Lessons Learned

"You cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by evading it today."

Abraham Lincoln

When I initially enrolled in International Environmental Politics, I did so without having much of an idea of the size and scope of material that our class would eventually cover. A course in environmentalism, I reasoned, would be an excellent way to broaden my academic experience during my final year at American University. As my concentration lay in international development, I did not expect that such a course would involve such complex, politically charged debates over issues of sovereignty, human rights and economic considerations characteristic of other SIS courses. Over the past fourteen weeks, I have observed how interconnected environmental concerns are to international relations, and how significant the repercussions of policy, beneficial or detrimental, can be. For this reason, there are four important points that merit special mention.

I. Believe in the institution.

Especially after reading Michael Maniates' article, "The Individualization of Responsibility," the futility of over-relying on disconcerted, individual, consumer based efforts to solve the global issue of climate change became clear. This is not to say that one should not recycle, or that riding a bicycle should be discouraged, but rather that the world in which we live is dominated by powerful, large-scale institutions that exert a high degree of political influence and economic leverage over our society. Meaningful change, therefore, must take place at the top as well as at the bottom. This may deviate from the conventional idea of grassroots level activism, but the article "Leverage Points" by Donella Meadows provided a strong case for this manner of thinking, as well as a pragmatic way of how to compel change in such institutions. 

2) The art of diplomacy in polarized debates

As was evidenced by class discussions as well as my brief Thanksgiving endeavor, in discussing environmental politics one must be diplomatic in the extreme. Excluding the segment of society that stubbornly refuses to acknowledge climate change as a real, urgent problem, environmental proponents must present their argument in a rational, even-keeled manner, even if they feel that the opposing perspective has no credibility. Appeals that are scientifically sound but presented in an overtly aggressive manner may have the effect of diminishing the receptivity of undecided individuals to the environmentalists' cause. Soft words win hard hearts. 

3) The importance of culture

As I sit in my two bedroom apartment watching football on my flat screen plasma TV while drinking a Starbucks venti Chai Tea Latte while typing this blog on my MacBook Pro and texting my friends on my Motorola smartphone, the culture of consumption, an observation advanced by Eric Assadourian, weighs heavily on my mind. Will it ever be feasible for my fellow countrymen to embrace changes that might reduce the number of conveniences that we enjoy? Will we be able to disassociate the idea of consumption from the way that we measure success or happiness? These may be difficult questions to ask, but they are more difficult to answer. Yet, in looking beyond our borders, it is clear that wealthy, developed countries need not adopt US levels of consumption to maintain a high quality of life. Other countries demonstrate negative rates of growth, proving that it is possible, at least at the national level, to check the expansion of the human population. 

4) The power of humanity to change

Most importantly, and above all else, this course has demonstrated the powers of humanity, though its own constructs, to make significant, far-reaching changes to human behavior. The work of such innovative individuals as William McDonough, the star architect of environmentally friendly buildings and author of Cradle to Cradle, is illustrative of how advances in technology and changes in thought can lead to ideas and initiatives that fundamentally alter the way in which humans live and interact with each other. Humanity is highly adept at improving the existing systems that we have created, but less so at shifting the paradigm of our operations. Only when we are able to objectively evaluate our society in terms of economic productivity in a way that makes environmental sense as well should we begin to improve efficiency.