This is the 2014 UN Climate Summit's (awesome) promotional video.
These commitments include adopting absolute greenhouse gas reduction targets in cities, cutting natural forest loss in half by 2020, declarations to invest in renewable energy, among many others. You can read all about these commitments on their website.
Leonardo DiCaprio gave a speech at the event to rally policy makers.
The message I'm getting from the Summit is that we are past the point of change at the individual level having a significant impact on GHG emissions. We are in a place where only wide-scale, institutional policy change can neutralize the effect we have had on our environment. Yes, their promotional video is a call to action, but it is a little unclear who exactly needs to act.
 |
| Retrieved from here. |
Stephen Pacala and Robert Socolow discuss their solution to climate change - stabilization wedges that show how society can stabilize GHG emissions over the next 50 years (Wheeler, 173). Each wedge has a recommendation on how to stabilize that topic, and most of them suggest benchmarks that a governmental agency needs to set in place for automotive and other mechanical industries.
Roseland points out that most of the GHG emissions come from our manufacturing industries (Roseland, 230). The graph below shows the changes in each GHG since the Industrial revolution. To me, this is reinforcing the idea that big manufacturing causes the bulk of GHG and therefore big changes must happen at a policy level to get the manufacturing companies to change their big ways.
 |
| Taken from Roseland, 231. |
Now, I firmly believe that individuals need to do their part to reduce their carbon footprint. But just to play devil's advocate... If everything is pointing towards policy-makers being the deciding factor in our ability to reduce climate change, why should individuals even try?
The People's Climate March recently took place in NYC where thousands of individuals came together to protest and raise awareness for climate change. This was one of the largest gathering of individuals on this topic to date. Jon Stewart covers the march on The Daily Show here. He wonders why people still need to raise awareness for a commonly accepted phenomenon, then shows clips from The United States House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology where U.S. representatives essentially try to debunk climate change.
Suddenly, it becomes very clear why individuals matter in policy change. If our decision-makers still don't believe climate change even exists, then the public voice and vote is essential in finding leaders that do believe and will act.
What do you guys think? Can individuals actually make a difference in stopping the increase of GHG emissions, whether through personal behaviors or advocacy? Or does it need to come from policy makers?
Just to end on a positive note, here is Jill Sobule singing global warming's theme song.
Great post! I liked that you brought in pop culture's responses to CC with Leo and Jon Stewart as well. Maybe public responses to climate change hinge on having faces to the movement, popular leaders rather than just repeating scientific facts. As we learned in community based social marketing, just inundating people with knowledge doesn't seem to influence behavior much. As far as the question you posed regarding if individuals really have a significant part to play at this point..I would think that the members of the House of Reps might change their wildly outdated opinions if their voters were unified in their support of reducing climate change.
ReplyDeleteEven though we say that climate change is an publicly accepted phenomenon (which it should be), it's not. I was at a restaurant recently where the bartender and a patron were discussing the Climate March and how they felt it was a joke; and this conversation was taking place in the liberal oasis that is Bloomington. There's still a lot of work to do to get a lot of the (willfully) ignorant people up to speed. Whether that is going to be done (or should be done) through the continuation of large-scale demonstrations like the Climate March or smaller-scale education initiatives, I'm not sure.
ReplyDeleteI know how you feel. A couple of years ago I was in a class called Ecology as Religion, which was a very spiritual perspective of ecology and full of religion studies students, you get the idea. Even in that class someone asked the group if we thought climate change was really as serious as everyone makes it out to be. It is pretty surprising (and scary) how many people choose to ignore or rationalize the issue.
DeleteI completely agree, Brad. Aside from my SPEA friends, most of my family and friends (from high school, from undergrad, from jobs I've had) are blissfully unaware of these issues. They simply go about their daily lives and really do not concern themselves with the issue. At all. And, I'm not exaggerating. This is what I mean when I say we are in a SPEA bubble & this is why I personally believe change needs to happen at a both a regulatory level and at a grass-roots level - ie getting those other people involved somehow.
DeleteI should add too...coming from a science background & having worked in science related jobs - some of these friends are educated in science and believe climate change is a problem. It's just not of a personal concern to them.
DeleteClimate change is such a depressing topic; it's such a complex and difficult problem that it seems like nothing we do on an individual level will have any impact. However, it's not only policy that will affect climate change, but also cultural shifts away from our CO2 consuming culture, and the cultural shift has to start somewhere! I agree with Jackie that putting pressure on our representatives is a good way to make individual actions have a greater impact. I think chapter 13 of Roseland even points out that another global problem, the hole in the ozone was only solved after smaller scale initiatives at the community level spurred national and international actions.
ReplyDeleteI think individuals certainly have the capability to make a difference, however I don't think it is likely to happen quickly enough to avoid the four degree Celsius rise you mention. There are at least two hurdles the public needs to clear before we can force significant action: 1) a healthy majority need to at least believe in climate change 2) those that believe need to care enough to sacrifice for the betterment of future generations. I think the former will happen eventually, at least my faith an optimism in society in general leads me to that conclusion. I'm not as optimistic about the latter. While there is definitely research showing that emission reducing policies are not nearly as expensive as they we think (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/19/opinion/paul-krugman-could-fighting-global-warming-be-cheap-and-free.html?_r=0), that is how they are perceived. So I guess I believe both will change in the end. Unfortunately, we need action RIGHT NOW if we're going to make significant headway. Who knows how long societal change will take to occur? I think sweeping policy reforms that may be unpopular is a more plausible option than relying on the public to demand change.
ReplyDeleteI agree. All these comments seem to keep coming back to the same thing - the public needs to advocate for policy reform to create benchmarks that society as a whole cannot pass. So maybe the motivation for reducing your carbon footprint at the individual level (besides personal beliefs as a motivator) is that we are prepared for when the widespread policy reforms transform our lifestyles to reduce emissions. Just a thought.
DeleteNick - I wholeheartedly agree with everything you wrote :)
DeleteYes, Laura. Love your devil's advocate approach haha! In this case, I think individual action and policy are inextricably linked. What is a policy besides a mandate for individual actions? Your last point there rings true for me: individual actions inform policy and policy informs individual actions, so BOTH will be key to changing the world. It seems to me that policy makers are not going to make any headway until the push from voters is so strong it can't be ignored. To me, that means a bottom-up approach to solving these issues will be our best best. Progress this way may seem like it will take longer, but who knows...maybe we are just moments away from the huge swell of one of the most important public movements in history! ...I sure hope so :)
ReplyDeleteLaura,
ReplyDeleteI honestly believe it is going to be a combination of both individuals and policy makers to help begin to make more action against climate change. I believe having a stronger push from voters in this country as a whole to help stop the onset of climate change is the greatest way to help to start more action. We need both advocates to promote more awareness of ways to help reduce GHGs and the push from them to get policy makers to help develop laws and regulations at the local, state, and national level o help reduce climate change. More and more people are becoming aware of the negative effects of their behaviors each day, it's just ensuring that people will change and maintain their more environmentally friendly behaviors to aid in awareness of publicizing ways to reduce climate change.
I agree with all these comments. It is a back and forth kind of thing. Individuals have power to do things every day and to march and signal for policy shifts. But policy is really important too! Remember the Earth footprints - how just because we live in the US we have such a big footprint... that's because of policy ultimately. I think we are seeing changes, a slightly different back and forth conversation than we were having a few years ago... it's just not the RIGHT NOW that people like us want it to be. And yes, the CC rhetoric can be scary, and says we don't have time to dilly dally... but frankly we have to be realistic... there is no indication that anything is going to change as fast as it should. The back and forth will keep changing, little by little... and that is frustrating as hell... but it's all we have. We have to celebrate the "little" things like the Climate March, make them a big deal. I hope there will be a huge swell, Dana, but it seems like a steadily rising tide will be more likely.
ReplyDeleteWow the videos on people's blogs are really touching a nerve today. I'm getting all sorts of fired up about climate change and injustices on all fronts!
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I did catch the Jon Stewart clip a few weeks ago. One of the Congressmen was from Indiana. Being a native Hoosier, I was curious about what district he represented. He's from a small town near Evansville. And, guess what.
The man is a heart surgeon by trade. He HAS A SCIENCE background.
Admittedly, health science. But, still a science background. And yet, he flat out says he does not believe the climate change scientists because research on climate change allows them to publish papers.
So, like Jackie mentioned above, I very much believe one of the first steps to getting some policy initiatives passed is voting out these ridiculous representatives.
And, if you watched that Jon Stewart clip, then you know he also discussed the 3 biggest campaign donators for the IN Congressman. Guess what, they are all energy-related. So, honestly, we not only need to vote in climate change believers, we also need campaign finance reform to limit the influence of money on votes and policies.
So, now that I've ranted about politics, I will step off my pedestal and go calm down.