Following a few overwhelming discussions on classic and contemporary approaches to environmental discussion, Who Rules the Earth, by Paul Steinberg, provides a more conclusive approach. While integrating the contradictions prevalent in environmentally-oriented discourse, Steinberg moved past the bickering of individual researchers and provided, while still opinion-based, offers different approaches in addressing issues such as climate change, economic prerogatives, and lawmaking.
Encompassing all three of the aforementioned themes was the concept of rules. Rules, in this context, are not isolated to those visible around a swimming pool. Social rules, “an indispensable and inescapable part of our existence,” provide structure to the societies they exist in. Synonymous with institutions, these rules “coordinate social activity,” preventing farmers from overusing or depleting their common spaces as Hardin theorized. With the positives also come the negatives: “they are also a source of our most recalcitrant dysfunction, driving us blindly down paths that no rational society would choose to follow” (Steinberg 2015, 11, 24, 195). These are embedded on a variety of scales, from the unspoken cultural norms, to religious expectations, to business contracts, to laws.
In order to “put society on a sustainable path,” and promote environmental consciousness, social rules must be reconfigured (Steinberg 2015, 12). To no surprise, this is a significant challenge. A variety of incentives prevent the ‘ideal outcome,’ which in itself is subjective. Observed by the conservation efforts to protect the vulnerable cerulean warbler, conflicts arise with the profits to be made from the rubber harvests, trees cut for farmland, and coffee production which outweighs inexplicit values of biodiversity (Steinberg 2015, 74). The protection of the land occupied by the cerulean warbler extends beyond a single country, and the species requires protection movements beyond a single government.
Another area of contest is the structure of governing bodies, since the support of local governments often clash with larger governing bodies, where the offices are dispersed to create a closer relationship with ‘the people.’ In tandem with federalism (checks and balances provided through a dispersal of power), small scale operations can introduce more voices into political discussions. While it may seem contradictory, large-scale functions can also have a positive influence. For example, the European Union has “the capacity to respond to environmental problems in a coordinated fashion” (Steinberg 2015, 163). Steinberg refers to the integration these scales as “thinking vertically,” shown to be a successful, multi-scale method of rulemaking.
Mentioned earlier, Hardin’s famous theory, “Tragedy of the Commons,” is one of many theories that is used to wrongly justify policy. Supported by no empirical evidence, Hardin claims “that natural resources shared by a community are doomed to be overexploited” (Steinberg 2015, 194). Although it is “perfectly intuitive,” it is a very unlikely phenomenon, simply because it would entail a setting with “no social rules governing human behavior,” as well as no cooperation between individuals, which is unlikely at best. Another similar theory is the “race to the bottom,” which assumes that states will push their regulations to the minimum to promote market competition (Steinberg 2015, 203). Both of these theories have been sufficiently disproved, with the usage of real and empirical support; yet, these are still regarded as factual and daunting possibilities.
The prevalence of these theories, and their overrepresentation reveals how individuals “working on the front lines of environmental social science have failed to spread the world beyond [their] inward-looking circles” (Steinberg 2015,193). To prevent the further glorification of unfounded theories, the obvious solution would be to turn to education and invest all available resources into more accurate, environmentally-focused education. Unfortunately, with the slow change of generational turnover, these falsehoods, accompanied with supplemental environmental concern, would be slow to come by. An alternative would be to make a mainstream issue that incorporated these concepts and, as a result, make new routines and habits that would address them and “protect the public interest” (Steinberg 2015, 227, 230).
Throughout April and May of 2017, Travel Oregon is holding outreach meetings to promote and discuss the “Oregon Outdoor Recreation Initiative.” In a recent meeting held in Portland, OR, representatives Oregon Wild, REI, the US Forest Service, and a variety of other organizations (and me) came together to discuss the new strategies, perceived outcomes and long-term visions of the initiative. The initiative has nine impact areas for the development of vision and strategies: economic impact, livability, transportation, education, social diversity, stewardship of natural resources, etc. While there are a variety of goals, the top-priority is the formation and staffing of a government-based “Office of Outdoor Recreation” (See More Here).
This public outreach, while not oriented towards environmental preservation and conservation, takes into account some of Steinberg’s recommendations. Most prominently, establishing new rules via the Office of Outdoor Recreation, which would institutionalize some of environmentally focused ideals. Lumber organizations, although underrepresented in Portland’s meeting, were still recognized for their economic impact and prevalence in Oregon. Individual insights were valued, with opinions heard, allowing for a more diverse discussion about future of outdoor recreation, and what we hope to see implemented.
As Steinberg concludes, “The physicality of the natural world makes environmentalism unique among political causes, offering to those who open their senses a powerful elixir of body, mind and spirit all triggered by actions as simple as sitting quietly in a wooded field at sunset” (Steinberg 2015, 278). It is with this sentiment that environmental stewardship can be approached, or with fervor, or with fear. With these motivations, the rules, assumptions and structures surrounding ‘the environment,’ whatever focus one might have, must be filtered through and most likely reorganized.
Works Cited
Paul F. Steinberg. 2015. Who Rules the Earth?: How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.