If our carbon emissions are falling, it means we’re on the right track, right? And we’ve done it without needing to drastically change our economics (or even our lifestyles). But what if our accounting systems are wrong?
People who cut their carbon footprint because they’re worried about climate change are ‘environmental’ types, right? They love ‘nature’ and get fired up by those photos of polar bears stranded on melting ice. They might even rate ‘protecting the environment’ or ‘respecting the earth’ as their number one value.
Well, no; not necessarily.
As part of a research project on promoting lower-carbon lifestyles, I interviewed people who have cut their carbon footprint because they’re worried about climate change, to try and understand more about what motivates them. Concern about ‘the environment’ for its own sake is not generally their main reason for action. They tend to be more bothered about the effects of climate change on poorer people in developing countries. They’re often motivated by a deep sense of the injustice of a situation where those who will suffer most are those who have contributed least to the problem, and they talked in terms of trying to live with a fairer – therefore smaller – share of the world’s resources. When I asked them to imagine that we live in a different kind of world, one in which climate change would threaten polar bears with extinction but would somehow have little effect on humans, several interviewees said they would probably not be so anxious about the issue, and would not be trying so hard to address it.
Being WEIRD – a long but incredibly rewarding article about the mistaken belief that we all share “the same cognitive machinery—the same evolved rational and psychological hardwiring”. Cultures don’t just shape our attitudes and behaviours they “mold our most fundamental conscious and unconscious thinking and perception”. The article concludes: “we may have underestimated the impact of culture because the very ideas of being subject to the will of larger historical currents and of unconsciously mimicking the cognition of those around us challenges our Western conception of the self as independent and self-determined.
Blog: Rebuilding Optimism of Will – Che Guevara said that “the true revolutionary is guided by strong feelings of love”. But not just any love, the love of humanity that transcends the day to day love of individuals (our family for example). In a way its a shame that the actual content of this paragraph from Che has been bastardised to be about some nebulous love that drives revolutionaries. Instead what Che was talking about was a very real dilemma. How to keep ourselves motivated, heading towards the goal, when we have so little time for our real “loved ones”, so little time for ourselves, and to develop our personal lives.
The Sound of Change – From the team behind Live Aid and Live Earth comes this concert for women directed by Beyoncé who, repeatedly asked if she is a feminist, says things like: “I need to find a catchy new word for feminism, right? Like Bootylicious.”
Starting in September 2013, Common Cause and the UN Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development Scotland will be running an Action Learning Programme (ALP) to develop practical approaches to applying Common Cause.
The aim of the ALP is to catalyse action that contributes to sustainability by strengthening intrinsic values. The ALP will consist of six workshops in Scotland – one per month from September 2013 to February 2014 – supported by a mentoring programme. It is open to groups and organisations promoting community engagement with the natural world. Participants will be recruited in pairs from each group/organisation and nine groups/organisations will be able to participate.
We will be holding an information event on Tuesday 23rd April in Edinburgh, from 10:00 to 12:30. If your group or organisation is interested in participating in the ALP, you can book your place at the information event by visiting: http://groupspaces.com/CommonCauseScotland
Yesterday saw the launch of the campaign Leave Our Kids Alone, with a letter in The Telegraph, and articles in the Daily Mail and The Guardian. This campaign grapples with what must surely be one of the most important common causes around which third sector organisations, irrespective of the issues upon which they work, should be galvanised: the problem of advertising aimed at our children. Read more
Che Guevara said that “the true revolutionary is guided by strong feelings of love”. But not just any love, the love of humanity that transcends the day to day love of individuals (our family for example).1 In a way its a shame that the actual content of this paragraph from Che has been bastardised to be about some nebulous love that drives revolutionaries. Instead what Che was talking about was a very real dilemma. How to keep ourselves motivated, heading towards the goal, when we have so little time for our real “loved ones”, so little time for ourselves, and to develop our personal lives.
This is a serious issue that is often unconsidered by the left. But more over today those of us who have invested years to the cause of stopping climate change are at risk of demoralisation, depression, exhaustion, and alienation. For me this has been a confronting reality as I have struggled with depression for the better part of 2012 and have undertaken to see a psychologist. I suspect there are others out there in a similar state of mind.
There is an idea that well sums up the reality of our task as climate activists “combining pessimism of the intellect with optimism of the will”. Unfortunately getting the balance right is no easy task, nor will that balance be achieved accidentally. Read more
Could there ever be a corporate Common Cause? Adam Corner asks if the private sector shouldn’t start thinking about developing and investing in some common strategies for sustainability. As Tom Crompton has said, “The marketing industry has a particular responsibility to examine the impact of its activities on cultural values [but] a company’s management culture, the incentives it offers its employees, and its contribution to public priorities through the lobbying activities of its trade associations, are all likely to have crucial impacts on cultural values.” And on a related note, join the debate about ‘Goodvertising’ here.
This Space Available reclaiming cities and other spaces from the onslaught of the visual pollution of advertising.
The limits of data – “Data obscures values. I recently saw an academic book with the excellent title, Raw Data’ Is an Oxymoron. One of the points was that data is never raw; it’s always structured according to somebody’s predispositions and values. The end result looks disinterested, but, in reality, there are value choices all the way through, from construction to interpretation.”
We’re ‘consumers’ or ‘taxpayers’ and we care about things like ‘pay-off’, ‘return on investment’ and ‘growth’: that’s the bottom line. Right?
Well, I’d put my money on it.
But, actually, when did that happen? When did we start to pepper our meetings, our work, and even dinner conversations with such words and phrases? Sometimes, our use of economic framing has an obvious trigger; take ‘credit crunch’. In one of the recent economic crises, journalists repeatedly used it (with a straight face), and then before you knew it, the 2008 edition of the Oxford English Dictionary carried a new definition of the word ‘crunch’, as meaning “a severe shortage of money or credit”. It was always pretty difficult to pass that particular term casually into everyday conversation, but now we officially associate crunch with economic recession, as well as biscuits.
Economic frames easily creep into everyday language via news media, or advertising, or political rhetoric, but we have little awareness of the effect that might have on the way that we think and behave. Psychological research is finally shedding light on this.
Rajesh Makwana came to one of our workshops in January and kindly allowed us to repost this article, originally published at Shareable.
We are all painfully familiar with the plethora of statistics that illustrate how unsustainable modern lifestyles have become and how humanity is already consuming natural resources far faster than the planet can produce or renew them. In a bid to reverse these trends, increasing numbers of people are attempting to consume less, reduce waste and recycle more regularly. The rapid growth of the sharing economy over recent years reflects this growing environmental awareness and commitment to changing unsustainable patterns of consumption. The possibilities for sharing are already endless in many parts of the world, in everything from cars and drills to skills and knowledge. The sharing economy is undeniably taking off – and rightly so.
But can sharing the things we own as individuals really address the environmental threats facing Planet Earth? To some extent the answer is likely to depend on which resources are being shared and how many people are sharing them. However, given the urgent sustainability challenges we face – from climate change to deforestation and resource depletion – it seems unlikely that even well-developed systems of collaborative consumption will, on their own, constitute a sufficient response.
One year ago, I signed up for the Common Cause ‘Action Learning Process’ and started a journey with a group of campaigners from across the charity sector. Although we were all working on different issues (disability, international development, climate change) we shared a hunger for new ideas on how to campaign in a way that could reach out to more people and achieve fundamental changes in society.
Some initial reading around the theory of values and frames had enticed me in, but I was unsure of what to expect from the course. Although this theory provided the backbone of what followed, it was the process itself, and the people I shared it with that really stuck with me. Read more