Monday, April 27, 2009
I was at a recent meeting for an environmental organization where someone brought up the term “state of emergency” to describe global warming. The organization talked about the possibility of declaring a “state of emergency” in order to get something done about energy use in their city. Some people stood behind it, while others felt it was too drastic.
At the time, I listened and didn’t state my opinion, and I enjoyed learning about people’s different perspectives on the issue. I do not know whether or not the term would be appropriate for purposes of public interest and public policy, but I would agree that our planet is in an environmental state of emergency.
For some, it can be easy not to recognize the extent to which our environment is in danger unless one has personal ties to drastic situations. For example, cancer clusters possibly caused by chemical Superfund sites, slash-and-burn deforestation, or the breaking off of an iceberg. The examples I’ve cited seem so extreme that it can be difficult to connect them to our lives. And yet, Superfund chemical sites occur in our own hometowns, and people drive cars emitting carbon dioxide daily.
The type of environmental degradation occurring today as a result of a century’s worth of degradation is generally insidious rather than explicit, so I can further understand why people would hesitate to use a term as alarming as “state of emergency.”
But what if we were to look closer to home? What if we were to look, simply, at the rate at which land is being developed in our own towns?
Take a moment to notice how many “land for sale” signs you see on the side of the highway the next time you are driving. What is your reaction?
Unless we pay attention, our daily routines do not necessarily cue us into the harm that is taking place. It might be true that for people who recognize the level of degradation, every day is a conscious “tuning in” to what is happening to the environment.
The complexity and depth to which the environment is intertwined in our lives can feel intimidating, and as a result it may be hard to conceptualize the idea of positive change. One thing we aim for in teaching the Greenfox5 is creating order out of chaos, and providing a roadmap for change.
Related to K-12 education in particular, it is important that the facts of environmental degradation are presented thoughtfully to children, with attention to the appropriate age-level, and again, with an emphasis on making a positive connection to the environment.
What I’d like to propose is developing an awareness about the environment rooted in personal connection and optimism. With a personal connection, empathy develops, and a willingness to change that was not there before.
I propose identifying what is important to you personally (for example, it might be the people you care about) and identifying those things born out of the environment that you like (for example, food).
How do we become aware of these things? By making a point to slow down once a day or once a week, and become mindful. Out of such mindfulness we develop a sense of connection.
Maybe it will take the implementation of the term “state of emergency” to get the ball rolling in some places. Maybe it will be a long time before such is declared. The answer to changing our daily behaviors is not through fear alone, but through feeling connected.
-Kristen von Hoffmann
Posted by kvonhoffmann 