Focusing on how individuals can stop climate change is very convenient for corporations
Sure, it’s morally good to reduce your footprint–but don’t let that deflect attention from who is really to blame.
What can be done to limit global warming to 1.5°C? A quick internet search offers a deluge of advice on how individuals can change their behavior. Take public transport instead of the car or, for longer journeys, the train rather than fly. Eat less meat and more vegetables, pulses and grains, and don’t forget to turn off the light when leaving a room or the water when shampooing. The implication here is that the impetus for addressing climate change is on individual consumers.
But can and should it really be the responsibility of individuals to limit global warming? On the face of it, we all contribute to global warming through the cumulative impact of our actions.
By changing consumption patterns on a large scale we might be able to influence companies to change their production patterns to more sustainable methods. Some experts have argued that everyone (or at least those who can afford it) has a responsibility to limit global warming, even if each individual action is insufficient in itself to make a difference.
Yet there are at least two reasons why making it the duty of individuals to limit global warming is wrong.
INDIVIDUALS ARE STATISTICALLY BLAMELESS
Climate change is a planetary-scale threat and, as such, requires planetary-scale reforms that can only be implemented by the world’s governments. Individuals can at most be responsible for their own behavior, but governments have the power to implement legislation that compels industries and individuals to act sustainably.
Although the power of consumers is strong, it pales in comparison to that of international corporations, and only governments have the power to keep these interests in check.
Usually, we regard governments as having a duty to protect citizens. So why is it that we allow them to skirt these responsibilities just because it is more convenient to encourage individual action? Asking individuals to bear the burden of global warming shifts the responsibilities from those who are meant to protect to those who are meant to be protected. We need to hold governments to their responsibilities first and foremost.
A recent report found that just 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions since 1988. Incredibly, a mere 25 corporations and state-owned entities were responsible for more than half of global industrial emissions in that same period.
Most of these are coal- and oil-producing companies and include ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, Gazprom, and the Saudi Arabian Oil Company. China leads the pack on the international stage with 14.3% of global greenhouse gas emissions due to its coal production and consumption.
If the fossil fuel industry and high-polluting countries are not forced to change, we will be on course to increase global average temperatures by 4°C by the end of the century.
If just a few companies and countries are responsible for so much of global greenhouse gas emissions, then why is our first response to blame individuals for their consumption patterns? It shouldn’t be–businesses and governments need to take responsibility for curbing industrial emissions. ...
https://www.fastcompany.com/90290795/foc...SqVAtxXGZhP8oTA
Neue Antwort erstellen
| 23.327 Beiträge
Forum Statistiken
Besucher
