“You worry a lot about whether it makes the slightest bit of difference, or whether in fact it might be counterproductive. Eventually you realize that there is no real way of knowing if you can make a difference to this world. And, finally, you are left with the simple question […] Do you want to be the type of person whose nature it is to try, or do you not?” These are the words of Collin Beavan (aka No Impact Man) and I think they speak to the heart of the question of personal responsibility as it pertains to environmental stewardship. Collective action is what creates the environmental problems we see in the world today. Collective action is what will be needed to ameliorate the problems caused by environmental degradation. So in a world where change must take place on an unimaginably massive scale, what difference does personal action make?
This question underlies the entirety of Beavan’s work, No Impact Man, a chronicle of Beavan’s year of living as environmentally-minded as possible. As Beavan and his family endure great inconvenience with their attempts to live contrary to the polluting, resource/energy intensive, unsustainable system that permeates American culture, the question of whether or not their efforts are ultimately futile resurface again and again. Indeed, when personal action is simply a drop in the big-picture bucket, the difference between participating in and eschewing America’s unsustainable consumer culture appears to be miniscule. Articulating such frustration, Beavan laments that “because our systems are not designed to be sustainable, I had to swim against the cultural tide, and sometimes I got tired.” In the case of Beavan and his family, if there’s little environmental difference to be made by rejecting non-local pizza on a disposable paper plate, there’s no reason to deprive your cravings.
Or is there? Beavan posits that, despite the fact that his efforts amount to just a drop in the bucket, his tiny drop is capable of producing ripples that can travel throughout the water and potentially incite change in others. Certainly his actions and the dissemination of his ideas and story have influenced many, but I propose that personal efforts like Beavan’s offer something even more than the potential for ripples.
Though it can certainly be daunting to make personal life decisions that seem to amount to nothing on the global scale, firsthand experience is immeasurably valuable. Ration informs decision making, but history has shown again and again that even the most reasoned changes frequently do not become manifest without being fueled by emotion, without propulsion by the personal investment of individuals. Knowing must come first, but caring makes a close second to instigating broad scale change. Individual efforts like Beavan’s, though practically-speaking they may be futile, offer something that government mandate and international protocol cannot. Personal experiences give the individual a tangible experience, a concentrated taste of cause and effect that system-wide changes rarely communicate.
Beavan concedes that much environmental damage is done by large corporate entities, many of whom would rather the citizen take personal responsibility for environmental change, lest the company be blamed and held accountable. Certainly such corporations should be held accountable, and if forced to atone for their environmental sins, improvements would be far and away more substantial than any one household’s. Personal responsibility, however, requires something of the individual that scapegoating will never achieve. The first hurdle to improving the environment is not forcing corporations to internalize the environmental costs borne by the world. The first hurdle is overcoming apathy.
Beavan concedes that much environmental damage is done by large corporate entities, many of whom would rather the citizen take personal responsibility for environmental change, lest the company be blamed and held accountable. Certainly such corporations should be held accountable, and if forced to atone for their environmental sins, improvements would be far and away more substantial than any one household’s. Personal responsibility, however, requires something of the individual that scapegoating will never achieve. The first hurdle to improving the environment is not forcing corporations to internalize the environmental costs borne by the world. The first hurdle is overcoming apathy.
Individual experience, the internalizing of the burden borne by the environment due to personal choices, may offer negligible returns in immediate environmental benefit, but it succinctly and efficiently crushes apathy towards the world. If we don’t know, we won’t care. If we don’t care, nothing will change.
No comments:
Post a Comment