When I first chose ENVS 160, I didn’t really know what to expect out of the class because I felt that I already knew a fair amount about the environment and how to protect it against climate change. Most of my knowledge about the environment came from my very eco-friendly family and from my experiences in the wilderness with my high school’s outdoor program. I thought that I already knew how to limit my impact on the earth and that little actions like recycling and taking short showers were the most that I as an individual could do to combat climate change. But I soon realized that by taking ENVS 160, my established thoughts and opinions about how to treat the environment and deal with climate change would be challenged in many ways.
This first started when I came to understand three important aspects of what we learned in class. The first is that an individual’s own experiences, values and upbringing will shape how they view environmental issues. The second being the difference and effect of action at an institutional scale versus an individual scale. And finally I am close to understanding why climate change is not such an easy problem to solve as I previously thought.
My experiences and upbringing will change my shape my view on modern environmental issues
In “Why We Disagree About Climate Change”, Hulme argues that one of the reasons why people disagree about climate change is because “we believe different things about our duty to others, to Nature and to our deities” (Hulme 2009, 144). Part of the reason we believe these different things is because we are all brought up differently with different values, experiences, religious beliefs, etc. This seems almost painfully obvious to me now but before reading “Why We Disagree About Climate Change” I couldn’t comprehend why people would have such differing views. I also realized that a lot of my views on the environment and climate change come from growing up in the liberal, outdoorsy city of Boise, Idaho.
For me, where I am from is a huge part of who I am now. Growing up playing in the wilderness allowed to me to develop a love for the outdoors. This love evolved into a need to protect the mountains that is my backyard. My experiences in the outdoors made me realize how important it is to protect nature because other people who may not have had the same experiences as me will not think twice about harming the environment. Hulme’s book made me realize how everyone’s background and experiences will shape how they feel about nature and what they do (or not do) to protect it.
Should I take action at the individual or institutional scale?
At many points during this course we talked about classic versus contemporary thought. One axis that was brought up is the scale axis which discusses whether action against climate change and other environmental concerns should be dealt with at an individual level or an institutional level. This stuck with me because I have always thought that the only way for me to do something was to take individual small steps like taking shorter showers and reusing water bottles but I never felt that this was actually doing something to help the environment. But on the other hand I felt like it wasn’t really possible for me as an individual to things like big institutions can.
I learned that even though it may be hard for individuals to act at an institutional level, it is much more efficient for large institutions to take action against climate change than for individuals to try to change things. At an institutional scale there would be more support for research and development to foster technological innovation. I learned that while individuals can’t act as a institution, they can act individually but with the goal of acting institutionally.
Climate change is not a simple problem
Hulme poses climate change as a “wicked problem” because there is not a single solution that would appeal to everybody. The problem of climate change is wicked because “a solution to one aspect of a wicked problem often reveals or creates other, even more complex, problems demanding further solutions” (Hulme 2009, 334). Given all the social complexities of climate change, like how climate change is portrayed differently all around the world, it makes sense that the solution is not as straightforward as I had thought it was. I previously thought climate change was complex but not impossible to solve. I may have even been naive in thinking it would be simple for all the countries to come together to solve the problem. Now I understand that there may not even be a solution to climate change.
Works Cited:
Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.