In ENVS 160, a lot of reading has been done. This class will structure your mind in a way that enhances concentration and promotes articulation. A quiz (almost) every morning percolates the mind, and prepares one for discussion and “environmental” discourse. Throughout the course, we have covered many varying topics. All of these topics have obviously been related to environmental studies, but less obviously have been structured around environmental thought. Many enroll in this class to look at global wind patterns, or assume they will be able to solve climate change after scoring a B+. However, what this course introduces to the fledgling environmentalist is that the world of environmental thought is so vast, and so varied, that before any action can be taken, one has to understand the fundamentals of how actions can take affect on people and systems. Because of this reason, the course covers four dynamic and or comprehensive sections. If you keep up with the readings and reading guides, which may become challenging at certain points, you can certainly not only obtain a stellar grade in the course, but a broadened understanding of what environmentalism can mean as well.
The course starts off diving right into the center of contemporary issues. Although British writer Mike Hulme may punctuate his grammar slightly differently than what Americans are used to, his analysis of Why We Disagree About Climate Change is spot on, and transcends international borders (Hulme 2009). This section of the class covers a large proportion of ideas on climate, innovation for tracking climate change in history, and anthropogenic disagreements of our time. Some concepts I found most fascinating in this text/section, was how religious discourse highly affects what one may think about climate change. Some religions think that the earth’s climate is in God’s hands only, while some think the climate is of human relation. As much as the text is long, the ideas just become richer and richer. Keep reading; you will find something that fundamentally interests you. As a culmination of this section, we went out into the streets of Portland and conducted surveys. This project asked different people about how they felt about climate change. It was interesting to see the results, and after a healthy chunk of class work it was scintillating to see the discourse we were analyzing play out in the mind of the general public. After this comprehensive section of the class that focuses on social relations, we delve into a more technical section of environmental studies.
The second section of this course engages Vaclav Smil, a very smart man. His book Making the Modern World (Smil 2013) analyzes among many things, capital flows and dematerialization capabilities and processes. These may sound like complex topics; and they are. However, if you put the work into the reading, this may drastically enhance your understanding of how the world’s materials really cooperate with one another. This section is definitely worthwhile to immerse oneself in. It may be considered the most challenging part of this class, but once you have overcome this section, the rest of the course falls into place. For our culminating project in this section (you may start to see a trend here), we split into groups and analyze minerals. Not just the chemical compounds, of let’s say silica, but where and how this mineral comes into international context. We analyze different sites of mining and production, but most importantly, we analyze what a “place” is. A “place,” we come to understand, is not just a physical geographic area, but the intersection of commerce, culture, geography, and many more factors. This intersection of different factors takes us back into the world of differing environmental thought.
In the third section of the course, we compare classic and contemporary environmental thought. We start reading one of the foundational pieces of classic environmentalist thought, The Tragedy of the Commons (Hardin 1968). The words that Hardin sculpt into an essay may define environmental values that seem to correlate with many media portrayals of environmental problems. Don’t be fooled to accept this as valid, though. This section shows us a drastic difference between how common environmental thought was accepted then vs. now. Hardin was mostly pessimistic of mankind’s ability to improve on the environmental challenges facing us head on. The Tragedy of the Commons is an economic theory that individuals do not act for the common good within a shared resource system, but rather act for their own personal benefit — depleting resources that all can benefit from (Hardin 1968). This doomed state of mind contradicts with how more contemporary environmental thinkers may think. Leigh Phillips believes there is hope in restoring the negative effects of climate change; however, the only way to do this, he thinks, is by changing the system which allocates resources for specific uses, i.e. the government (Phillips 2015). Phillips not only advocates for socialism, but offers great insight into how there is still hope for abating climate change. Among many benefits from reading Phillip’s book, Austerity Ecology and the Collapse-Porn Addicts, two most stand out in my eyes. One advantage is that the text is quite sharply, humorously written. This provides a nice contrast to other works in the course, which while interesting, do not feel as present. A second advantage is that Phillips is alive, and willing to skype with college students! As the professor set up a skype meeting with Phillips, the students were able to hear first hand about the book from the author himself. My advice here is to come prepared to class with questions to ask the author. When such a rare, fascinating activity is available, it is most helpful to engage oneself. For the culminating project of this section (hey, look!), we looked at how different “isms” affect global environmentalist discourse. “Isms” such as eco-terrorism and ecofeminism all were analyzed by this project. My group, though, focused on incrementalism. As we learned that systems and processes cannot change immediately but over incremental steps, through legislations and social amalgamations, we were able to focus on how humans are intrinsically tied into the processes in which change happens. It was very convenient, for me personally, that my group focused on this “ism,” because it segued into the next section of the course quite effortlessly. Of course, though, the “isms” project required a lot of scholarly effort.
In the last section of the course (boy, have we covered a lot of material), our previous sections all coalesce as we look into Paul Steinberg’s work, Who Rules the Earth? (Steinberg 2015). This work pulls together classic and contemporary environmental ideas, technical material flows, and aspects of why the earth and its climate change issues are so hotly contested. If you have not been fully paying attention in ENVS 160 yet, now would be the time to chime in. All of these aspects, though, are pulled together in a way that promotes institutionalization. Steinberg teaches us that the best way to act is not individually, but institutionally. Like any great work, Steinberg also defines what acting is, what the implications of acting individually are, and what the applications of acting institutionally are as well. Throughout this section of the class we were given the chance to reflect and synthesize all of the data we have been analyzing recently. Opposed to group assignments mentioned above, the last section allowed us to all realize what we have been learning individually. Our first post was a recollection of how ENVS 160 has changed us. This was an instrumental step in our reflection process. In order to reflect effectively on critical information, we had needed to start in a “place” that would allows us to bolster off of incrementally. The second post was similar to this post I am writing now. It was a synthesis of the first three sections of the course. This was a stellar opportunity to place all of our newfound ideas and meanings together. The third post focused on synthesizing ideals discovered in the WRE text. So if you are curious to get a sense of this portion of the class before you get here, read my project, and other ENVS 160 student’s as well. The fourth and final reflection post mirrors the WRE text, because it is an analysis of how we will act on climate change in our future academic and personal lives. The reflection posts were a rigorous four weeks of self reflection and deep realizations. While the structure of the course may sometimes feel overwhelming, the reflection posts make the knowledge garnered worth the research. These posts help the individual realize just how much she has learned.
In ENVS 160 a rollercoaster of thoughts and different ideas will give you whiplash if you don’t stay sharp. Okay, maybe the course load is not that dramatically daunting, but it is definitely worthwhile to keep up with the readings and quizzes. Some advice I highly recommend to follow, is to try and work with a different group during each group project. As you have hopefully picked up from this report, there are many differing views on environmental discourse. To immerse yourselves with as many different viewpoints as possible, will only help you articulate yours more clearly. Albeit Lewis & Clark and ENVS 160 attracts many people with “progressive” viewpoints in regards to climate change, hearing different insights may broaden your understanding of certain issues and systems. Good luck with this class, and remember that if you ever need help you can surely ask your peers, or even students who have already taken this course. I’m positive we’ll be glad to help you guys out.
Citations
Hulme, Mike. Why We Disagree about Climate Change : Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Smil, Vaclav. Making the Modern World: Materials and Dematerialization. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2014.
Hardin, Garrett. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science 162, 1968.
Phillips, Leigh. Austerity Ecology & the Collapse-porn Addicts : A Defence of Growth, Progress, Industry and Stuff. Winchester, UK ; Washington, USA: Zero Books, 2015.
Steinberg, Paul F. Who Rules the Earth? : How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2015.