In Chapter One of Who Rules the Earth: How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives written by Paul Steinberg, he lays out his intention for the book by stating, “This book is an attempt to distill insights from that research and to share the findings with those who need them most: intelligent reader who are concerned about the environment and eager to learn what they can do beyond tossing a bottle in the recycling bin – an action that produces a strange, conflicted sensation of knowing you are doing the right thing, yet wondering if it really makes any difference at all” (Steinberg 2015, 6). This quote reveals Steinberg’s larger mission and argument to not fall under the guise of “think globally, act locally”. He calls out for a higher order action that looks at “thinking vertically” (Steinberg 2015, 163) and he analyses the positive and negative institutions that are harming or helping our crippling environment.
His analysis of positive institutions is best found in Chapter 7, where he applauds the European Union’s ability to implement and enforce strict environmental regulation by starting not with local citizens, but corporations and business. One of negative analysis arises not in the form of an institution, but rather common thought. Chapter Nine looks at the “Four Ideas that Will Not Change Your Mind” stating there are imbedded assumptions on how the environment will be aided, but are consequently false and thus, harm our world. These two examples give breath to his intent to look at larger systems that shape our environmental policies and harms.
But ultimately, Steinberg comes to the conclusion that, “It is a matter of balance, contemplating these everyday acts of individual conscience with larger actions that promote social change” (Steinberg 2015, 278). Thus, while he criticises small local actions and calls for deeper “vertical thinking”, in the end he claims that it is both that will get us to the most environmental aid.
In the reflection of Who Rules the Earth, I touched on two major points. Steinberg’s rejection of “think global, act local” and the best means to promote environmental change is though balance. These two points are not only crucial to the heart of the book, but also are the pieces that struck me the most. I grew up at my local farmers’ market where the community became my family and together we breathed the mantra “think global, act local”. Like many, his analysis of localism shook, but ultimately, it has helped me shape my new environmental perspective and path. I am interested in studying agriculture in relation to environmental degradation and community. Through his critique, I am finding that the idealization of localism is not helpful in the grander scheme of change. Thus, when thinking about how I want to help communities and ecosystems, his work has helped me think larger and dream bigger.
Additionally, this ties into the quote I mentioned above where he states “It is a matter of balance…” (Steinberg 2015, 278). My dream of working on a farm and selling to the community his slaughtered by his hesitancy with local action, but ultimately in the end he reminds us that it takes everything to make change. Thus, personally, I recognize that my dreams while they may be small, can still be impactful. But, to truly foster change I need to work outside a small scale and I accept the challenge.
Works Cited
Steinberg, Paul F. 2015. Who Rules the Earth? : How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.