"There’s nothing they need, nothing they don’t own already,
nothing they even want. So you buy them a solar-powered waving queen; a belly
button brush; a silver-plated ice cream tub holder; a “hilarious” inflatable
zimmer frame; a confection of plastic and electronics called Terry the Swearing
Turtle; or – and somehow I find this significant – a Scratch Off World wall
map.
They seem amusing on the first day of Christmas, daft on the
second, embarrassing on the third. By the twelfth they’re in landfill. For
thirty seconds of dubious entertainment, or a hedonic stimulus that lasts no
longer than a nicotine hit, we commission the use of materials whose impacts
will ramify for generations."
--George Monbiot
This quote from George Monbiot from his Guardian article particularly struck me when I was considering my Christmassy blog post
over the last few days. Although his attitude towards the Christmas mass consumerism
does seem to me to be leaning towards the unnecessarily dour side (i.e. have
all the gifts in landfill by the 12th day of Christmas), I can
empathise with his wider point. Having had the misfortune of experiencing
Oxford Street anywhere near Christmas time, the issue of frantic mass consumerism
was apparent to me. According to climate psychologist Rosemary Randall, the
average Brit now has a carbon footprint three times larger than the average in
the 1950s, and I’m surprised it isn’t more (Randall, 2011).
In several countries, consumerism is being used as a tool to
recover from economic stagnation, most significantly being in the Netherlands
(Kopnina, 2014). However, what is considered consumerism needs to be analysed,
and environmental concerns considered if a movement away from the current
paradigm is to occur. There have been many theories proposed in order to change
the dominant economic practise, such as ‘ecological modernisation’ (EC), ‘postmaterialist
value theory’ (PMVT) and the ‘Environmental Kuznets curve’ (EKC). In turn, these
involve:
- EM: natural resources can be used for growth and development – an anthropocentric view.
- PMVT: greater wealth leads to greater environmental values.
- EKC: in early industrialisation materials are used intensely, up to a threshold of development were structural economic changes lead to a lessening in material use.
However, in reality these ideals have barely been
considered, as the “material saturation level of ‘developed’ societies is far
from sustainable” (Kopnina, 2014). What ideally needs to change is the level
AND type of consumerism practised, meaning the pure volume of materials
consumed and the increased consideration of the whole production chain.
All of these theories show how the issue of sustainable
consumerism is still anthropocentric, which links to the proposition put forth
by Crutzen in 2002, that we are living in a new geological epoch
of the Anthropocene. He proposes that since 1784 (Watt’s steam engine) that
humans have altered the environment so much that we are now the dominant force
affecting most of the earth, therefore it warrants a new geological epoch as
the earth system is vastly different from previous states. Fundamental in this
shift is the use of fossil fuels and non-renewable energies which has vastly
contributed to the dominance of humans in the earth system. This is why
renewable technology is vital to the economic and cultural change required to
prevent further ecological and environmental damage, of which Christmas
consumerism is only a part!
Along that theme, a rather large Christmas present given to
the Humber region recently, has been the announcement of the government
approval of the ABLE Marine Energy Park which will be a huge enterprise area
dedicated to the manufacture, assembly and repair of offshore wind turbines to
supply the huge plans for wind farms in the North Sea. This will provide around
4000 jobs for the area and ideally act as a catalyst for the whole region to
become a renewable energy hub (www.ableuk.com).
This move in the Humber region has been welcomed across the
board and hopefully will act as an example both nationally and globally, to encourage
the economic shift to a more environmentally conscious system, accompanied by
the appropriate cultural change, which over time, could lead to a rather
different Christmas!
Hi Catherine, Happy New Year!
ReplyDeleteIndeed a rather scrooge like statement from George Monbiot, but I agree he does have a point. In addition to the excessive consumption of goods during Christmas, I also find the excessive production of 'Christmas' by businesses rather shocking. In particular, this year I realised the excessive amount of packaging for children's toys, the logic behind which baffles me as all the 3 year old wants is the toy! Thus, as you said, a focus on the whole production chain is necessary. I think you may find these talks by Yvonne Ryding and Peter Hall interesting. Ryding looks at how we could tacle energy issues at the urban level, one way being peer pressure, while Hall discusses the region of Friedberg in Germany.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkIoXyAU7hE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IE_Ye4y653I
I think cultural change of the magnitude of consumption could be quite difficult to bring about but hopefully it can be achieved using a coevolution framework to address energy use and methods such as those being implemented in Humber and Friedberg disseminate globally.
Happy New Year to you too!!
DeleteThat's a good point, to consider the actual packaging itself - as it seems to be of little benefit to either the producer (cost), environment (waste) and consumer (general annoyance)! That again, shows the need to increase the efficiency of the whole production system.
Those talks do look interesting and I will check them out! I've read about Friedberg previously I think, very inspiring actually, considering the radical movement and subsequent green innovation was initiated by students!! To my knowledge, this town is widely seen as one of the first places to truly embrace green issues; I'm hoping my home area Humberside will follow suit!