Like much of the rest of the world, I've been frightened and angry by the scale of the fires in the Amazon rainforest, and the unwillingness of Brazil's president, Jair Bolsonaro, to react to them as a global emergency. That being said, I think it is a useful exercise for those of us on the left to consider whether there is a grain of truth in his response. Though his motivations may be money and power, I don't think he's out of order when, addressing the UN General Assembly yesterday, he accused the international backlash against him of being a form of colonialism. While I fervently disagree with Bolsonaro that nations have no responsibility to the rest of the world when it comes to managing their land and natural resources - and I don't believe that the majority of the international community is seeking to get involved out of a desire to take the Amazon's resources for themselves - it is hypocritical of many of us to express such vitriol over the deforestation of the Amazon when our own nations have over the course of centuries ransacked and all but erased the natural resources closer to home. Stepping back, I can see shades of the 'White Savior' complex. However, that should not stop the international community from using diplomatic and economic tools to ensure a vital global resource is protected.
All of this had been on my mind when up popped a Guardian article by George Monbiot. I'm currently (very slowly) reading his book Feral, and I'm sure I'll publish a review of that when I'm done, but this article summarises some of its key points very well, and with reference to the current headlines about the Amazon. To quote Monbiot:
"We rightly call on other nations to protect their stunning places. But where are our rainforests? I mean this both metaphorically and literally. Out of 218 nations, the UK ranks 189th for the intactness of its living systems. Having trashed our own wildlife, our excessive demand for meat, animal feed, timber, minerals and fossil fuels helps lay waste the rest of the world."
He goes on to lament the state of biodiversity in the UK's national parks and the lack of political action on matters of conservation. While there are serious problems all over the world, I don't think they're as separate as all that. Preservation of and access to wild places touches on public health, climate change, environmental justice and many other issues. I want to focus more on rewilding and reforesting in the UK, where I live, partly because I have a much bigger stake in what happens close to home than half way around the world, but also because we are so bereft of nature here that I want to help change it.
Wednesday, 25 September 2019
Monday, 23 September 2019
Natural Health Service
Land use, and particularly green space, in the UK is quickly becoming a major interest of mine. I'm often frustrated by the lack of 'natural' landscapes available to the public in this country, where so much green space is given over to agriculture, livestock grazing, military exercises and industrial forestry rather than just, you know, nature. Therefore, I was pleased to see on the Ordnance Survey blog that they're working with the NHS to assess the green spaces around NHS properties and residential areas as part of their Green Health Strategy.
As Julie Proctor of Greenpeace Scotland put it in the piece:
“Studies repeatedly show the positive impact that greenspace can have on our quality of life and particularly on health and wellbeing. Greenspace really is our natural health service: a daily dose of green space could be just what the doctor ordered to keep us active and provide tonic for the soul!"
I'm very happy to hear that there is high level recognition of how beneficial access to nature is for mental and physical well being. However, looking at the taxonomy they've used to assess land use for this project, I'm a little concerned that one of the categories is simply 'natural'. Other green spaces are categorised as 'park', 'allotment', 'golf', 'bowls' and 'play space', showing the diversity of managed recreational green spaces in urban environments, but the variety of natural green spaces is glossed over. Are they managed woodland, heath, or an impenetrable blackberry thicket by the side of a train line? Are they fenced off from the public by high fences, subject to a visitors fee, or can anyone visit? Disaggregating this data would go a long way to understanding what types of green spaces we have and who is likely to use them.
Acknowledging the benefits of nature to public health is a very good first step. Next we have to invest in publicly accessible and sustainable natural landscapes.
As Julie Proctor of Greenpeace Scotland put it in the piece:
“Studies repeatedly show the positive impact that greenspace can have on our quality of life and particularly on health and wellbeing. Greenspace really is our natural health service: a daily dose of green space could be just what the doctor ordered to keep us active and provide tonic for the soul!"
I'm very happy to hear that there is high level recognition of how beneficial access to nature is for mental and physical well being. However, looking at the taxonomy they've used to assess land use for this project, I'm a little concerned that one of the categories is simply 'natural'. Other green spaces are categorised as 'park', 'allotment', 'golf', 'bowls' and 'play space', showing the diversity of managed recreational green spaces in urban environments, but the variety of natural green spaces is glossed over. Are they managed woodland, heath, or an impenetrable blackberry thicket by the side of a train line? Are they fenced off from the public by high fences, subject to a visitors fee, or can anyone visit? Disaggregating this data would go a long way to understanding what types of green spaces we have and who is likely to use them.
Acknowledging the benefits of nature to public health is a very good first step. Next we have to invest in publicly accessible and sustainable natural landscapes.
Tuesday, 23 July 2019
Book review - Sustainability: A History
One reason for starting this blog is to keep track of reading and activities related to professional development, including article and book recaps/reviews. The first in this series is on:
This is an incredibly important book to the study of sustainability in that it helps unpack the strands of thought, political movements and scientific disciplines that have contributed to it as an idea. The broad thesis is that there is not one singular concept or movement around sustainability, but rather a constellation of related - but often contradictory - philosophies, goals and ideologies. Just as climate change' is not one singular problem but rather a host of tightly linked causes and effects, sustainability and sustainists represent a wide range of answers to these problems. Understanding this complexity is the first step toward progress. By acknowledging where we differ and where we align, we can begin to shape a consensus response to the greatest challenges our species has ever faced.
First, Caradonna traces the history of ideas and practices that might be considered 'sustainable', i.e. taking an interest in the management of the natural environment and resources in such a way that they will endure for future generations. (The actual definition of 'sustainability' is a matter of some debate, and Caradonna discusses this at some length, but as the entire work presents multiple different views of the concept, I won't provide a fixed or detailed definition here.) This history begins with early European forestry practices that sought to ensure the continued availability of woodland resources for future generations, through the philosophical and political dissents to Industrialism, up to the earliest warning signs about carbon emissions.
This history brings us to the current state of affairs, where various theoretical and political strands influence the sustainability movement, from ecological economics to climate justice. Sustainability is a spectrum of ideas, some that embrace Capitalism and economic growth and some that reject them as inherently unsustainable. Some are concerned with non-human ecosystems, while others focus on 'climate justice' and the unequal distribution of the causes and effects of climate change among different populations. Some focus primarily on carbon emissions in the atmosphere, while others are concerned with other systems such as biodiversity, soil and water quality and rare earth resources. Some emphasise conservation, using current biodiversity, carbon and biomass levels as a baseline, while others want to wind the clock back through rewilding and other such mechanisms.
It is important to consider the potential of each of these contrasting mechanisms. What would the results look like? Who would pay for them? What are the impacts on other countries, on people living in poverty, on people with disabilities? How quickly would the results take effect relative to the IPCC estimate that we have ten years in which to prevent climate catastrophe? Caradonna does not provide answers, or privilege one approach over others. The role of this book is not to say who is right but to catalogue the relevant histories and philosophies of sustainability. It is in the interest of those who seek to discredit sustainists to lump them together in one monolithic stereotype, so by presenting the different strands of thought within the sustainability movement, Caradonna challenges the reader to consider their relation to it.
For me, this book was an ideal place to start delving deeper into sustainability, social responsibility and environmental justice. I had somewhat taken for granted that sustainability meant roughly the same thing to everyone. I'm sure I'll be returning to this book as a reference in the future. For the purposes of this blog, I think it's useful to take Caradonna as a prompt to position myself in relation to the various sustainability movements. I believe that we should be working to set the clock back to pre-Industrial levels, with the eventual goal of minimum long-term management of the environment by humans (e.g. through rewilding), while bringing quality of life up for those in poverty around the world. I am sceptical about the ability of Capitalist systems to be sustainable, but I believe that to take effect in the time required the solutions need to operate within Capitalism. I also have many blind spots, for example I don't know exactly how land use theories say that the world can support both rewilding and food production at current and projected population levels. I don't know how digitalisation can be harnessed to make the situation better rather than worse. Sustainability: A History raised many more questions than it answered.
The next step on my journey is to explore more solutions to the host of problems that I will for shorthand refer to as the climate emergency, including global warming, soil quality, biodiversity loss, coral bleaching, plastic pollution, extractive industries and climate injustice. I want to know what can be done quickly, what can be done over the long term, and how the labour of climate action breaks down between industries, policymakers and ordinary people.
I'll let you know what I find out! Bye for now, and stay curious!
Sustainability: A History by Jeremy L. Caradonna
This is an incredibly important book to the study of sustainability in that it helps unpack the strands of thought, political movements and scientific disciplines that have contributed to it as an idea. The broad thesis is that there is not one singular concept or movement around sustainability, but rather a constellation of related - but often contradictory - philosophies, goals and ideologies. Just as climate change' is not one singular problem but rather a host of tightly linked causes and effects, sustainability and sustainists represent a wide range of answers to these problems. Understanding this complexity is the first step toward progress. By acknowledging where we differ and where we align, we can begin to shape a consensus response to the greatest challenges our species has ever faced.
First, Caradonna traces the history of ideas and practices that might be considered 'sustainable', i.e. taking an interest in the management of the natural environment and resources in such a way that they will endure for future generations. (The actual definition of 'sustainability' is a matter of some debate, and Caradonna discusses this at some length, but as the entire work presents multiple different views of the concept, I won't provide a fixed or detailed definition here.) This history begins with early European forestry practices that sought to ensure the continued availability of woodland resources for future generations, through the philosophical and political dissents to Industrialism, up to the earliest warning signs about carbon emissions.
This history brings us to the current state of affairs, where various theoretical and political strands influence the sustainability movement, from ecological economics to climate justice. Sustainability is a spectrum of ideas, some that embrace Capitalism and economic growth and some that reject them as inherently unsustainable. Some are concerned with non-human ecosystems, while others focus on 'climate justice' and the unequal distribution of the causes and effects of climate change among different populations. Some focus primarily on carbon emissions in the atmosphere, while others are concerned with other systems such as biodiversity, soil and water quality and rare earth resources. Some emphasise conservation, using current biodiversity, carbon and biomass levels as a baseline, while others want to wind the clock back through rewilding and other such mechanisms.
It is important to consider the potential of each of these contrasting mechanisms. What would the results look like? Who would pay for them? What are the impacts on other countries, on people living in poverty, on people with disabilities? How quickly would the results take effect relative to the IPCC estimate that we have ten years in which to prevent climate catastrophe? Caradonna does not provide answers, or privilege one approach over others. The role of this book is not to say who is right but to catalogue the relevant histories and philosophies of sustainability. It is in the interest of those who seek to discredit sustainists to lump them together in one monolithic stereotype, so by presenting the different strands of thought within the sustainability movement, Caradonna challenges the reader to consider their relation to it.
For me, this book was an ideal place to start delving deeper into sustainability, social responsibility and environmental justice. I had somewhat taken for granted that sustainability meant roughly the same thing to everyone. I'm sure I'll be returning to this book as a reference in the future. For the purposes of this blog, I think it's useful to take Caradonna as a prompt to position myself in relation to the various sustainability movements. I believe that we should be working to set the clock back to pre-Industrial levels, with the eventual goal of minimum long-term management of the environment by humans (e.g. through rewilding), while bringing quality of life up for those in poverty around the world. I am sceptical about the ability of Capitalist systems to be sustainable, but I believe that to take effect in the time required the solutions need to operate within Capitalism. I also have many blind spots, for example I don't know exactly how land use theories say that the world can support both rewilding and food production at current and projected population levels. I don't know how digitalisation can be harnessed to make the situation better rather than worse. Sustainability: A History raised many more questions than it answered.
The next step on my journey is to explore more solutions to the host of problems that I will for shorthand refer to as the climate emergency, including global warming, soil quality, biodiversity loss, coral bleaching, plastic pollution, extractive industries and climate injustice. I want to know what can be done quickly, what can be done over the long term, and how the labour of climate action breaks down between industries, policymakers and ordinary people.
I'll let you know what I find out! Bye for now, and stay curious!
Wednesday, 8 May 2019
Don't you know there's a climate crisis on?
During the Second World War, the people of Britain were encouraged to go about their daily routines despite the fear of bombing raids, the rations and the restrictions. "Keep calm and carry on", the oft-mimicked posters urged, as upper lips stiffened and socks were metaphorically pulled up. It pulled people through the fear.
On 1st May 2019, the UK House of Commons voted to declare a climate emergency. It is a move that was a central demand of groups such as Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion. But what does it look like in practice to be in a state of crisis? The climate crisis is a different type of crisis. We cannot rely on military might to save us, nor can we afford to wait for people in big offices lined with marble and leather to solve our problems. Keeping calm and carrying on in the face of mounting evidence is what got us here, so what trade-offs will be made in this new political reality?
We are already seeing the effects of the vote in Scotland, where the government has dropped plans to cut air travel taxes. This is one tiny step, but evidence of a huge shift in political will when gas prices are still low and voters will be missing out on a financial benefit. This shows that the natural environment is now being weighted differently in the equation of (votes) + (money) + (environment). Once this shift is made across the board, or at least by a majority of politicians, the way they make decisions will make a seismic shift and it is that scale of change we need. There are still very difficult choices to make between different stakeholders and trade-offs. But the urgency, and to a certain extent the political will, has changed in light of this decision.
Personally, I'm glad to see Parliament admitting the crisis we are in. For decades, scientists and environmental activists have been adamant about the direction we were heading if we carried on as we were, but it has often felt like shouting into the (hurricane force) wind. Being told not to worry so much about it ironically caused me to panic more. When I read the news about the Commons vote, I wrote to my MP thanking him for that outcome, but urging him to act accordingly. Now that we have politically framed climate change as a crisis, we need to hold our politicians accountable to act accordingly, and putting the environment before short-term political or financial gain. So, get active, talk to your representatives and make sure they weigh the environment
On 1st May 2019, the UK House of Commons voted to declare a climate emergency. It is a move that was a central demand of groups such as Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion. But what does it look like in practice to be in a state of crisis? The climate crisis is a different type of crisis. We cannot rely on military might to save us, nor can we afford to wait for people in big offices lined with marble and leather to solve our problems. Keeping calm and carrying on in the face of mounting evidence is what got us here, so what trade-offs will be made in this new political reality?
We are already seeing the effects of the vote in Scotland, where the government has dropped plans to cut air travel taxes. This is one tiny step, but evidence of a huge shift in political will when gas prices are still low and voters will be missing out on a financial benefit. This shows that the natural environment is now being weighted differently in the equation of (votes) + (money) + (environment). Once this shift is made across the board, or at least by a majority of politicians, the way they make decisions will make a seismic shift and it is that scale of change we need. There are still very difficult choices to make between different stakeholders and trade-offs. But the urgency, and to a certain extent the political will, has changed in light of this decision.
Personally, I'm glad to see Parliament admitting the crisis we are in. For decades, scientists and environmental activists have been adamant about the direction we were heading if we carried on as we were, but it has often felt like shouting into the (hurricane force) wind. Being told not to worry so much about it ironically caused me to panic more. When I read the news about the Commons vote, I wrote to my MP thanking him for that outcome, but urging him to act accordingly. Now that we have politically framed climate change as a crisis, we need to hold our politicians accountable to act accordingly, and putting the environment before short-term political or financial gain. So, get active, talk to your representatives and make sure they weigh the environment
Monday, 1 April 2019
Introduction: Once a librarian...
As of today I am no longer a librarian.
Well, at least it's no longer in my job title, the end of an era of eleven years with some variation of 'librarian' on my CV. But there's a kind of professional pride so deeply rooted that it becomes self-identification: once a librarian, always a librarian, even when you release us into the wild to use our information skills in different ways.
My new role is as an information specialist (I'll probably talk lots more about what that involves in other posts), but before charging ahead into the unknown I thought I would look back and take stock of the skills and dispositions being a librarian has given me. I'd also like to express my gratitude for these lessons and the people I worked with from whom I learned them.
Librarians are a fierce bunch, leading charges for critical thinking, media literacy and access to information in a climate where the power of fact is waning. In some ways this democratisation is a good thing - no longer do people accept the opinions of experts simply because they have a degree - and in others it's extremely dangerous. When the vacuum left by experts is filled with demagogues and Twitter bots, critical thinking becomes an endangered species. I hope I always work toward radical, inclusive information literacy, no matter what my job title is.
Librarians are also service-minded in a way that I hope stays with me. There's a willingness to take on other people's challenges, puzzles and problems, try to solve them and if not, point people to someone else who might be able to help. The phrase "I don't know, but..." is an essential part of a librarian's toolbox, usually followed by "... I can find out and let you know." With so much information at our fingertips, not many people are willing to stick at the work it takes to find the right resource, but librarians are the calm, diligent puzzle-solvers of the digital world. But librarians are not just people who find information and bring it to you, they're informational cartographers and cataloguers. How information is organised and described matters. It matters a lot. Knowledge is power and the easier it is for people to access knowledge the more democratic it is. I am so glad that librarianship instilled that in me.
Finally, I got to work with a team that was creative, experimental and driven, who taught me that innovation is a matter of having a supportive culture. I hope I continue to work in places where the phrase, "We've always done it this way" is an anathema because it's been exciting, challenging, and has led me to wonder what else I'm capable of. I'm incredibly grateful to them for that.
As an avid hiker (and a person who enjoys breathing oxygen) I care a lot about the natural environment. Eventually I'd like to have a career where I use my information skills to help the planet; maybe grant writing for non profits, maybe consulting with businesses on corporate sustainability and social responsibility practices, maybe helping research groups who are working on climate related projects. For now, I'm an information professional in the wild, unsure of how my background will help and unsure of how I will be able to help the environment. I want use this blog to record my journey in both respects. I want to share what I learn about conservation, rewilding and corporate sustainability, as well as what I learn about report writing, knowledge management and life after librarianship.
Bye for now, and stay curious!
Well, at least it's no longer in my job title, the end of an era of eleven years with some variation of 'librarian' on my CV. But there's a kind of professional pride so deeply rooted that it becomes self-identification: once a librarian, always a librarian, even when you release us into the wild to use our information skills in different ways.
My new role is as an information specialist (I'll probably talk lots more about what that involves in other posts), but before charging ahead into the unknown I thought I would look back and take stock of the skills and dispositions being a librarian has given me. I'd also like to express my gratitude for these lessons and the people I worked with from whom I learned them.
Librarians are a fierce bunch, leading charges for critical thinking, media literacy and access to information in a climate where the power of fact is waning. In some ways this democratisation is a good thing - no longer do people accept the opinions of experts simply because they have a degree - and in others it's extremely dangerous. When the vacuum left by experts is filled with demagogues and Twitter bots, critical thinking becomes an endangered species. I hope I always work toward radical, inclusive information literacy, no matter what my job title is.
Librarians are also service-minded in a way that I hope stays with me. There's a willingness to take on other people's challenges, puzzles and problems, try to solve them and if not, point people to someone else who might be able to help. The phrase "I don't know, but..." is an essential part of a librarian's toolbox, usually followed by "... I can find out and let you know." With so much information at our fingertips, not many people are willing to stick at the work it takes to find the right resource, but librarians are the calm, diligent puzzle-solvers of the digital world. But librarians are not just people who find information and bring it to you, they're informational cartographers and cataloguers. How information is organised and described matters. It matters a lot. Knowledge is power and the easier it is for people to access knowledge the more democratic it is. I am so glad that librarianship instilled that in me.
Finally, I got to work with a team that was creative, experimental and driven, who taught me that innovation is a matter of having a supportive culture. I hope I continue to work in places where the phrase, "We've always done it this way" is an anathema because it's been exciting, challenging, and has led me to wonder what else I'm capable of. I'm incredibly grateful to them for that.
As an avid hiker (and a person who enjoys breathing oxygen) I care a lot about the natural environment. Eventually I'd like to have a career where I use my information skills to help the planet; maybe grant writing for non profits, maybe consulting with businesses on corporate sustainability and social responsibility practices, maybe helping research groups who are working on climate related projects. For now, I'm an information professional in the wild, unsure of how my background will help and unsure of how I will be able to help the environment. I want use this blog to record my journey in both respects. I want to share what I learn about conservation, rewilding and corporate sustainability, as well as what I learn about report writing, knowledge management and life after librarianship.
Bye for now, and stay curious!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)