Post One: Creating a data set using secondary sources
Article One: The climate crisis is already here – but no one’s telling us
George Monbiot is an established journalist, author and environmental activist who writes extensively on climate change. Given his roots in activism, Monbiot’s article portrays Global Warming as an individualised and moralised issue and reads like an anthem for the grassroots movement.
Where this article really shines though, is in its analysis of the media machine as a driver of climate change attitudes. Coming from the perspective of someone within the very faculty he denounces, Monbiot is able to articulate with great clarity the medias role in granting social licence to the political and industrial processes that are hurling us towards systemic collapse.
By touching on the American Presidential Election campaign, Monbiot makes salient the notion that the media, both traditional and social, have given weight to misinformed voices. One can literally see the ebb and flow of climate change coverage relative to whatever provokes the greatest public reaction.
The take home message: where politics, agriculture, mining and transport have a lot to answer for, the media are not neutral arbiters of information (Monbiot, 2016). While bias based on political leanings and personal experience is unavoidably part of climate coverage, it is perhaps the media’s bias against relevance that is the most imminent threat to attitudes and barrier to social change.
Monbiot, G. 2016, ‘The climate crisis is already here – but no one’s telling us’, The Guardian, 3 August, viewed 7 August 2016, <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/03/climate-crisis-media-relegates-greatest-challenge-hurtle-us-collapse-planet>.
Article Two: Why Malcolm Robert’s demand for ‘empirical evidence’ on climate change is misleading
For a phenomenon that is heavily researched and overwhelmingly evidenced, its a wonder that climate change is still debated.
A conversation that was once scientific has been hijacked by politics and relegated to the footnotes. Skeptics calls for proof but relentlessly denounce and undermine it without having to provide evidence to the contrary. There seems to be no better contemporary example of this than Australian MP, Malcolm Roberts.
I was first made aware of Roberts while listening to him in conversation with Tom Tilley on Triple J Hack. I felt deeply concerned that an individual with such ill-informed ideas was not only elected to represent, but was so unwavering in his position that he thought himself immune to responding to questions with any semblance of maturity. “No Empirical Evidence!” was his catchall, and he was sticking by it.
The subsequent article that I read provided insight into Roberts’ public history of climate change denial, his background in coal mining and his obsession with empirical evidence. There’s a great deal to be said for empathy research. Still, Redfearn writes firmly in opposition of Roberts and paints him as a charlatan, with leading Australian climate change researchers and scientists sharing his view.
Despite its biases, the article does uncover – albeit indirectly – an undercurrent of fear that permeates Australian political discussion on matters of climate change. Politicians like Roberts feed on the anxiety that stems from a lack of understanding or education and use it to push their own agenda. The misuse of scientific jargon fuels the dissemination of specious arguments that are just convincing enough to play on our collective vulnerabilities.
Redfearn, G. 2016, ‘Why Malcolm Robert’s demand for ‘empirical evidence’ on climate change is misleading’, The Guardian, 9 August, viewed 10 August 2016, <https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2016/aug/09/why-one-nation-senator-malcolm-roberts-demand-for-empirical-evidence-on-climate-change-is-misleading-bunk>
Article Three: Climate Change will trigger the worlds greatest refugee crisis
By now the connection between climate change and politics is undeniable, and this article starts to tease out the moral implications of the inaction that results from conflicting stakeholder interests. It’s an interesting approach given that the writer is herself a politician and shadow parliamentary secretary for environment, although in defence her writing is well-informed and draws some fair conclusions.
Without allusions to anthropogenic science or much discussion on the symptomatic expression of global warming on the environment, Singh posits climate change as a moral issue and makes a case for its reconceptualisation in our social conscience.
By referencing numbers of displaced people and giving a face to the movement through Kiribati native, Ioane Teitiota, the writer seeks to establish empathy. Singh makes an emotional appeal that frames climate change as an issue needing an urgent compassionate response.
Paraphrasing her closing call to action, we need less emphasis on physical and imagined borders of separation, and more emphasis on equal rights for every living person (Singh, 2015). It’s clear now that climate change is inextricably tied to human rights issues and that any hope of a remedy requires the symbiotic interaction of fact and emotion. The true difficulty lies in implementing necessary policy reform while resisting the dehumanisation that is typically its byproduct.
Singh, L. 2015, ‘Climate change will trigger the worlds greatest refugee crisis’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 November, viewed 30 July 2016, <http://www.smh.com.au/comment/climate-change-will-trigger-greatest-refugee-crisis-ever-20151123-gl5z7e.html>.
Article Four: Indigenous dance group tackles climate change
This article makes no secret of the fact that climate change disproportionately affects the worlds vulnerable communities. While it is often depicted as something nebulous that may potentially happen at some point in the distant future, it is actually playing out in realtime and is felt most strongly by the people who live in close cahoots with the land.
Darren Mara’s article is on the use of performance art in remote indigenous communities to educate those on the social fringes in a way that aligns with their culture. Mara reveals how environmental discourse is set up in a way that actively excludes the people it affects the most and presents a value-driven grassroots response that has enabled Indigenous communities to reimagine climate science.
Much can be learned from the connection that Indigenous communities have with the land. The appropriation of scientific language into dance also reveals a seemingly untapped entry point into the social consciousness. It’s an unusually positive take on global warming and as a designer, I’m fascinated by the weaving of science and art into cultural fabric.
Mara, D. 2016, ‘Indigenous dance troupe tackles climate change’, SBS News, 13 January, viewed 30 July < http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/01/13/indigenous-dance-troupe-tackles-climate-change>
Article Five: Study points to the profound planetary consequences of eating less meat.
In popular culture, holidays have become synonymous with two things; far too much food and a racist over-opinionated uncle. Hashtags have emerged, memes developed… this isn’t an isolated occurrence. We throw back wine to get through it and meditate on the fact that it only happens once or twice a year.
Only it doesn’t.
Chris Mooney is a prominent journalist for the Washington Post who writes extensively on the fate of our planet. While his writings usually rest in the vein of environmental politics, he decided to tackle the very fickle subject of food and the agriculture industry as they relate to climate change.
Mooney treads around the issue carefully, obviously aware of the emotions that wrap around our relationship to food and the implications of threatening something that is deeply entrenched in culture. But he refuses to remain silent, citing a gamut of studies that show the irrefutable link between the agriculture industry and CO2 emissions.
His suggestion – significantly limiting or eliminating meat from the human diet. The concept is not new and supporters of a plant-based diet have touted its benefits for decades. Extensive research has been undertaken to show that it is both possible and safe. On paper, Mooney brings to the table a response that is soaked in promise.
A potential issue with Mooney’s argument though is its reliance on scientific models of predicted outcome. He himself rationalises that it is “difficult to assess something that seems near impossible to regulate”. It is in these moments that flaws emerge. In an effort to inspire action, Mooney turns to the positive benefits that dietary shift would have on health and economy for the individual. But such an overarching statement seems too simple and only serves to represent the possible outcomes of an ideal experiment, not a living, shifting thing.
It’s certainly plausible though, that solutions to climate change could naturally be solutions to many other social issues that we face. It is in this space that Mooney’s article gains traction, tapping into the privileged Western market by attaching global warming to the many other defining issues of our time that tend to garner more support and urgency.
In closing, food oversupply is not just a side effect of an overzealous grandma around family gatherings, it is an epidemic in the Western world that only serves to place strain on our health, environment and morality. Where hundreds of millions lack sufficient food, people in the Western world are burdened by an apparent error in the supply-demand feedback loop. It only makes sense that we look at something that we can do each day to alleviate the stress we put on ourselves and the planet. All this without even touching on the moral grey area of farming sentient beings.
And in case you were wondering, you need not wait for December 25th to role around to invite a loud, racist, science-hating man into your house – you can follow Donald Trump on twitter.
Mooney, C. 2016, ‘Study points to the profound planetary consequences of eating less meat’, The Washington Post, 22nd March, viewed 30th July 2016, <http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/03/22/study-points-profound-planetary-consequences-eating-less-meat>
Closing Thoughts and Future Direction
Poet and activist Gary Snyder reminds us that ‘nature is not a place to visit. It is home.’ (2015)
Sobering in its revelations about our disconnect from the natural world, this quote stuck with me as I navigated through the amorphous issue that is climate change.
After analysing widely sourced articles, I’m compelled to question the efficacy of social structures that seem to ignore our dependancy on a planet that sustains us in favour of political agenda that champions power and money. How can we collectively respond to climate change when its salience is undermined? Further still, how can we in the Western world act on a moral imperative to change when we see ourselves as separate from the land.
In terms of design, I think there is a really rich, unexplored space between the chasm of science and story. I’d like to explore the ways in which we can reimagine the climate change conversation so that what is proven is accessible, regardless of language, education or cultural differences.
Image
Welcome to the age of denial (Poizat, 2015)
Poizat, C. 2015, untitled, NY Times, viewed 10 August 2016 <https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/08/22/opinion/0822OPEDpoizat/0822OPEDpoizat-master675.jpg;
Emergent Practices 
