Throughout my time in ENVS 160, I have read many great texts. Although the texts are not necessarily related in every way, I have found three key connections between them.
The first connection I was able to find is between Why We Disagree About Climate Change and Who Rules the Earth. In Why We Disagree About Climate Change, Mike Hulme goes out to learn the reasons why there is a lot of disagreement surrounding climate change, and why people have different ideas on what to do about environmental issues going on in the world. Throughout each chapter in his book, he talks about different types of disagreements people have with each other about climate change, and explains how the way one thinks about climate change and nature is influenced by factors such as where one lives. In Who Rules the Earth, Paul Steinberg argues that political and social rules shape our planet and the people on it. He believes that sustainability is a struggle going on politically and is not affected by individuals. Both Why We Disagree About Climate Change and Who Rules the Earth talk about the different and varying factors that influence the world.
The second connection I was able to find is with Who Rules the Earth and how it connects with the idea of classic environmental thought. Those who are more classic tend to think more conservative in regards to time, are unsupportive of technology, and have an apocalyptic view of the future (Jim Proctor, “Ecotypes; Exploring Environmental Ideas”, accessed 4/10/17). In Who Rules the Earth, Paul Steinberg states that corporations and manufacturers are able to take advantage of people in order to benefit themselves. He states, “Manufacturers of leading gasoline launched an aggressive public relations campaign to make sure the new product was widely used. The Result was the largest environmental health disaster in US history. By the late 1970s, nine out of every ten kids ages one to five had blood lead levels considered unhealthy by the US Centers for Disease Control, primarily as a result of leaded gasoline” (Steinberg 2015, 96). This relates to a problem that arises due to exploitation by corporations and manufacturers, which happens due to the way our political system is set up. Steinberg also states that producers don’t care about the environment, saying, “Let’s say the owners of a cell phone manufacturing plant decide that, rather than reduce or properly dispose of their pollution, they will dump it in a river, imposing a cost on those who use the waterway for fishing and recreation. This is not just bad manners. It is a breakdown in the operation of a market economy” (Steinberg 2015, 105). Steinberg uses classic environmental thought in order to show how these manufacturers disagree with environmentalists on how we deal with nature.
The final connection I was able to find is with Why We Disagree About Climate Change and how it connects with the concept of contemporary environmental thought. Those who are more contemporary tend to think more progressive in regards to time, are enthusiastic and supportive of technology, and are more optimistic about the future (Jim Proctor, “Ecotypes; Exploring Environmental Ideas”, accessed 4/10/17). Hulme believes that those who are more contemporary are on the better side of the spectrum because it creates wicked problems that “[have] led to the construction of a global solution-structure that possesses elements that appear either inadequate or inappropriate given the intractability of climate change” (Hulme 2009, 532). He addresses this issue in his book as well as other classical views.
References
“EcoTypes and Classic vs. Contemporary Environmental Thought.” 2017. EcoTypes. January 12. https://ds.lclark.edu/ecotypes/ecotypes-and-classiccontemporary-environmental-thought/.
Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. iBooks.
Steinberg, Paul F. 2015. Who Rules the Earth?: How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.