I was privileged to attend a side event at COP17 in Durban
last year and I have explored some of the disappointment and hope from the
international climate negotiations in a previous post. At the time I was
looking forward to Rio+20 as a more relevant event for progress on cities and
our built environment. And on some fronts it seems to be so, at least as far as
cities are concerned.
However the final text contains few, if any, firm
commitments. The commentary coming out of Rio was downbeat, with the hash-tag
#riominus20 getting airtime on Twitter - and Greenpeace adopting what CEO, Kumi
Naidoo, has termed a 'war footing' of civil disobedience. The USA and Russia
appear to be the major blockers of strong action, perhaps with a view to exploiting
arctic energy resources?
Guardian columnist George Monbiot wrote an excellent piece
on how global leaders are using the rhetoric of hope to string the public along
with these global negotiations. I too have allowed myself to dare to hope that
leaders will announce some big breakthrough at these conferences, something
more than is needed, not less - and each time I have been bitterly
disappointed.
And yet why are we disappointed? There has been so much
written on the relationship between corporations and governments: embracing
partners in a dance of power and wealth, at any cost it would seem. Is it not
naive to believe that this very system will somehow transcend its own
inherently selfish nature?
So the inevitable failure of Rio hurts, but does not
surprise... And yet, despite my best efforts (a few brief minutes of fantasy
about being a John Gant of sorts and dismantling the industrial machine,
although for wildly different reasons to those described in Atlas Shrugged), I
cannot give up hope. But I cannot hope in the pomp and ego of the global sustainability
summits any more. They have been sold to us on the basis of 'last chances' but negotiators
have failed us too many times now.
Instead I must hope in individuals working to do things better
tomorrow than they did them yesterday. Simple things. Because we seem to find
our humanity at the local scale and that is where my hope lies, in finding our
humanity. And even in the midst of massive institutional failure, and the
potential humanitarian and environmental disasters that might follow, I can
still hope in community and the simple, everyday human interactions that build
it.
So for my part, my efforts will be directed at designing
spaces that best allow community to engage with environmental and humanitarian
challenges at their own scale, in their own context.
“The key is to map out ways in which the new society can begin to grow within and alongside the institutions it may gradually marginalize and replace. That is what making change is really about. Rather than simply waiting for government to do it for us, we have to start making it in our own lives and in the institutions of our society right away. What we need is not one big revolution but a continuous stream of small changes in a consistent direction. And to give ourselves the best chance of making the necessary transformation of society we need to remember that the aim is to make a more sociable society, which means avoiding the disruption and dislocation which increase insecurity and fear and so often ends in disastrous backlash. The aim is to increase people’s sense of security and to reduce fear; to make everyone feel that a more equal society not only has room for them but also that it offers a more fulfilling life than is possible in a society dominated by hierarchy and inequality.”
ReplyDeleteThe Spirit Level: Why Equality is better for everyone, Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, 2010, Penguin books, UK.
p236