Finally, the success of the initiative means that both industry and various levels of government will have to start taking local concerns more seriously.  

I believe Longmont's Ballot Initiative 300 is an appropriate response to an environmental issue because it uses existing leverage points to draw attention to environmental concerns, empower local communities, and demonstrate the power of grassroots organizing.  Longmont, in passing such a measure, has to some extent gone rogue - instead of waiting for state and federal regulation of fracking, the city has struck out to determine its own future.  Regardless of the long term success or failure of the initiative, Longmont's given me hope that even small, seemingly unimportant communities can make a big difference for environmental issues on the national stage.

United States-Indonesian Comprehensive Partnership

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=67613

The article outlines some positive results that have emerged from the United States-Indonesia Comprehensive Partnership. It is a long-term commitment between the two nations to address issues related to security, economy, development, the environment, and education among other many other issues. The Environment and Climate Change working group within the partnership has tasked with the job of identifying opportunities of economic growth for Indonesia while mitigating climate change. Some of the actions that they have either implemented or in the process of implementing includes a debt-for-nature swap in which the U.S. forgives a certain amount of Indonesian debt in exchange for Indonesian commitments to protect forests and reduce gas emissions from deforestation. Another program that is detailed in depth in the article is the establishment of 450,00 hectares of marine protected areas. As detailed in the article, one of the key areas of cooperation detailed in the partnership was environmental cooperation. The sustainable marine reserve park is a prime example of an effective and replicable response to an environmental challenge. The most important development that came out of the initiative was the transfer of responsibility for maintaining and monitoring the reserve from government officials to local fisherman whose livelihood were directly affected by the success of the reserve.

Environmental issues are often stalled in the international arena; the Kyoto protocol, and most recently the Copenhagen Summit in 2011—the latest international attempt in addressing leading environmental issues—did not produce significant deliverables in the global campaign against climate change. The environmental provisions in the United States-Indonesia Comprehensive Partnership, on the other hand, stand as effective forms of action.

The provisions’ success (measured by the concrete programs in place and level of current implementation) was possible for a number of reasons. First is the political willingness of Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. Yudhoyono in the 2012 Rio Summit became developing country leader that unilaterally pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 25 percent by 2025. Indonesia’s success will reduce global emissions by 7%, well ahead of the Millennium Development Goal’s requirements. Moreover, by accepting Indonesia’s role as the world’s third largest carbon emitter, Yudhoyono has effectively reversed the traditional developing country stance of blaming the west regarding environmental issues.

Second, the reason plans extended into the implementation phase was the way international environmental groups, United States agencies and donors such as Norway made this possible was by framing environmental concerns as a security concern; Along Indonesia’s coastal areas, residents derive 70% of their protein from fish. Thus, for the Indonesian government, protecting maritime resources became intertwined with the economic livelihood and security of their citizens. Moreover, protecting natural resources fell within ASEAN goals of regional integration.

Lastly, Indonesia’s growing economy makes renewable energy, green and blue markets desirable sectors for investment. Thus, it was within the Indonesia’s best interest to boost their economy by focusing on environmentally friendly sectors. 

Sports, Development, and the Environment

While browsing the projects on the recommended "World Changing" website, I was intrigued by the "Stadium/Sports facility" tab.  As a lifelong athlete, I am a huge proponent of sports of a means of social and community development.  Involving youth in sports is enormously beneficial to their personal growth and can also prevent them from getting involved in detrimental activities such as drug use, crime, etc.  From a community perspective, sports can provide a unifying effect whether through a team to root for or a place to gather.  I had, however, never considered that the construction of a stadium or other athletic facility could be an environmental project until I stumbled across this project: http://openarchitecturenetwork.org/projects/esperance

The link above provides the description for a soccer stadium/community center in Kimisagara, Rwanda.  This project is part of FIFA's larger Football for Hope campaign which broadly aims to provide health, educational, and economic opportunities for disadvantaged youth especially but to the community as whole through the context of sport.  The Kimisagara pitch is located on the the campus of a primary school, and in addition to offering a space to play soccer/football in both an organized and unorganized fashion, the space offers classes on healthcare and other issues, a library, a healthcare center, and a space for microcredit and other informal economic activities.  As such, the program has a clear social and economic development focus.
Admittedly, Football for Hope does not have a strict environmental focus, but the movement emphasizes sustainable development and constructs facilities in a manner to minimize environmental impact.  The Kimisagara stadium, for instance, was constructed largely with local materials, minimizing transportation costs (both monetary and environmental); has a rainwater collection system to provide water for the facility; has planted trees throughout the facility; and is constructed in a manner to make it so air conditioning is unnecessary. Another Football for Hope facility being constructed in Nairobi, Kenya uses power generated by wind turbines and includes a community garden.   These projects represent the type of sustainable development that allows underdeveloped countries the opportunity to develop without having the same detrimental impact that traditional development/industrialization has had.
Football for Hope, fittingly, gives me hope because it addresses a number of developmental issues including economic initiatives as well as education.  Further, it centers around sports, which I love, and is a fantastic example of corporate social responsibility.  As an aside, this type of project is the reason why I objected to the absolute anti-corporate stance of the "Story of Stuff" video that we watched in class a while back.  Large corporations such as FIFA have enormous potential and the financial resources to engage in sustainable development.  A major issue with many development projects is that they are not sustainable due to financial constraints.  Football for Hope, because it is bankrolled by FIFA, is more likely to avoid this problem.