“Who rules the Earth?” asks Paul Steinburg, whose book ENVS students like myself have been studying rigorously throughout the last portion of the semester. The answer to this question is not a simple one that can be meticulously picked apart in a short reflection post, but Steinburg makes sure to develop a theme throughout his work which captivates the reader through the entirety of his intricate arguments. The main lesson is this: Social rules (i.e. institutions) are the most critical actors of environmental change and need to be acknowledged and utilized to their fullest extent to achieve successful environmental policy. In order to deconstruct this lesson in summation, key ideas and arguments are necessary for reference.
Steinberg introduces social rules as inherent in just about every aspect of one’s life. These rules specify a number of roles, spells out the rights of each role, and attaches responsibilities to anyone who occupies these roles. If these social rules are remembered and utilized, we may be in reach of “feasible worlds” where substantial improvements in environmental and human affairs are feasible in the near-term within the realms of economics, politics, and technology (Steinberg 2015, 37).
But first there are some obstacles to be overcome. These include a lack of information to key decision makers, the human tendency to resist cooperation, powerful organizations lack correct structure, and a disproportionate influence of a small group of extremely wealthy individuals. In order to move forward to tackle these and other hurdles, some things need to be clarified before institutional utilization and action is possible. First is a misconception concerning private property rights and government regulation. There exists a common view that these two act in opposition to one another—but that is hardly the truth of the matter. Private property rights are a type of regulation. They are social rules that “determine who gets what, when, where, and why, and are enforced by governments that must adjudicate among competing demands by referring to broader social priorities that have been encoded in law” (Steinberg 2015, 67).
In fact, Steinberg argues in chapter five that modern capitalism itself could not exist without widespread government regulation. Peru serves as a great example, in which a study conducted by Hernando DeSoto obtains legal proof of property, a process that took over seven years with countless steps taken involving 52 different government bureaus. This explains Peru’s stagnant local economy—people are not provided the social rules necessary to achieve successful business.
For the creation and enforcement of social rules, governments are important. Steinberg emphasizes this in connection to the main current of environmental thought today, which tends to deemphasize global issues where market and nonprofit sectors have more influence. Yet it is forgotten that governments of all scales dictate these sectors through social rules, which are the only force capable of standing up to powerful vested interests. A key issue concerning governments and their citizens on a global scale is that they choose to think globally, but feel satisfied acting locally. This perception, according to Steinberg, is entirely oversimplified and naïve. We need to acknowledge all levels of government and “think vertically” (Steinberg 2015, 163). The European Union is an example of why this new framework works so well. EU countries can leverage large-scale change by innovating at home and then pushing for the adoption of their innovations at the European level (Steinberg 2015).
Scaling down is equally as important in relation to social rules and environmental policy. Steinberg presents this through the false fear of the “race to the bottom” where people worried companies would lower their pollution standards to an absolute minimum in order to win more jobs from other states (Steinburg 2015, 202). However, this is hardly the case in the real world, where most states have stronger monitoring requirements if not stricter pollution standards than national criterions. The way this was achieved was through local citizen activism paired with a large professional legislative staff (Steinberg 2015).
These elements of scaling up and down facilitate the creation of new enduring social rules in order to replace old ruts of law that hold back opportunities for environmental policy. Nevertheless, when we create new ruts, they must be made to be adaptable and well looked after, or else they might turn out to be stagnant and corrosive. Establishing social rules with long enough anchors of permanence allows them to survive the issue-attention cycle discussed earlier on in the book, where the public tends to provide an initial burst of enthusiasm for environmental policy, but will gradually gain disinterest over time. The only concrete source of environmental protection that can exist for an extended period of time would be through pertinent and long-lasting social rules (Steinberg 2015).
Through these main arguments, Steinberg successfully brings the message across that institutional-scale and material-domain thinking and acting is fundamental to the success of environmental policy through the employment of social rules on all governmental levels. As a college student, social rules resonate with me on a strong level. I now can recognize and consider those that exist around me and appreciate how they are fundamental to my life. These social rules are indeed tied to the multitude of intricacies within politics, economics, and cultural phenomena. Hence, it too is clear to me that institutions are the most reliable mode to ensure effective environmental success. I shall keep them at the forefront of my mind when approaching and studying environmental issues in the future as well as critically analyze the work of other scholars that may differ from this framework.
This text also affects me on a much more personal level. The rejection of “think globally, act locally” changed my understanding of global crises a great deal (Steinberg 2015, 163). Providing emphasis on my role as a citizen before being a consumer is an idea that I never considered being important before. But I now see it as more crucial than ever, especially with novel understanding of certain methods that can change social rules for the better, such as local citizen activism and democratic participation. If I ever expect to see effective change, both in an environmental and moral perspective, I need to work with the crowned systems of social rules that indeed rule the Earth.
REFERENCES:
Steinberg, Paul F. 2015. Who Rules the Earth?: How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.