Action (Small/Big)
What action at small vs. big scales will help us build the world we want?
The Action theme builds on the Change, Diversity, Future, Social Scale, Society, and Spatial Scale axes, all of which address how to make a difference in this world. Can small actions make a big difference? Does big change demand big action? Is change even possible? These questions are difficult to reconcile, but perhaps this leads to the possibility of creative tension in the Action theme.
Two Poles
Action (Small Pole)
Action (Big Pole)
This pole prioritizes small-scale action by each of us to build the world we want, as the only practical alternative and one that will eventually make a big (at least bigger) difference. Joining the incremental pole of the Change axis, the low priority Diversity pole, the possibility pole of the Future axis, the individual pole of the Social Scale axis, the consensus pole of the Society axis (thus we share equal responsibility to act), and the local pole of the Spatial Scale axis, the small pole of the Action theme is bottom-up, hopeful, and attempts to be apolitical through and through. There are many possible online examples via e.g. a “Simple Things Environment” search.
Another way to think about what scale of action we need is based on the premise that big problems do indeed call for big solutions. The big pole of the Action theme weaves together the radical Change pole, the high priority Diversity pole, the crisis pole of the Future axis, the institutional Social Scale pole, the conflict Society pole (i.e., we are unequal, even in our responsibility to act), and the global Spatial Scale poles to focus on structural, more politicized change. Focusing on the little things we each can do, according to the big pole, is not action but distraction; yet there is less possibility for change at these bigger scales. One online example is System Change not Climate Change.
Incremental Pole |
Change |
Radical Pole |
|
Small changes toward solving environmental problems will get more done than attempting radical changes. Step by step is a good way to build environmental solutions; there is no need for bigger, radical changes. |
|
There is no way to solve major environmental problems via incremental changes; we need radical change instead. Taking small steps to solve environmental problems can distract us from the imperative for more radical change. |
Low Priority Pole |
Diversity |
High Priority Pole |
|
The needs of poor and nonwhite populations are being adequately addressed by environmentalists today; they don’t require greater priority. We must ensure that greater diversity of race and class among environmentalists does not diminish emphasis on longstanding issues such as conservation. |
|
The most important need in environmentalism today is to diversify the movement beyond white, middle-class participants. We must focus more on environmental issues affecting poor and nonwhite populations, and less on traditional issues like wilderness protection. |
Crisis Pole |
Future |
Possibility Pole |
|
It is hard to imagine a way out of severe environmental crisis in future. Future ecological disaster is almost a certainty at this point, no matter what people try to do. |
|
There are many opportunities for us to solve environmental problems in future; crisis is not inevitable. I’m an optimist about possibilities for people to solve environmental problems and avert disaster in future. |
Individual Pole |
Social Scale |
Institutional Pole |
|
Green lifestyle changes are a better focus for our ecological energies than trying to change larger systems. Individual actions like recycling can actually accomplish more than collective actions like working to pass green laws. |
|
Individual lifestyle changes won’t make a big environmental difference; we must focus on larger social and political institutions. Our ecological actions must address major political and economic systems, not just changes at the individual scale. |
Consensus Pole |
Society |
Conflict Pole |
|
Since all of us contribute equally to society, each one of us is partly to blame for our environmental problems. We can solve our environmental problems if people could just come together and work in agreement with each other. |
|
A small, powerful subset of society, not each one of us, is mostly to blame for our environmental problems. Environmental problems arise from power differences between people; we must therefore confront those in power. |
Local Pole |
Spatial Scale |
Global Pole |
|
The best way to address global environmental problems is at the local scale, where we can make a difference. Things are going so badly at the global scale today, the only hope is to contribute at the local scale, like our communities. |
|
Major environmental problems today are global, and so must be their solutions; we cannot accomplish much at local scales. “Think globally, act globally”! Local solutions to global environmental problems just don’t make a difference. |
Survey Results
The histogram above displays a weighted mean of this theme’s related axes, for surveys from fall 2018 to now. Responses toward the left of this chart lean toward the left pole of this theme; those toward the right favor the right pole. What is the overall distribution of responses? What does this say about participants in the EcoTypes survey, and their take on this theme? How do your results compare?
The correlation table above compares responses to statements for axes related to this theme. Values near 0 mean little association; values above |0.2| and |0.4| are formatted to imply stronger association. (Positive values mean the axis poles line up as above.) Which axes seem to have a strong empirical association? Do you find any surprises in the strong, weak, or negligible associations summarized above?