Having done the Global Warming course in Toronto, I came into this course thinking climate change was the biggest, most urgent threat we face. Indeed that's why the url for this blog is "rethinkingglobalwarming"- when I made it at the start of the course I thought that nothing was more urgent than global warming. This course rebalanced my view a little in that yes, climate change is a big issue but environmental protection is just as important to consider. For example, in the post about Maltese bird shooting, the vulnerability and threatened status of birds like the European turtle dove comes mainly from overexploitation by humans through hunting, not climate change. Human activity will harm the environment more quickly than climate change will and as we see from the Planetary Boundaries framework, biosphere integrity is crucial to the other planetary boundaries and the overall stability of the Earth in its Holocene state.
In order to engage more of the public on issues regarding the environment, I think it is important to keep raising the subject and raising awareness. A lot of the time, people don't know why something they're doing is bad, or they don't know how to behave in a more environmentally friendly way. That's why informing people of what they need to change and how they can actually change it is so important. It's also crucial not too sound too pessimistic but rather frame the problem in a way that empowers people to want to change. I myself need to get more involved with citizen science programmes, campaign for indigenous rights and environmental movements, and overall adopt more environmentally friendly behaviours- this blog has helped me work out a few of the ways in which to do so.
On a personal note, I'll admit I struggled with this assignment. I was a little too nervous to press publish sometimes, or I'd spend far too long agonizing over insignificant details in the post that took up far too much time and resulted in fewer posts overall, with quite a few beginnings of posts that will probably not get published (at least not before the deadline for this assignment- these draft posts include GMO foods and how they can be useful in light of climate change; and also carbon offsetting). I guess this is because I felt a little uncomfortable putting my thoughts and work up on such a public platform. Sure, I did a blog for my year abroad (and I actually have some global warming related posts on there including Syria's climate refugees and how we need to eat less meat), but again, I only ever shared it with my close friends and family so there wasn't that pressure of knowing strangers will read it. Why am I nervous of sharing my work? Having spoken to a few people about climate change issues, it's happened a few times that I've been challenged to the point that I haven't been able to answer why something has to happen the way it has to, or I haven't been able to explain a physical process properly and thus my whole argument of why we need to change a certain behaviour etc. gets discounted and I feel frustrated that I've failed to engage someone about such an important issue . I guess I kind of missed the point of this exercise which encourages dialogue with the other geographers to learn, as had I been a little more timely with posts, I could have gotten more out of it. I'd love to continue an environmental awareness blog in the future, as I do think it can be a very engaging way of raising climate change and environmental issues- I just need to be more confident that I'm writing something worthy of being published and realise it's all about opening discussion rather than aiming for the perfect post!
Wednesday, 11 January 2017
Wednesday, 4 January 2017
Positive framing is the key
How we frame environmental problems and climate change is really important. What is a frame? Well, a hospital frame for example would include doctors, nurses, patients, acts of operating and getting better. All of our knowledge makes use of frames, and these frames are often connected with the emotional parts of the brain. Political ideologies are also characterized by frames; with repetition of a certain type of language and imagery serving to strengthen particular messages. The problem with environmentalism is that there hasn't yet been an effective framing system developed yet- people simply don't have the system of frames in place to make sense of the environmental facts that they are bombarded with while conservative climate skeptics and deniers have developed much more effective framing systems for their own environmental messages. As such environmentalists need to construct messages that build new framing systems as well as activate these new frames.
How to develop more effective environmental frames:
- don't repeat incorrect frames and messages from for example conservatives as this simply activates the wrong frames and messages in peoples' brains,
- tell stories that rouse emotions; don't simply give numbers and facts as their overall significance might not be understood,
- address everyday concerns,
- use words people can understand- i.e. don't use technical jargon,
- visuals are really important for engaging people. The image below is quite striking in how it tells the story of the turtle simply and visually, rousing our emotions that the poor turtle might be eating a plastic bag instead of a jellyfish. It activates a frame in our minds of how we can protect the turtle, similar to how we wouldn't want harm to come to our pets.
 |
| Source |
Sunday, 18 December 2016
The Great Maltese Bird Shoot
I went to the TV wildlife presenter Chris Packham's "iConserve Plus: A Brief Tour of my Phone Diary" talk recently. Going through the photos from 2016 on his phone, Chris told many amusing personal stories, and highlighted key conservation issues and debates. Having been born on Malta, the story that struck me most was the traditional bird shooting and trapping that takes place on this tiny island nation. Malta's traditional hunting season is in Spring when a number of protected bird species fly into Europe from Africa via Malta on their crucial migration route; a secondary shooting season takes place in Autumn when the birds fly back. Every year, 108,000 birds are killed illegally, placing Malta top on the list of highest concentration of birds killed per square kilometre in the Mediterranean (overall numbers are higher if you consider legal shooting as well!).
Birds from hundreds of species are shot in Malta, including swifts, Montague's harriers, kestrels, quails and the European turtle dove. The European turtle dove is particularly vulnerable: populations have fallen by up to nearly 50% in the last 16 years leading it to be put on the IUCN Red List of species at risk of extinction. The Maltese government has introduced quotas for number of turtle doves allowed to be shot in one season (5000 birds each Spring; 7000 birds each Autumn), but Birdlife Malta questions whether these quotas can be accurately stuck to, and many more turtle doves are shot illegally outside of these quotas.
The Federation for Hunting and Conservation Malta (FKNK), the Maltese hunter's association essentially, regard bird shooting as "Maltese indigenous socio-cultural way-of-life", and that to ban the hunting and capturing tradition "kills or rather murders an integral part of that individual". Indeed, reading some of FKNK reports, I find it striking how emotive the language is, and while I understand that hunting and trapping is steeped in Maltese tradition and deep-rooted personal identity, it's worrying how much this passion obscures willingness to accept the scale of problems associated with the practice. Shooting may have been acceptable in the past when the birds were a source of food, but nowadays it's simply all about the fun of the hunt. Regarding trapping of birds, the FKNK explain that birds are trapped for captivity; live-decoys (presumably to enable further hunting and trapping?), for "their song" (surely it's nicer to hear birds singing outside than cooped up in a cage?!) and for "captive breeding enthusiasts" (doesn't sound very official). Are any of these reasons really good enough for continued hunting and trapping of the wild migratory birds?
It's not just hunting and trapping either: in discussing the 2011 Trees and Woodlands Protection Regulations, the FKNK emphasizes how its members have transformed the arid Maltese "semi-desert" into "miniature oases" through the planting of indigenous trees such as olive and Aleppo pine as well as non-native Acacia and Eucalyptus. According to the FKNK, the Maltese and Gozitan countryside now "looks a great deal better than it did a generation ago", and they are offended that the Trees and Woodlands Protection Regulations will result in these trees being cut down again. But this is it, the Regulations aim to preserve Maltese woodland communities and particularly endangered, threatened or endemic flora and fauna species. The regulations specifically mark Acacia and Eucalyptus in the "invasive, alien or environmentally-incompatible species" category as they are not compatible with these aims of protection. The FKNK report doesn't seem to understand this however, as it goes on about, for example, how Accia Karroo (the FKNK made a mistake there as it should be Accia karroo- you should only ever capitalise the genus, not the species!) is "one of the most beautiful and useful trees", and gives information about the tree that is irrelevant to the Maltese context. The tree may be beautiful, but it is an invasive species, thus impacts the stability and biodiversity of the native ecosystem, and can reduce ecosystem service delivery. The FKNK has the word "conservation" in their official name but that seems to just be a formality to make them seem more eco-concerned than they are- they seem quite ignorant on ecology and hunting impacts.
Birdlife Malta is active in opposing the Spring and Autumn shoots. The organization is critical of the Maltese government's lack of action in safeguarding migratory birds, pressures the Maltese government to suspend the hunting season to allow safe passage for migratory birds; reports illegal hunting to the police and Wild Birds Regulation Unit (WBRU); watches over key hunting areas even when hunters react violently; tends to injured birds; and educates the public through environmental education programmes and training of environmental youth leaders who engage children and the public with wildlife.
Overall, I've always supported communities keeping up old traditions and being proud of their heritage, but this hunting and trapping seems to be nothing more than an outdated practice at odds with the bigger picture of conservation. The Maltese government really needs greater political will to crack down on illegal shooting and trapping, and make sure those legal shooting quotas are strictly adhered to; a running theme in Packham's "Malta- Massacre on Migration" mini-documentary seems to be weak Maltese police enforcement. Unfortunately, a referendum in 2015 that proposed banning spring shooting of birds before they have the chance to breed saw the hunters win by a tiny margin of just 2,200 votes, or 50.44% to 49.56%. It seems the hunters still have quite a lot of political influence, but Birdlife Malta is doing a great job pressuring the government to do more, as well as educating and engaging the Maltese public about the issue. I am sure that with time and education, and maybe even some international pressure from the EU, this harmful bird shooting practice will decline.
Lastly, this whole case study reminded me that hunting is one of the more dangerous of human activities for threatened species:
Birds from hundreds of species are shot in Malta, including swifts, Montague's harriers, kestrels, quails and the European turtle dove. The European turtle dove is particularly vulnerable: populations have fallen by up to nearly 50% in the last 16 years leading it to be put on the IUCN Red List of species at risk of extinction. The Maltese government has introduced quotas for number of turtle doves allowed to be shot in one season (5000 birds each Spring; 7000 birds each Autumn), but Birdlife Malta questions whether these quotas can be accurately stuck to, and many more turtle doves are shot illegally outside of these quotas.
 |
| European turtle dove. Source. |
The Federation for Hunting and Conservation Malta (FKNK), the Maltese hunter's association essentially, regard bird shooting as "Maltese indigenous socio-cultural way-of-life", and that to ban the hunting and capturing tradition "kills or rather murders an integral part of that individual". Indeed, reading some of FKNK reports, I find it striking how emotive the language is, and while I understand that hunting and trapping is steeped in Maltese tradition and deep-rooted personal identity, it's worrying how much this passion obscures willingness to accept the scale of problems associated with the practice. Shooting may have been acceptable in the past when the birds were a source of food, but nowadays it's simply all about the fun of the hunt. Regarding trapping of birds, the FKNK explain that birds are trapped for captivity; live-decoys (presumably to enable further hunting and trapping?), for "their song" (surely it's nicer to hear birds singing outside than cooped up in a cage?!) and for "captive breeding enthusiasts" (doesn't sound very official). Are any of these reasons really good enough for continued hunting and trapping of the wild migratory birds?
It's not just hunting and trapping either: in discussing the 2011 Trees and Woodlands Protection Regulations, the FKNK emphasizes how its members have transformed the arid Maltese "semi-desert" into "miniature oases" through the planting of indigenous trees such as olive and Aleppo pine as well as non-native Acacia and Eucalyptus. According to the FKNK, the Maltese and Gozitan countryside now "looks a great deal better than it did a generation ago", and they are offended that the Trees and Woodlands Protection Regulations will result in these trees being cut down again. But this is it, the Regulations aim to preserve Maltese woodland communities and particularly endangered, threatened or endemic flora and fauna species. The regulations specifically mark Acacia and Eucalyptus in the "invasive, alien or environmentally-incompatible species" category as they are not compatible with these aims of protection. The FKNK report doesn't seem to understand this however, as it goes on about, for example, how Accia Karroo (the FKNK made a mistake there as it should be Accia karroo- you should only ever capitalise the genus, not the species!) is "one of the most beautiful and useful trees", and gives information about the tree that is irrelevant to the Maltese context. The tree may be beautiful, but it is an invasive species, thus impacts the stability and biodiversity of the native ecosystem, and can reduce ecosystem service delivery. The FKNK has the word "conservation" in their official name but that seems to just be a formality to make them seem more eco-concerned than they are- they seem quite ignorant on ecology and hunting impacts.
 |
| On the left, non-native Acacia saligna; on the right, native Pinus halepensis (Aleppo pine) |
Birdlife Malta is active in opposing the Spring and Autumn shoots. The organization is critical of the Maltese government's lack of action in safeguarding migratory birds, pressures the Maltese government to suspend the hunting season to allow safe passage for migratory birds; reports illegal hunting to the police and Wild Birds Regulation Unit (WBRU); watches over key hunting areas even when hunters react violently; tends to injured birds; and educates the public through environmental education programmes and training of environmental youth leaders who engage children and the public with wildlife.
Overall, I've always supported communities keeping up old traditions and being proud of their heritage, but this hunting and trapping seems to be nothing more than an outdated practice at odds with the bigger picture of conservation. The Maltese government really needs greater political will to crack down on illegal shooting and trapping, and make sure those legal shooting quotas are strictly adhered to; a running theme in Packham's "Malta- Massacre on Migration" mini-documentary seems to be weak Maltese police enforcement. Unfortunately, a referendum in 2015 that proposed banning spring shooting of birds before they have the chance to breed saw the hunters win by a tiny margin of just 2,200 votes, or 50.44% to 49.56%. It seems the hunters still have quite a lot of political influence, but Birdlife Malta is doing a great job pressuring the government to do more, as well as educating and engaging the Maltese public about the issue. I am sure that with time and education, and maybe even some international pressure from the EU, this harmful bird shooting practice will decline.
Lastly, this whole case study reminded me that hunting is one of the more dangerous of human activities for threatened species:
 |
| The big killers of threatened and near-threatened species. Source |
Friday, 9 December 2016
Citizen science- everyone can be a scientist!
What is citizen science?
How useful is citizen science really?
Citizen science is useful in that it can cover large temporal and spatial extents- in other words, data is collected over a much wider area and can be taken over much longer time periods. This is often crucial for conservation biogeography. Citizen science is flexible and can be tailored to each individual project, with some projects involving general members of the public and others involving specially trained volunteers that . Even children can get involved, with specifically designed projects like Project Noah allowing easy uploading of photos, geographic location and date to build a database of biodiversity of flora and fauna. Especially with children, these kinds of projects can build a sense of community with the natural and social world, a sense of self-importance and understanding that research is not just for scientists. It's similar for adults too, in that citizen science and active participation promotes citizen engagement with nature and with science.
Most practically, citizen science provides cheap source of alternative labour for collecting data considering how expensive it can be to hire scientists, graduate students and field technicians. The increasing use of the internet and phone apps has only increased the ease and accessibility for volunteers to collect data, and for projects to promote themselves.
Citizen science is the collection of scientific data out in the field by members of the public to be used in larger scientific studies. A citizen scientist is any volunteer who collects such field data. Citizen scientists now participate in projects related to many areas including climate change, invasive species, ecological restoration and conservation, population ecology and water quality monitoring.
How useful is citizen science really?
Citizen science is useful in that it can cover large temporal and spatial extents- in other words, data is collected over a much wider area and can be taken over much longer time periods. This is often crucial for conservation biogeography. Citizen science is flexible and can be tailored to each individual project, with some projects involving general members of the public and others involving specially trained volunteers that . Even children can get involved, with specifically designed projects like Project Noah allowing easy uploading of photos, geographic location and date to build a database of biodiversity of flora and fauna. Especially with children, these kinds of projects can build a sense of community with the natural and social world, a sense of self-importance and understanding that research is not just for scientists. It's similar for adults too, in that citizen science and active participation promotes citizen engagement with nature and with science.
Most practically, citizen science provides cheap source of alternative labour for collecting data considering how expensive it can be to hire scientists, graduate students and field technicians. The increasing use of the internet and phone apps has only increased the ease and accessibility for volunteers to collect data, and for projects to promote themselves.
Is citizen science accurate/reliable?
There are some limitations. In asking volunteers to identify different species for example, volunteers may can often misidentify the species, thus affecting results. But it has been argued that with proper training, simple enough data collection methods and good project design, volunteer data can be reliable. Volunteer data can be validated for example by verifying every record, or calculating error margins, meaning data can be trusted.
How can citizen science projects engage more people to become citizen scientists?
There are some limitations. In asking volunteers to identify different species for example, volunteers may can often misidentify the species, thus affecting results. But it has been argued that with proper training, simple enough data collection methods and good project design, volunteer data can be reliable. Volunteer data can be validated for example by verifying every record, or calculating error margins, meaning data can be trusted.
How can citizen science projects engage more people to become citizen scientists?
- each project needs to have a clear hypothesis so that citizens know that the project is researching something worthwhile
- volunteers should get feedback on their contribution so they know they have invested their time well by participating
- develop easy participation methods, simple data collection instructions and guides as well as easy ways of sharing or submitting the data
- incorporate citizen science into education from an early age to get children growing up with the idea that the environment is important and that they can positively contribute to scientific inquiries and conservation efforts
- emphasize that citizen science projects are not just useful for conservation and scientific studies, but they are fun!
Some citizen science projects you can get involved in here in the UK:
- Big Garden Birdwatch- next official birdwatch is coming up 28th-30th January 2017; find a green space (your garden or a local park) and count the the maximum number of bird species you see at any one time! Go online to find out how to tell the birds apart or download the free starter pack from the RSPB. Over half a million people in the UK took part in the Big Garden Birdwatch in 2016; you can see the results here!
- UK Ladybird Survey- record your ladybird sightings online or through the iPhone and Android phone apps
- Observeatree- you an report any unusual pests, diseases or symptoms on trees to the Forestry Commission through Tree Alert online form. Specialist volunteers are also trained annually by Forest Research and Fera scientists to carry out site surveys and manage Tree Alert forms. While all 200 of the specialist Observeatree volunteer spots are filled for 2017, keep an eye out on these kinds of specialist volunteer roles that allow deeper involvement in projects and learning from experts in the field - sounds pretty cool to me!
Of course there are many more citizen science projects than these, meaning no matter what animals or plants or aspects of the environment you're interested in, there's sure to be some way to help out with your data collection. Just do a quick Google search and get involved!
Friday, 18 November 2016
Lessons from Standing Rock
Standing Rock Indian Reservation has been in the news recently for the protests by the Sioux Native Americans against the nearly completed Dakota Access Pipeline. The pipeline will transport crude oil from a North Dakota oil field to a refinery in Illinois near Chicago but protesters, who are trying to halt construction, say the pipeline would endanger sacred native lands and the supply of drinking water from the Missouri River. Peaceful protest techniques such as setting up camps, prayer circles, and blocking roads have been met by a militarized police force using tear gas, pepper spray, arresting of Native protesters and generally using "unnecessary force". Interestingly for this case, are the 1.4 million people "checking in" to Standing Rock on Facebook. The purpose of this "checking in", from people all over the world, is supposedly to confuse the police about the number and identity of the protesters actually on site. Despite the police denying the use of social media to track protester movement, it is interesting that so many people, who had probably never heard of the protests before it started trending on Facebook (me included), have taken interest in "standing with Standing Rock" online. With environmental activists also resisting the pipeline because it will help to increase fossil fuel emissions, I want to look at whether granting and respecting indigenous land rights is one way forward in helping protect the environment, and how non-Native citizens can help.
Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), is the knowledge, practices and institutions developed and maintained by indigenous and local peoples in relation to the biophysical environments in which they live. This knowledge varies between different indigenous and local groups, reflecting differences in values, worldviews, and environmental ethics, but it has often been passed down through many generations to help secure livelihoods within dynamic ecosystems. Since the 1980s, TEK has garnered growing interest among Western scientists and policy makers for how it can be used alongside dominant Western science to sustainably manage land and resources, as well as building long-term resilience of socio-ecological systems. This is because the experiential data held by TEK holders can allow greater understanding of local environments, ecosystem services, and adaptations made in response to changing environments and pressures such as logging and overfishing. An example of TEK importance:
Of course TEK holders may sometimes have scientifically incorrect understandings of their local environments, but TEK still needs to be preserved in order to increase adaptation options for the future. One way of preserving the ever-declining TEK is supporting indigenous land rights. Local and indigenous people often have the environment's health in their best interest, especially if they rely on the ecosystem for their livelihoods; thus they can be very good environmental stewards. Indeed, when indigenous land rights are recognized, evidence suggests that the rate of deforestation goes down, which means the forests continue locking in carbon. The Peruvian indigenous group, the Asheninka, are an example of a community fighting to gain formal land tenures in order to have more autonomy and legal recognition; this would help the Asheninka protect the forest from trespassing of illegal loggers, as well as bring in new education opportunities that would help prepare community members for future defending of the land, forest, its resources, and carrying on the traditional Asheninka way of life.
I've only scratched the surface of this topic here, but I'm trying to get across that TEK and indigenous land rights are two really important ways of helping protect the environment and mitigating climate change. Yet there is so much resistance, with 2015 being the worst year on record for killings of land and environment defenders, with a disproportionate 40% of the 185 total killed coming from indigenous groups. We need scientists, policy makers, markets and indigenous/local peoples to all work together more fully and respectfully to sustainably manage the Earth's resources. On an individual level, Máxima Acuña, an indigenous woman from Peru who is protesting against the opening of a new gold mine on Native land, suggests that citizens in the Western countries need "to just be really alert and become aware of...the abuse, the aggression, the violation of [our] rights.”. So keep talking about indigenous land rights, listen to what indigenous people have to say, pressure the big corporations to become more responsible, support indigenous land claims, and donate money and supplies (more specific Standing Rock support in this article). Hopefully, the high coverage of Standing Rock has increased the visibility of indigenous struggles around the world and increased momentum for defense from Native and non-Native citizens alike.
 |
| Protesters at Standing Rock. Source: Huffington Post |
Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), is the knowledge, practices and institutions developed and maintained by indigenous and local peoples in relation to the biophysical environments in which they live. This knowledge varies between different indigenous and local groups, reflecting differences in values, worldviews, and environmental ethics, but it has often been passed down through many generations to help secure livelihoods within dynamic ecosystems. Since the 1980s, TEK has garnered growing interest among Western scientists and policy makers for how it can be used alongside dominant Western science to sustainably manage land and resources, as well as building long-term resilience of socio-ecological systems. This is because the experiential data held by TEK holders can allow greater understanding of local environments, ecosystem services, and adaptations made in response to changing environments and pressures such as logging and overfishing. An example of TEK importance:
- slash and burn agriculture, or swidden, is a form of agriculture where crops are cultivated in land cleared by fire, followed by a longer fallow period where vegetation regrows and soil fertility is naturally replenished (see diagram below). Swidden has long been considered by colonial and Western science as a wasteful, primitive type of agriculture characterised by unplanned deforestation and lack of foresight. Countries like the Philippines, under the guise of conservation, have gone as far as criminalizing and pressuring swiddeners to adopt more intensive agricultural methods. In the Indonesian transmigrant projects, where citizens from overcrowded islands were moved to less populated islands and upland areas, the new migrants were encouraged by the government to practice settled agriculture. However, the poor upland soils were unsuitable for continuous cultivation of crops, leading many of the swiddeners to teach the transmigrants how to practice swidden agriculture. Indeed, swidden agriculture is not as destructive to the environment as previously thought, as it can actually be important for maintaining biodiversity through its creation of a mosaic of varied habitats that support many different species. The example of swidden shows that Western science and tradition is not always the most sustainable in local contexts.
 |
| System diagram for slash and burn agriculture. Source: Pennsylvania State University |
Of course TEK holders may sometimes have scientifically incorrect understandings of their local environments, but TEK still needs to be preserved in order to increase adaptation options for the future. One way of preserving the ever-declining TEK is supporting indigenous land rights. Local and indigenous people often have the environment's health in their best interest, especially if they rely on the ecosystem for their livelihoods; thus they can be very good environmental stewards. Indeed, when indigenous land rights are recognized, evidence suggests that the rate of deforestation goes down, which means the forests continue locking in carbon. The Peruvian indigenous group, the Asheninka, are an example of a community fighting to gain formal land tenures in order to have more autonomy and legal recognition; this would help the Asheninka protect the forest from trespassing of illegal loggers, as well as bring in new education opportunities that would help prepare community members for future defending of the land, forest, its resources, and carrying on the traditional Asheninka way of life.
I've only scratched the surface of this topic here, but I'm trying to get across that TEK and indigenous land rights are two really important ways of helping protect the environment and mitigating climate change. Yet there is so much resistance, with 2015 being the worst year on record for killings of land and environment defenders, with a disproportionate 40% of the 185 total killed coming from indigenous groups. We need scientists, policy makers, markets and indigenous/local peoples to all work together more fully and respectfully to sustainably manage the Earth's resources. On an individual level, Máxima Acuña, an indigenous woman from Peru who is protesting against the opening of a new gold mine on Native land, suggests that citizens in the Western countries need "to just be really alert and become aware of...the abuse, the aggression, the violation of [our] rights.”. So keep talking about indigenous land rights, listen to what indigenous people have to say, pressure the big corporations to become more responsible, support indigenous land claims, and donate money and supplies (more specific Standing Rock support in this article). Hopefully, the high coverage of Standing Rock has increased the visibility of indigenous struggles around the world and increased momentum for defense from Native and non-Native citizens alike.
Thursday, 3 November 2016
Watch Leo DiCaprio's "Before the Flood" climate change documentary
Just found out today that until November 6th, you can watch Leonardo DiCaprio's climate change documentary "Before the Flood" for free on the National Geographic (link here).
Summary: the documentary provides a good overview of the climate change threat, with DiCaprio (the UN's Messenger of Peace on Climate Change- who knew?) visiting and exploring the destructive Canadian tar sands; Beijing's industrial pollution; Indonesian forests cut down for palm oil production; agricultural disasters in India because of changed precipitation patterns; coastal flooding in Florida; and ice retreat in Greenland and the Arctic. He talks to locals; experts; Pope Francis; as well as John Kerry and Barack Obama when touching upon a key question of the role of America and other governments in climate change mitigation.
Favourite moment: Sunita Narain from the Centre for Science and Environment in Delhi making DiCaprio uncomfortable about America's high consumption habits, then shaking her head at his reply that despite the evidence he doesn't think Americans will change lifestyles, and finally ending with Narain's bombshell "What is the US doing which the rest of the world can learn from? You're a fossil-addicted country, but if you are seriously disengaging, it's something for us to learn from. It'll be leadership that we can all hold up to our governments and say listen if the US can do it, and the US is doing it... we can do it as well."
Resonating message: "think about the shame that each of us will carry when our children and grandchildren look back and realise that we had the means of stopping this devastation but simply lacked the political will to do so". While this speech by DiCaprio was specifically directed to the leaders of the world gathered at the UN, we all have a role in finding this will and actually acting to help climate change mitigation and stop environmental degradation.
Summary: the documentary provides a good overview of the climate change threat, with DiCaprio (the UN's Messenger of Peace on Climate Change- who knew?) visiting and exploring the destructive Canadian tar sands; Beijing's industrial pollution; Indonesian forests cut down for palm oil production; agricultural disasters in India because of changed precipitation patterns; coastal flooding in Florida; and ice retreat in Greenland and the Arctic. He talks to locals; experts; Pope Francis; as well as John Kerry and Barack Obama when touching upon a key question of the role of America and other governments in climate change mitigation.
 |
| Beautiful Canadian tar sands, eh? |
Favourite moment: Sunita Narain from the Centre for Science and Environment in Delhi making DiCaprio uncomfortable about America's high consumption habits, then shaking her head at his reply that despite the evidence he doesn't think Americans will change lifestyles, and finally ending with Narain's bombshell "What is the US doing which the rest of the world can learn from? You're a fossil-addicted country, but if you are seriously disengaging, it's something for us to learn from. It'll be leadership that we can all hold up to our governments and say listen if the US can do it, and the US is doing it... we can do it as well."
 |
| Sunita Narain is unimpressed with Leo. |
Resonating message: "think about the shame that each of us will carry when our children and grandchildren look back and realise that we had the means of stopping this devastation but simply lacked the political will to do so". While this speech by DiCaprio was specifically directed to the leaders of the world gathered at the UN, we all have a role in finding this will and actually acting to help climate change mitigation and stop environmental degradation.
 |
| Leo and Obama discussing climate change. |
Final thoughts: As climate change becomes more and more politicised, and more parties join the
debate, celebrities emerge as increasingly important non-state actors in
influencing climate change discourse and action. Celebrities can be seen as
newly authorized speakers who engage new sections of the public through making
climate change more relatable and easier to understand (than scientists, governments and businesses) as well as making
climate change more interactive through new media (e.g. social media). DiCaprio
in particular, is a relatively well-liked celebrity and thus arguably very influential.
Of course, DiCaprio has faced accusations of hypocrisy, with suggestions that he undermines his pro-environment message by continuing to live a carbon-intense lifestyle himself as well as issues surrounding his credibility to talk on the subject. The cynics among us may also argue that DiCaprio's activism in environment and climate change is simply a part of his brand that the public, as consumers, buy into; or perhaps celebrity involvement simply mobilises action as a temporary fad that then fades when the celebrity becomes less popular and loses influence. Celebrity involvement may also simply be a form of entertainment that distracts from the fundamental issues of political and scientific communication on climate change.
Personally however, I think DiCaprio presents a new opportunity for spreading the climate change message. After DiCaprio's Oscar acceptance speech where he touched upon climate change, tweets and Google searches about the topic soared, with the authors of one study concluding that the "DiCaprio Effect" had engaged so many people about climate change that it rivalled traditional top-down strategies for spreading the message. With the influence of DiCaprio obvious, I think he's doing well in engaging the public and raising awareness; my only niggles would include hypocrisy and leading more by example to encourage individual behavioural change.
Sunday, 16 October 2016
Welcome to my Blog!
Hello and welcome to my blog! In this blog, I aim to look at how we can engage the general public to care more about the environment and adopt more environmentally friendly practices in light of the global warming and environmental degradation threat. Let's start with a little background to the topic...
During the Holocene (the geological epoch that started 11,500 years ago with the retreat of the glaciers), human activity grew to become a principle mechanism of change in the natural world on a local scale through for example altering soils; burning; or introduction of new species. Now, however, scientists suggest we have entered the Anthropocene- a new epoch where human activity has grown to such a level that it has significant global effect on the Earth's geophysical processes and ecosystems. There is debate as to when exactly we entered the Anthropocene (suggestions include in 1800 with the onset of Industrialization; the detonation of the first nuclear bomb in 1945; the beginning of the Great Acceleration post-1950; as well as back in the early Holocene when humans caused mass deforestation with suggested global, not just local, impacts) but the point is that the explosion in human population and resource exploitation means that humans now have taken on a central role in the functioning of the Earth's natural systems. More specifically, 97% of climate scientists agree that the Earth is undergoing human-induced global warming due to an increase in greenhouse gases (GHGs- mainly through burning of fossil fuels); as well as pollution; environmental damage; and deforestation.
Most of us are aware at least a little of the dangers of global warming: rising temperatures; melting ice caps; rising sea levels; changes in precipitation, soil moisture, snowcover and sea ice; increases in extreme weather; increases in water stress, heat stress and food insecurity; species extinction; disease etc. yet despite all the scientific evidence and understanding, not enough is being actually done by governments, corporations and the public to reduce GHGs emissions and help the environment. As such, this blog aims to explore how we can get the public to engage more positively with the environment, "rethink" behaviours and relationships to the environment and whether we need to "rethink" how we frame global warming as a whole in order to get people to act.
My interest in this particular subject stems from my Year Abroad in Toronto, Canada where I took a module called "Global Warming". The sense of urgency in the module that global warming was the biggest threat that humanity faces and that we must all do much more than we are doing currently really sparked my interest in the psychology of global warming; the value-action gap, self-evaluation and changing of my own lifestyle choices; and how perhaps I, through framing and speaking about the environment in certain ways can encourage family and friends to behave in more environmentally friendly ways.
A useful framework to think about throughout my blog is the Planetary Boundaries approach. The Planetary Boundaries approach aims to develop a safe space within boundaries where societies can continue to develop but do not compromise the functioning and resilience of the Earth system. As shown in the image below, we need to stay within the green "safe" spaces in all 9 key areas, yet we have already, for example, exceeded the zone of uncertainty in Biosphere Integrity and Biogeochemical Flows. How can we engage the public in order to perhaps bring and keep these 9 variables within the safe(r) boundaries?
Comments are welcome!
During the Holocene (the geological epoch that started 11,500 years ago with the retreat of the glaciers), human activity grew to become a principle mechanism of change in the natural world on a local scale through for example altering soils; burning; or introduction of new species. Now, however, scientists suggest we have entered the Anthropocene- a new epoch where human activity has grown to such a level that it has significant global effect on the Earth's geophysical processes and ecosystems. There is debate as to when exactly we entered the Anthropocene (suggestions include in 1800 with the onset of Industrialization; the detonation of the first nuclear bomb in 1945; the beginning of the Great Acceleration post-1950; as well as back in the early Holocene when humans caused mass deforestation with suggested global, not just local, impacts) but the point is that the explosion in human population and resource exploitation means that humans now have taken on a central role in the functioning of the Earth's natural systems. More specifically, 97% of climate scientists agree that the Earth is undergoing human-induced global warming due to an increase in greenhouse gases (GHGs- mainly through burning of fossil fuels); as well as pollution; environmental damage; and deforestation.
Most of us are aware at least a little of the dangers of global warming: rising temperatures; melting ice caps; rising sea levels; changes in precipitation, soil moisture, snowcover and sea ice; increases in extreme weather; increases in water stress, heat stress and food insecurity; species extinction; disease etc. yet despite all the scientific evidence and understanding, not enough is being actually done by governments, corporations and the public to reduce GHGs emissions and help the environment. As such, this blog aims to explore how we can get the public to engage more positively with the environment, "rethink" behaviours and relationships to the environment and whether we need to "rethink" how we frame global warming as a whole in order to get people to act.
My interest in this particular subject stems from my Year Abroad in Toronto, Canada where I took a module called "Global Warming". The sense of urgency in the module that global warming was the biggest threat that humanity faces and that we must all do much more than we are doing currently really sparked my interest in the psychology of global warming; the value-action gap, self-evaluation and changing of my own lifestyle choices; and how perhaps I, through framing and speaking about the environment in certain ways can encourage family and friends to behave in more environmentally friendly ways.
A useful framework to think about throughout my blog is the Planetary Boundaries approach. The Planetary Boundaries approach aims to develop a safe space within boundaries where societies can continue to develop but do not compromise the functioning and resilience of the Earth system. As shown in the image below, we need to stay within the green "safe" spaces in all 9 key areas, yet we have already, for example, exceeded the zone of uncertainty in Biosphere Integrity and Biogeochemical Flows. How can we engage the public in order to perhaps bring and keep these 9 variables within the safe(r) boundaries?
 |
| Source: Steffen et al., 2015 |
Comments are welcome!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)