Transcript
Mendel Skulski 00:00
Hey, everyone, hope you're all doing well.
[Melancholic ambient fades in] Immobilis jevonsii by Loam Zoku – Composed and produced by Schuyler Lindberg and Y'honatex
Adam Huggins 00:03
This is the last episode in our Scales of Change series. And, our heads are spinning. So we want to pause for a moment to process everything that's happened since we got started on this just two months ago. As of this recording in early July of 2020, we're in the middle of the kind of global pandemic experts have long feared would become more common as the climate warms. Hundreds of thousands of people have died, hundreds of millions are out of work indefinitely, and billions have gone through radical, unanticipated life shifts in the space of a handful of months. And it's only getting worse. Right now it feels like many leaders are more concerned with putting people back to work and putting them in harm's way than they are with taking this opportunity to imagine an economy that, for starters, won't collapse if it can't grow constantly, and doesn't leave huge parts of the population in dire straits during a crisis like this.
Mendel Skulski 01:07
Meanwhile, the price of oil cratered at one point even going negative, throwing the energy sector into a tailspin and hitting our neighboring province of Alberta particularly hard. Nevertheless, instead of reconsidering continued economic dependence on such a volatile and polluting resource, the Canadian government is arguing that a healthy fossil fuel industry is in fact an essential part of a transformation to a greener economy. And the province of Alberta has passed a bill that effectively criminalizes protest at or near so called critical infrastructure, meaning everything from pipelines to refineries, mines, highways, and railways.
Adam Huggins 01:48
Basically all of the choice spots to stage a protest.
Mendel Skulski 01:52
Notably, this list of critical infrastructure doesn't include lakes, rivers, forests and the atmosphere.
Adam Huggins 02:03
It's now been over a month since Minneapolis police murdered George Floyd. And the movement for Black Lives has exposed police violence and systemic white supremacist racism at a pretty much global scale. Almost overnight, reforms that were thought previously impossible have become inevitable. And we're only at the beginning of a transformation that, much like the climate crisis, requires everybody's participation.
Mendel Skulski 02:30
And then, after an incredible 17% drop in global carbon emissions during the initial months of the pandemic, carbon is spiking again as economies reopen. In an alarming underreported story, an unprecedented heat wave in Siberia has led to catastrophic wildfires, which are melting permafrost and accelerating a climate destabilizing carbon feedback loop.
Adam Huggins 02:57
There are moments right now when I feel hopeful in a way that I haven't felt in years. And then there are moments when I feel utterly terrified. Because in some places people are embracing change, and in others, they're clearly doubling down. We began this series as an attempt to offer just a set of ideas and tools that we can use to help each other to act when maybe we're not always up for it. We wanted to highlight some bright spots, to inspire, and also to point out some cognitive traps that we've observed ourselves falling into.
Mendel Skulski 03:28
And what we've presented isn't meant to be comprehensive. There's so much we haven't even touched on. What's become really clear to us though, is that the tools to slay these dragons apply to more than just the climate. They can be used in our response to COVID-19, the steps we take to end police violence, and beyond.
Adam Huggins 03:49
Throughout this series, we've positioned the dragons as relevant to either our individual actions or to our collective ones. Maybe by this point, you've realized that this dichotomy is a bit of a ruse. Individual actions always have systemic effects. Our individual actions matter, and, our collective actions matter. They've never mattered more.
Mendel Skulski 04:21
And so we've reached the last chapter of this field guide. We're going to introduce you to the last genus of dragon, and then leave you with some points for departure. Welcome to Chapter Seven: A Form of Life.
[Theme song] D7 by Loam Zoku – Composed and produced by Schuyler Lindberg and Y'honatex
Introduction Voiceover 04:38
This is Scales of Change: A Field Guide to the Dragons of Climate Inaction. Join us as we learn to spot them in the wild, and discover how they can be disarmed. Produced by Future Ecologies on the traditional territories of the Lekwungen and WSÁNEĆ peoples, with support from the University of Victoria.
[Music fades out]
Mendel Skulski 05:12
Okay, we're back. This is our seventh chapter, our seventh genus of dragon, and our final episode of this series. If for whatever reason, you've decided to start your journey with us at the end, we can't stop you. But we can say that the content of this episode will make more sense if you listen to the introduction, entitled, A Theory of Change. Once again, I'm Mendel. This is Adam.
Adam Huggins 05:37
Hello!
Mendel Skulski 05:38
And this is Professor Robert Gifford.
Robert Gifford 05:40
Hello.
Mendel Skulski 05:42
Today, our final genus, the genus Immobilis, or limited behavior, contains only two species of dragon– Tokenism, and the Rebound Effect.
Adam Huggins 05:53
Despite their number, they're among the most pernicious dragons of all, especially for those of us who already care deeply about climate change. The first is Immobilis signum, or, the Dragon of Tokenism.
Robert Gifford 06:06
Yeah, I mean, because a lot of people think that, you know, in the one liner I recycle, so I'm done. And of course, recycling is a good thing, but it's not all we need to do. So the tokenism dragon is, uh, thinking that you've done something so you've done enough. Um, and it's simply not the case.
Adam Huggins 06:28
Most of us like to maintain a positive perception of ourselves. And so we tend to celebrate our victories and conveniently ignore or rationalize our shortcomings. Tokenism is when you tip the scales, letting one good deed pay for an otherwise unexamined lifestyle.
Mendel Skulski 06:47
And if you go one step further, and convince yourself that your good behavior might just have earned you a treat, then you my friend, have fallen victim to the Rebound Effect.
Robert Gifford 06:58
The Rebound Effect is an important one too, because, and maybe that's the one that needs some attention, because people like to reward themselves for being good. And often there, there's evidence for this. That the net carbon cost of the reward to self is greater than the carbon saved by the virtuous behavior. And I'll use that example– the honey, I bought a Prius, let's drive to Newfoundland.
Adam Huggins 07:27
For the non-Canadians amongst us, Newfoundland is a province that's about as far from British Columbia as you can get in Canada.
Mendel Skulski 07:33
The Rebound Effect is our second dragon. We've named it Immobilis jevonsii. It's the only dragon named after a person. William Stanley Jevons and his eponymous Jevons paradox.
Robert Gifford 07:46
That's the other name for for the Rebound Effect, or the original name, coal in the 19th century in England. I, I know about the Jevons paradox, yeah.
Mendel Skulski 07:53
How about you break it down for us?
Robert Gifford 07:55
Well, I'm, I'm not confident I'll get it exactly right. But I think what happened was as mechanization in coal mining began in Industrial Revolution, the price of coal went down and then people started using more coal because it was cheaper.
Adam Huggins 08:11
Yeah, I'd say that's it in a nutshell. Future Ecologies listeners may remember that we've touched on Jevons paradox before.
Mendel Skulski 08:18
Season two, episode six.
Adam Huggins 08:20
But to recap, the Rebound Effect is not limited to coal or, even just to fossil fuels. It's actually about the nature of efficiency in general. When technology enables us to do more with less, we tend to take those gains in efficiency and reinvest them in even more production and consumption, which transforms what could have been a virtuous cycle into a vicious cycle.
Robert Gifford 08:45
Yeah, and I think Rebound Effect is really underestimated in all this, uh, that as things get more efficient, we just use them more.
Mendel Skulski 08:54
Honestly, this is one of the scariest dragons to me.
Adam Huggins 08:58
Me too.
Mendel Skulski 08:59
Like, all on an individual level, it's easy to undo your pro-climate choices with guilty pleasures, or, just use too much of a good thing. Like Robert said, you might drive your electric car 100 times further than you would if you owned, you know, a gas guzzler.
Adam Huggins 09:16
I can attest to that personally.
Mendel Skulski 09:18
But if you zoom out, it's even worse. The conventional wisdom is that by increasing the efficiency of our cars and our houses and everything we do, that will just make us more sustainable by default.
Bill Carroll 09:30
This is like the argument that the oil industry gives. What we need to do is not cut back on the amount but just make it much more efficient in the sense of less of a carbon load going into the atmosphere. Okay,
Mendel Skulski 09:42
This is Bill Carroll. He's concerned that focusing our efforts on efficiency alone is missing the point.
Bill Carroll 09:49
Actually, what that gives rise to is an increased use of the fuel rather than a downward sloping curve that gets us out of fossil fuel use. So it's a paradox because supposedly, this is a route out of carbon dependency, but it just increases usage because it actually, uh, cheapens the cost of the commodity in the first place. So, you know, energy efficiency isn't really a solution to the climate crisis.
Adam Huggins 10:17
Okay, so back up a second. Who is Bill and what does he do?
Bill Carroll 10:22
Well, I'm Bill Carroll. I teach sociology at UVic and codirect the Corporate Mapping Project.
Mendel Skulski 10:29
And he's not alone. We're also joined by his colleague, James Rowe.
James Rowe 10:33
I'm James Rowe, and I'm a prof of Environmental Studies here at UVic and I'm a researcher with Corporate Mapping Project.
Adam Huggins 10:40
I've heard the words Corporate Mapping Project twice now. So, what is it exactly?
Mendel Skulski 10:46
Well, it's a map… of corporations.
Adam Huggins 10:51
[Laughs] Okay, c'mon, can we get more than that?
Mendel Skulski 10:53
Okay, so it, it's more like a public directory. A who's who of the companies, funders, lobbyists, and regulators that are the actual power structures behind what you would otherwise call the fossil fuel industry and all of their enablers. It's a list of all the players and how they're connected.
Adam Huggins 11:11
Okay, so it's like, it's like a cork board with string and pins and lots of photos and everything?
Mendel Skulski 11:17
Well, it, it's a little easier to read than that. The Corporate Mapping Project is an attempt to pull back the curtain on the political powers that profit off of maintaining the fossil fuel status quo. The goal of the mapping project is to make energy policy more transparent. But, in addition to that, Bill and James advocate for a way to erode this deeply tangled power structure– divestment.
James Rowe 11:43
Very simply, divestment is removing our investments from fossil fuel companies.
Mendel Skulski 11:48
Which just means selling any shares held in those companies and thereby shedding the incentive to see them prosper.
James Rowe 11:55
Now the premise underlying the divestment is actually very similar to the premise underlying the Corporate Mapping Project which is at the primary block to significant action on climate change, is the concentrated power of the fossil fuel industry. And so what divestment tries to do is, is whittle away at the social license that that industry has by getting high profile institutions like universities and pension funds and charitable trusts and churches to divest. And so that culturally begins to marginalize the industry, which then opens up space for politicians to do the right thing, and that it, by marginalizing the industry makes, it harder for them to wield their significant influence to shape, uh, political decision making.
Adam Huggins 12:38
So to me, the question is, why choose this approach?
Mendel Skulski 12:42
Uh, I'll, I'll let Bill answer that.
Bill Carroll 12:44
Well, I think if we're experiencing climate breakdown, as we are, you know, we need to take really dramatic action and an aspect of that is beginning to think about the allocation of capital and how we can really shift from the overemphasis on, you know, business as usual and fossil fuels forever, to, renewables. But I think the shift has to take place in a way that sets the table for, uh, a more socially just future.
James Rowe 13:14
Yeah, like there's all along, there's been the moral argument that we've made from the beginning. And the, that moral argument that divestment uses is that if it's wrong to wreck the planet, then it's wrong to profit from that wreckage. And so it's just sort of a very clear message that we shouldn't be investing in the companies that are primarily responsible for the climate emergency.
Adam Huggins 13:35
I appreciate that they're framing this as a moral argument, because I've also seen divestment framed as a sort of forward thinking investment argument. And that is a position that only works if fossil fuels turn out to be bad investments. Which is happening right now, but even when they are, there's still this mythology around them being profitable. But we did talk about financial investments and sunk costs in the last chapter. So I guess my question to you is, what does divestment have to do with the Rebound Effect and Jevons paradox?
Mendel Skulski 14:05
We're getting there, I promise.
Adam Huggins 14:07
Okay. Well, as long as we're digging into divestment with our corkboard, there's something that I've never really understood. And I'm not an economist by any means. But if the point of the divestment movement is to encourage people in institutions to sell their shares in fossil fuel companies, then presumably, someone is also buying those shares, right. So, does that actually accomplish anything?
Mendel Skulski 14:34
It does. For starters, prospective buyers always want to get in for cheaper than the market price. So a move to sell naturally pushes the price down a little bit. But more importantly, the market works on sentiment– the collective aggregated intuition of just how much things are worth. The biggest impact of divestment isn't the price movement from the sale directly, but rather, it's the social influence. To that point, here's James,
James Rowe 15:03
From the beginning, it's understood that the actual capital movement is relatively marginal. But the announcements themselves have impact on share price. There's actually been research done showing that significant divestment announcements have a depressing effect on, on share price. Fossil fuel companies are seen as the new tobacco. And the pariahs. And that that's the exact goal of the movement is to marginalize them, so that it's harder for them to wield their influence, and I think we're already starting to see that happening.
Adam Huggins 15:31
So, so just by making a big show about how you're divesting, it tells the world that you no longer believe in oil as a safe financial bet. And that drives prices down.
Mendel Skulski 15:43
Yeah, the public divestment can help create a social stigma around fossil fuel companies. And that will make anybody who's thinking about getting into the market that much more apprehensive about their possible future returns.
Bill Carroll 15:57
Currently, these big corporations are seen as "blue chip," you know this this kind of notion that they're really, um, secure investments and so on and so forth.
Mendel Skulski 16:06
Which is clearly not the case anymore. Since I spoke with Bill and James, this topsy turvy world has sent oil prices crashing into the negatives for the first time ever. An oversupply and a lack of storage capacity meant that people were actually paying to get the stuff off of their hands. Nobody knows how the fossil fuel market is going to look by the time you're listening to this. The only thing we know for certain is that oil and oil companies are no longer the safe bets that they were long assumed to be.
Adam Huggins 16:39
Negative. I, like I [laughs] the whole negative price thing was hilarious, and my favorite meme about it was that barrel, like barrel of monkeys was worth more than barrel of oil.
Mendel Skulski 16:49
[Chuckles] Yeah.
Adam Huggins 16:50
That made me smile. But like, I, I can't pretend that that makes any sense to me at all.
Mendel Skulski 16:56
Yeah, but that's okay. This is definitely not the podcast that should be talking about futures contracts and the rest of it.
Adam Huggins 17:03
I agree. But on the subject it like, it's, it's been surreal, right? Living through such a dramatic collapse of the oil industry. And, you know, like the chickens have come home to roost in a sense. The divestment movement has been saying that this would happen all along. And now that wave is broken. And the result is just disaster. Our economy is still so intertwined with fossil fuels here in Canada that the suffering is like, it's real, right? People that work in the energy industry are going to need help. And I just, I feel like we've seen this before, that the knee jerk reaction of government is just gonna be to continue to prop up the industry, because that's the system that we live in.
Mendel Skulski 17:49
And that's why we need a deeper reassessment of that system, and the powers that shape it. So it's more important than ever to keep the pressure on and make these arguments about divestment.
Bill Carroll 18:02
That's, that's one of the starting points, I guess, just to begin to question the concentration of corporate power and whether they should have the power that they wield. And particularly in the fossil fuel sector, given the, um, the rapidly deepening climate crisis, it's not as if we have a lot of time to just dither away here and think that well, you know, we can, we can make some short term profits today and maybe get out before the last person gets out of this company. We actually need to be moving rapidly and, uh, dramatically. So divestment is a piece of the puzzle, but it's an important piece because the momentum is building toward shifting investments, you know, just on pure rational economic grounds, let alone the climate crisis. So I think divestment can help that process along but a lot of it is educative. That is, raising consciousness so that people can begin to see what the power structure looks like, you know? Where's all this capital going? You know who controls it? When you get into the politics of divestment, it's as, it gives you a certain angle on the broader political economic system.
Adam Huggins 19:16
I mean, in the end, it's about putting your money where your mouth is, right. There are lots of major institutions out there that are trumpeting their achievements and commitment to being climate friendly, including oil companies. But if those institutions aren't willing to divest, then ultimately that's just like, that's the Dragon of Tokenism right there.
Mendel Skulski 19:36
Totally.
Adam Huggins 19:38
Saying one thing and, and doing another when it really counts. So I get that, but I'm wondering like, What is the connection that you see between divestment and the Rebound Effect with Jevons paradox?
Mendel Skulski 19:51
You mean like, what's my point?
Adam Huggins 19:54
Yeah, I mean, like, what's your point?
Mendel Skulski 19:56
Okay, here it goes. The Rebound Effect, Jevons paradox, means that even if we escape our most pressing ecological issue, clearly, greenhouse gases and fossil fuels, we could still be in trouble in the long run. If all we do is decarbonize our energy sources, then we'll have done nothing to address the deepest aspects of our unsustainable relationship with the rest of the natural world.
Bill Carroll 20:22
Well, I would say that it's not so much a feature of humanity, per se, but it's definitely a feature of capitalism in that capitalism is a growth machine. There's, you know, you can't have a capitalist economy that doesn't grow. Because if it's not growing it goes into crisis. This way of life is geared to endless growth and, and endless growth means and endlessly increasing ecological footprints. So I agree with you, like, it's more than just an energy issue actually.
James Rowe 20:52
We absolutely have to be moving off of a growth based economy. It just doesn't make any logical sense that you can have an economy rooted and continuous economic growth on a finite planet. It's, it's a contradiction. Uh, and it's one that won't end well for us.
Mendel Skulski 21:07
But I don't think that a bitter end is an inevitable truth. Like Bill, I don't believe that it's some essential part of human nature to produce and consume to the absolute limits of our capacity. Jevons paradox is a consequence of our relationship with nature. It's the result of our perspective of a planet as something that's ours to use, and use up. And all of the cultural systems that have grown out of that.
Adam Huggins 21:36
Yeah, I agree that it's not innate. I think we've all been sort of brainwashed into believing and thinking of ourselves as consumers, right?
Mendel Skulski 21:44
Yeah.
Adam Huggins 21:44
But that's, there's nothing like, inherent about that in us.
Mendel Skulski 21:48
Right. So, the way that we can finally escape the Rebound Effect, collectively, is to challenge that perspective. To divest from the cultural stories that have delivered us climate change, and the stories that will continue to wreak havoc on the more than human world. Jevons paradox is not inevitable, but it is built into the culture of extractivism that we've inherited.
Adam Huggins 22:16
Okay. Um. So if we're going to expand the notion of divestment beyond the financial to include broader cultural narratives, then I think it's worth considering some of the finer points of the language that we're using here. It's, it's often easy to determine what kind of cultural narrative somebody is living within just by the language that they use.
[Mellow electronic music begins] FAWM 16 by Damon Boucher
Adam Huggins 22:40
So for example, you brought up the term extractivism, which refers to a culture that's based on the extraction and sale of natural resources. And that's a term that has meaning for you and I and for development scholars and environmental advocates, but I've never actually heard anyone who is actually in extractive industry, use it They're much more likely to employ the language of economic progress and mobility. So in terms of divestment when you're trying to convince someone to make a decision, the language that you use and the social affiliations and cultural narratives that it evokes– that's really important. And to expand on this idea, here is Candis Callison.
Candis Callison 23:23
My name is Candis Callison. I am an associate professor at UBC in the School of Journalism, Writing and Media and in the Institute for Critical Indigenous Studies, and I am from the Tahltan Nation in Northwestern BC. What's now Northwestern BC,
Mendel Skulski 23:39
Before Al Gore's breakthrough film, An Inconvenient Truth, had even hit theaters in 2006, Candis was conducting research on how the language and impact of climate change conversations varied dramatically within different social groups.
Adam Huggins 23:55
Candice's fieldwork led her to write about climate change as a form of life, which is a concept that she borrowed from Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Candis Callison 24:06
A form of life means that there's still negotiation around what something is. The grammars, the associations, all of those things are still being worked out and figured out. If you think about the way that a child learns language, right? They learn language through listening to use, the meaning isn't defined to them, and then they figure out how to use it. The meaning is established through using it. And I think it's the same thing with climate change. The meaning of what it is, how you should act, what you should do, whether there's a call to action, that all gets established through using it, and you see the different ways that people use it calls people to action in different ways. Touches on, you know, ethical and moral reasoning, right? That's already been established. And so how climate change gets situated within these ethical and moral frameworks and you know, and what kinds of knowledge matters, right? Those sorts of questions I think are really interesting. And they fall outside the kind of usual spectrum of talking about climate change as a science issue. It isn't a science issue. It's actually an ethical and moral issue. It's one in which meaning is continually being established.
Adam Huggins 25:19
Attentive listeners will note that Bill and James framed divestment as a moral issue earlier in this episode, as opposed to just an economic issue. And here again, Candis is considering climate change as a moral issue, as opposed to just a scientific issue. At heart, most of us really just want to do what's right. But that moral clarity is felt differently, depending on the form of life that the climate crisis takes in different communities. Even just right now, we're using the term climate crisis as opposed to climate change or global warming, in order to situate this conversation within a specific social and political and ecological context. Candis's work considers a number of examples of people trying to adapt the language of climate change. To connect with the specific moral frameworks of the communities that they inhabit. So, using the divestment movement as an example, Wall Street and the finance industry aren't exactly known for their ecological sensitivity. But if you point out that sea level rise and a worsening hurricane season, have real material impacts on their coastal investments, they'll listen. When you turn climate change into climate risk, you start speaking their language. Which is exactly what CERES one of the organizations that Candice studied, does.
Candis Callison 26:44
That is the genius, is that, they not only shifted the vernacular, they shifted all the other codes of ethics and morality associated with another vernacular. And by bringing them together, you end up with this different way of thinking about climate change.
Mendel Skulski 27:00
And just like that, a whole generation of investors could find themselves knowingly or otherwise, as honeybees.
Candis Callison 27:08
You just can't discount the social affiliations and the many groups that we're all a part of. The many groups that we have allegiance to, right? The many ethical and moral things that we consider important. And... and... and I think every individual has those kinds of varied collective so they, they feel a part of. How we act as individuals has a lot to do with how we situate ourselves as, in relationship, as, knowledgeable beings, as, you know, part of collectives.
Adam Huggins 27:41
And right now, many of these collectives remain opposed, either expressly or tacitly, to taking climate action. The battle lines have been long drawn and calcified. And so we have to learn to speak each other's languages, and, to understand the different forms of life that the climate crisis has taken for different collectives. I think that that's the key to starting to shift some of these cultural narratives that we've been playing out, over and over again. But if we're divesting from a dominant cultural narrative of efficiency and endless growth and extractivism, then what should we be investing in? What's the new cultural narrative? In other words, what's the solution? Well, it might be tempting to wish for a fix that lasts, uh, some kind of idyllic, sustainable society. But, there really is no such thing as a perfect solution. Here again, is Elin Kelsey, from Chapter One.
Elin Kelsey 28:45
There are many reasons that people are nervous about solutions or talking about solutions. And I think part of it is that we, we think of solutions as an end. You know? Like we fixed it, or, we've solved it. And, and I, I think we're never at an end. I think we move in a direction of what looks like a solution of that time. And we do that in our ordinary life. We try, we try to make things work better. And so I, I think it's about constant vigilance. But that constant vigilance, uh, should not prevent us from moving forward, [laughs] you know? And that it requires this huge, uh, welcomeness of failing [laughs], you know, all of those kinds of things that we know are part of how we make our way forward.
Mendel Skulski 29:27
We're all in for a transformation. And, as with any transformation, it may be painful, surprising, and anything but linear. If we're going to divest from our old ways of being, the most important thing we can do is simply stay open and observe. To watch the changes in ourselves, the changes under our feet, and respond accordingly.
Elin Kelsey 29:52
I just think it's inevitable that we'll move in directions with technology that we can't even anticipate now. We will move in directions with, you know, the restoration of ecosystems that we we know nothing about. And so, ideas are always changing. They always will be. And then we adjust as we must do and always have.
Adam Huggins 30:12
There always going to be unknown unknowns. And by letting go of the notion that sustainability is actually an achievable thing, we can also start to undermine the Dragon of Tokenism. Because it becomes more about a practice of improvement than a state of performance.
Elin Kelsey 30:32
Things shift. Stories change. And we need to recognize that when we talk about the environment in the same way that we do anything else.
Adam Huggins 30:40
And this line of thought has a mirror in the outdated misconception of an ecosystem as being an equilibrium. As if something can exist in perfect harmony, and then be disrupted by some intruding force. In reality, as far as we can tell, every ecosystem is in constant flux with different organisms interacting and shaping their world for their own needs.
Elin Kelsey 31:06
Right now, the current estimate is there's 8.7 million other species on Earth. And so a lot of the time when we're talking about the environment, we're really talking about what humans do, which we should. We're hugely impactful. People talk about the Anthropocene, you know, the period where humans are a dominant force on the planet. But there are surprises constantly, because of what other species are doing that, that we simply didn't know, or didn't take into account. And so, I, I think it, it means we'll always be surprised. And again, that means there's never a final place. I guarantee there will always be stuff that comes along. I had no idea how [laughs] these other species were doing this or you know, and that changes everything.
Bill Carroll 31:50
It makes sense to me that sustainability is a kind of a permanent challenge, that will probably never be, maybe never should be or could be be, a finished process.
Adam Huggins 32:04
Because the thing about forms of life is that they evolve.
[Music fades out.]
Adam Huggins 32:14
So instead of solutions, here's what we have to offer– a series of points of departure as we promised at the top of the episode. Each dragon genius that we examined in the series offered us a sort of key takeaway. And we designed the series to try to put these takeaways into practice ourselves. So, in the spirit of Robert, the Collector, we're going to share these takeaways with you as a summary.
[Dramatic music begins] August by IKSRE
Mendel Skulski 32:40
In Chapter One, we explored the Dragons of Limited Cognition, which prey on our irrationality. We discussed the way that environmental communication often defaults to traumatic stories, and we looked at Hopepunk as a genre that offers a way out of the cycle of trauma. The key takeaway for us, as storytellers, is that by shining a light on bright spots, these places where things are better than they should be, or where people have come up with novel solutions, we can remind ourselves that we're not starting from scratch here. There are solutions all around us.
Adam Huggins 33:17
In Chapter Two, we examine the Dragons of Ideologies, which prey on unexamined constellations of belief. We focused on techno-salvation. And Mendel used the example of negative emissions technology to illustrate how, while we can't rely on novel technologies alone to save us, they're also an indispensable part of any credible vision for a low carbon future at this point. Our key takeaway? That we can't neglect to use the tools that we have while we build the tools we wish we had.
Mendel Skulski 33:50
In Chapter Three, we interrogated the Dragons of Social Comparison, which prey on self-defeating social norms. Adam highlighted two multidisciplinary community art projects that engage people in expanding their narratives about what climate change is, and what it means. For us, the key takeaway is that social norms shift when we have these conversations in public, and that these conversations can never really be complete or objective. Instead, they need to include and be informed by a diversity of perspectives.
Adam Huggins 34:26
We also introduced Robert's mules, who lead by example through their own climate actions.
Mendel Skulski 34:33
Right.
Adam Huggins 34:34
In Chapter Four, we took a ride with the Dragons of Discredence, which prey on mistrust. We got the lowdown from some behavioral scientists on how to design effective incentive programs. And our key takeaway was that it's really hard to change what people care about. So instead, it's best to figure out what they already care about, and then meet them there, helping them understand how taking action on the climate fits within their existing set of priorities.
Mendel Skulski 35:00
And that's where we introduced Robert's honeybees who can be motivated to benefit the climate by pursuing their own self-interest.
Adam Huggins 35:08
Yes.
Mendel Skulski 35:09
Then in Chapter Five, we looked at the Dragons of Perceived Risk, which prey on our fears. We met Gloria Ushigua, who, despite tremendous risk to herself, and her family, became a legally recognized force of nature through her resistance to oil exploitation in her ancestral territory. Our key takeaway? It's dangerous for climate activists all around the world, [vocals begin over music] especially people of color. So the more of us who stand together and take those risks together, the safer and more effective, we will all be.
Adam Huggins 35:43
In Chapter Six, we dove into the Dragons of Sunk Costs, which prey on our investments. We focused on place attachment, and tagged along with the unique indigenous led education initiative that framed climate action within a place-based and language-based indigenous framework. The key takeaway for us is that place attachment is kind of a double-edged sword. But that love of place is a critical common ground that can bring us together and accommodate diverse histories and values.
Mendel Skulski 36:16
And finally, in this chapter, we explored the Dragons of Limited Behavior, which prey on our complacency. We link to the international movement to divest from fossil fuels, with the need to divest from the economics of endless growth, and the narratives that drive it. [Vocals stop] Our final takeaway is this. The work we have ahead of us is just ongoing. There will never be a tidy ending or a victory. Only a stream of new lessons and challenges. And as we go forward, it will serve us well to remember that each of us is just one of many forms of life on this planet. [Music fades out] Just one of many agents of change. So, here we are. One introduction, seven chapters, and 36 dragons later.
Adam Huggins 37:11
And, maybe a few new ones too.
Robert Gifford 37:13
The last thing I would ever do is say I've got the complete final list of all the dragons and all their implications. I, I have no such [laughs] illusions. So I'm, I'm, that's how this thing got this way– is people telling me stuff so I'm just a collector.
Mendel Skulski 37:28
That's right. There may still be undescribed dragons just waiting to be named.
Adam Huggins 37:34
But for now we've met all of the dragons that we know of so far. And, we each carry dragons. Different ones to different degrees. Once we can name them, we can start to see them. And, as we learn from each other, we'll find ways to slay them or even use them to take climate action.
[Peaceful bells begin] In Pursuit of Silence by Daniel Birch
Charlene George 37:55
This is perhaps a really good spot to remind us all that there's no wrong way to do something right.
Mendel Skulski 38:02
Before we go, we'd like to share a few words from kQwa’st’not Charlene George. You'll remember her from our introductory episode, "A Theory of Change."
Charlene George 38:12
Because change, or transformation, is uncomfortable. And many people want to have everything organized and planned down to the minute and instead, when you're going through transformation, you have a fear because you don't know what it's going to be. Some people are very adventurous in their souls and they will embrace that and some are not. And we have to encourage each one to be able to take a chance.
Mendel Skulski 38:45
And as we divest from our old stories, we'll make room for some new ones.
Charlene George 38:51
Society as a whole, especially Western society, has gotten very comfortable with where they are at. Education systems, government systems, were all designed to make a comfortable place for Western thinking, Western ideas, and how we're going to conquer the world. If we entered into a new place, with a more intercultural thinking of, "oh, I'm going to go meet a new relative," I'm interested in seeing how other people might do or be or act or govern themselves. We would have a very different society today if that had been the thinking. But that wasn't the thinking. It was a need for similar practices in language, understanding math, science, all of those parts. Now, I'm not saying that we throw out the baby with the bathwater. But what I am saying is that change is needed. The system that we presently have is archaic. It was designed for a time and place that no longer exists. And we really need to think about "how would we like it to be?" So why not redesign it to suit ourselves as we are transforming beings? And look at us as not just human, but we have a bigger family that we need to consider how we are designing what we could do, how we could be, and how we might work together.
[Music shifts to an electronic beat] A Garden City To Call One's Own by Radioactive Bishop
Adam Huggins 40:40
This has been Scales of Change: A Field Guide to the Dragons of Climate Inaction.
Mendel Skulski 40:45
If this podcast inspired you, please take a second to rate and review it wherever you listen.
Adam Huggins 40:51
And don't forget to tell some friends. Because, after all, our stories are the most important tool we have for change.
Mendel Skulski 40:59
Scale of Change is a production of Future Ecologies with support from the University of Victoria.
Adam Huggins 41:06
In this chapter, you heard Robert Gifford, Bill Carroll, James Roe, Candis Callison, Elin Kelsey, kQwa’st’not Charlene George, myself, Adam Huggins...
Mendel Skulski 41:18
...and me, Mendel Skulski. Thanks to Andrew Phillips, Ilana Fonariov, and Simone Miller. Endless thanks to Suzanne Ahearne, Anne MacLaurin, and of course Robert Gifford at the University of Victoria for making this series possible. Besides discovering the Dragons of Inaction, and teaching at UVic, Robert Gifford is the author of the textbook: Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice
Adam Huggins 41:46
Bill Carroll co-authored the book Organizing the 1%: How Corporate Power Works, and is a co-director of the Corporate Mapping Project. Check it out at Corporatemapping.ca.
Mendel Skulski 41:58
James Rowe is an Associate Professor of Political Ecology, divestment advocate, and researcher with the Corporate Mapping Project.
Adam Huggins 42:06
Candis Callison is an Associate Professor in the Graduate School of Journalism at UBC, and in the Institute for Critical Indigenous Studies. She's also a frequent panelist on the Media Indigena podcast, which is fantastic, and is the author of How Climate Change Comes to Matter: The Communal Life of Facts. You should also check out her latest book fresh off the presses. It's called Reckoning: Journalism's Limits and Possibilities.
Mendel Skulski 42:33
Elin Kelsey is an environmental educator, and the author of many truly excellent books for kids and adults. Her latest, available this October from Greystone books, is called Hope Matters.
Adam Huggins 42:43
kQwa’st’not Charlene George is the creator and compiler of an immense interactive artwork and teaching tool, combining Coast Salish language, visual art, and many, many stories. It's available online from the Sierra Club and it's called Seeing Through Watchers’ Eyes. Our theme for this series is by Loam Zoku. Other music in this episode was produced by Soda Lite, Anitek, Damon Boucher, Daniel Birch, IKSRE, and Radioactive Bishop. And I just want to give a heartfelt thanks to all of the musicians that contributed music to this series.
Mendel Skulski 43:24
You can tweet at us, or follow us on Facebook and Instagram at Future Ecologies, or send an email to scalesofchange@futureecologies.net.
Adam Huggins 43:35
If you want to get to know the Dragons of Inaction in detail, you can find their names both in English and silly made up Latin, their definitions, and even their phylogeny at futureecologies.net/dragons.
Mendel Skulski 43:49
You can support our work and join our community at patreon.com/futureecologies.
Adam Huggins 43:56
And if you like what we've done here, don't forget to subscribe to Future Ecologies wherever you listen to podcasts. We’ll be back for season three before too long.
Mendel Skulski 44:05
Thanks for listening. Bye for now.
Transcribed by https://otter.ai and edited by Victoria Klein