Who Rules the Earth? (Steinberg, 2015) serves as an very appropriate conclusion to the ENVS 160 course, exploring many of the big concepts regarding the problems of environmentalism that are also examined to the previous texts in the course, but also giving a hopeful and practical solutions to these problems. If anything, Who Rules the Earth? (Steinberg, 2015) is the most proper closure to the can of inquiries opened my Hulme in his Why We Disagree about Climate Change (Hulme, 2009). In his book, Steinberg first introduces the “the invisible worlds” (Steinberg 2015, 20) and the social “ties that bind” (Steinberg 2015, 22) these worlds together. Then he delves into the relationships between these worlds, more specifically that of the business, political worlds and environmentalism. In the last section of his book, Steinberg calls for change, to shift the perspective of classical environmentalists so as to put to power of ruling back in the hands of people.
Searching for solutions
In the first section of his book, Steinberg vocally criticizes the idea that “the small changes we can make as individuals will add up to something big” (Steinberg 2015, 5). Instead, through comparing the pesticide reforms in Canada and in the US, he makes his stand clear that “to bring about lasting change requires modifying the very rules that societies live by”, thus setting the stage for his entire book focusing on changes of social rules as a driver for environmental projects. Through his analogy about “the invisible worlds” (Steinberg 2015, 20), Steinberg is essentially explaining how social rules can exist without us even noticing them, yet they very much regulate every activities that humanity engages in, including activities relating to the environment – “the rules we live by shape our rivers, our skies, and the type and amount of energy we use” (Steinberg 2015, 26). Furthermore, Steinberg explains how only institutional effort would be able to facilitates these social changes effectively, thus drawing the connection between politics and environmentalism.
Who owns the Earth?
In this section, Steinberg explains how government and the economy are the two biggest facilitators of changes in social rules. From the example of “property rights” (Steinberg 2015, 66), Steinberg emphasizes the authority of institutions and the law in safeguarding the land even if it is labeled as “private property”. Furthermore, through the case study of ethyl gasoline in the US (Steinberg 2015, 96), Steinberg proves how the alluring appeal of the market can shape social changes and alter our environmental conditions. In addition, Steinberg says “the reason why social scientists use the vocabulary of “institutions” to describe social rules is we care about the enduring structures that funnel human energies this way and that” (Steinberg 2015, 141), which reinforces the crucial role of governments in environmental changes, since they are the only agency capable of making institutional changes – the key to environmentalism. This section of the book essentially reminds us that we cannot separate environmentalism from the biggest agents that can create change and drive progress more efficiently than any collective individual effort would. This is clearly a divergence from classical environmentalism thinking into more contemporary views that are suggested in the later half of Steinberg’s book.
Transformations and Leverage
In the last two sections of the book, Steinberg explores possible models of “ruling”. In the “Scaling Up” chapter, Steinberg once again emphasizes the importance of institutionalizing environmental policies, given the example of the European Union – “the European Union was capable of delivering results- economis, diplomatic, and environmental- that would be impossible for countries to achieve on their own” (Steinberg 2015, 180). Here, Steinberg alludes to the idea of thinking “vertically” (Steinberg 2015, 180) where the environmental rules are “first incubated at the national level” and working it its way up to a regional level through transfer of information and expertise (Steinber 2015, 181). Another big take away from this section of the book for me is the idea of “super rules”. Super rules are rules that “govern the rulemaking process itself” (Steinberg 2015, 246). In Steinberg’s argument, he claims that when push for change is applied to alter super rules instead of regular rules directly related to environmentalism, then a sustainable change would be formed as a result. However, any forms of changes would only be viable through active participation. Thus, Steinberg is putting back the “ruling” power to the people, however, advising them to channel their power into more effective channel that would result in long-term enduring changes.
Bibliography
Hulme, Mike. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change : Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Steinberg, Paul F. 2015. Who Rules the Earth?: How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.