Polar bears became poster children for carbon reduction initiatives around 2006, when an animated polar bear failing to climb on a melting ice floe featured in Al Gore’s documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth.” Once icons of predatory ferocity, polar bears were promptly transformed into delicate victims. Scientists warned of their declining numbers. Greenpeace protestors in polar bear costumes marched to protest global warming. However, one influential voice managed to turn the polar bear into a platform for arguing against human-caused climate change. And many Inuit, who do not deny climate change, argue that polar bear numbers are increasing. Although it is clear that without Arctic ice, polar bears will not survive, their use as icons of global warming raises questions about colonial attitudes, climate activism, and the differences between Inuit attitudes to other-than-human animals and those of the mainstream.
Dr. Margery Fee
Bio:
Margery Fee is an Emeritus Professor of English at UBC. Her book on polar bears for Reaktion Press’s Animal series will appear this year. Her most recent other books are Literary Land Claims: The ‘Indian Land Question’ from Pontiac’s War to Attiwapiskatand, with Dory Nason, Tekahionwake: E. Pauline Johnson’s Writings on Native North America, both published in 2015.
Water is an essential input for mining and minerals processing, but the industry’s use of water can pose detrimental impacts on natural ecosystems and the communities that rely on them. In the past decade, water has emerged as a priority issue among mining companies globally. Two thirds of the world’s largest mines are now located in countries experiencing high water scarcity, while water-related concerns have become a frequent trigger of conflict between companies and communities. In this seminar, I will provide a high-level overview of my evolving research program which focuses on characterizing and resolving water-related risks from the perspective of companies, communities and governments within mining regions. My research strategy is inherently interdisciplinary, bridging the fields of mining engineering, hydrology, social science and operations research. Current study regions include Canada, Chile, Peru, Brazil and Mongolia.
Dr. Nadja Kunz
Assistant Professor, School of Public Policy and Global Affairs and Norman B Keevil Mining Engineering
Bio:
Nadja Kunz is an Assistant Professor and NSERC Canada Research Chair in Mine Water Management and Stewardship, jointly appointed across the UBC School of Public Policy and Global Affairs and the Norman B Keevil Institute of Mining Engineering. Nadja received her PhD from The University of Queensland (UQ) in 2013. Prior to joining UBC in 2017, Nadja spent 2 years as a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Eawag Aquatic Research Institute in Switzerland and consulted as a Water Specialist for the International Finance Corporation. Nadja has Bachelor degrees in Chemical Engineering and Business Management, both from UQ.
Effecting change through community research and non-research projects
Abstract:
Sustainability research exists in the realm of post-normal science, and is often carried out by researchers who have deep commitments to change. Therefore, their research can ignite, draw from, and exist alongside on-the-ground community projects and initiatives. In this seminar, we will speak to researchers who have gotten involved in hands on work and collaboration in the communities that they study. What are the benefits and challenges created by occupying the position of researcher and participant concurrently? How does the role of knowledge generation and documentation affect ethical and appropriate participation of researchers in activist, technological, commercial, and political ventures in communities? This seminar will wade into the ambiguous and productive waters of research that turns into something more.
Panel Speakers:
Dr. Terre Satterfield
Professor, IRES
Dr. Satterfield is an anthropologist by training and an inter-disciplinarian by design. Her work concerns environmental values and sustainable natural resource development as these intersect with First Nations interests in land management, local food security, policy and regulation.
Dr. Hadi Dowlatabadi
Professor, IRES
Hadi Dowlatabadi’s sees the world in terms of interacting social, economic and environmental systems. He is interested in how these systems create and respond to challenges over time. Most of his work has focused on the interface of technology, energy, the environment, public health and public policy.
Dr. Nathan Bennett
Research Associate, IOF
Nathan Bennett is an environmental social scientist. Dr Bennett’s recent research focuses on marine protected area governance in Mexico, responses of fishing communities to environmental change in Thailand, indigenous community perspectives on conservation in Canada, marine planning initiatives in North Am. and human dimensions of large-scale marine protected areas.
Governments worldwide have barely managed to work towards the modest commitments under the Paris climate accord, and it’s not enough to address the problem.
Climate initiatives are currently under siege from major polluters. The United States and Australia have organized pro-coal events amid climate talks, carbon emissions are increasing again while new political regimes in Brazil and Saudi Arabia have shown worrying signs of climate skepticism. Why is it so difficult for politicians around the world to take the necessary steps to deal with the climate crisis?
Experts commonly offer two options to address climate change: Flexible regulations on polluting sectors like electricity and transportation, and carbon pricing that reflects the indirect cost of pollution.
These are justified economically, since mitigating climate change can result in popular sustainable development opportunities, create new jobs, prevent loss in professions that depend on healthy ecosystems and improve health outcomes at a lower cost. But that may not be enough — there is no bold Green New Deal that is even being contemplated in places like Russia or China at this time.
Political leaders need to care about climate enough to take on polluting entities like fossil fuel companies that supply or generate the vast majority of energy, provide millions of jobs and make political contributions.
Behavioural psychology suggests that politicians are resistant to measures that aren’t popular with voters or donors.
Even moderate efforts to price carbon have sometimes faced political backlash. A prime example is the domestic unrest in France where carbon pricing on top of economic measures exacerbated economic insecurity within society.
A man makes his way through tear gas as demonstrators protest on the Champs-Elysees on Dec. 15, 2018 in Paris. It was the fifth straight weekend of protests by the country’s ‘yellow vest’ movement. (AP Photo/Kamil Zihnioglu)
As politicians delay decisive action, what could be realistically and quickly done within political systems as diverse as those of the U.S., China, India and Russia? Together, they are the top four polluters, contributing 53 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions in 2017.
Citizens are apathetic too
We argue that the apathy of political leaders reflects the apathy of their citizens. Many politicians, and the people they represent around the world, simply do not view climate change as a crisis. Even when mainstream cable channels are covering it (a rarity in itself), people seem to care more about the next sports showdown or celebrity gossip for entertainment in their daily lives.
At the extreme are those who associate climate change and carbon pricing with various conspiracy theories. This includes everything from the supposed financial gain of climate scientists to socialist schemes to create a world government to destroy capitalism, and a Chinese plot against Western economies.
Arguably, discussions on climate change under these conditions can sometimes deepen the political divide given proponents of such conspiracy theories are largely immune to evidence and reason.
So how do we get citizens to care about climate?
Any energy transition will need to be preceded by a transition of vocal and influential citizens, or swing voters, away from an anti-climate position. We don’t necessarily need all citizens of diverse socioeconomic and educational backgrounds to understand climate science or proactively support it (though that would be highly desirable), we just need a politically influential section of citizens to not oppose bold climate action.
Presenting the case for climate action on CNN, BBC or CBC is important but leaves out the billions of people across China, Russia, India and a host of other countries with divergent political systems and their own media landscape.
They must also be concurrently convinced to take action. How?
Appealing to citizens via their wallets
If carbon pricing is going to be a significant vehicle for climate action, then the key to securing broader support is through people’s wallets.
We should take advantage of human nature. People care about personal gains like well-paying jobs and pay raises. And they instinctively oppose taxes. But would they oppose a tax if they directly profit from it?
This would address real concerns that carbon pricing can disproportionately affect the economically marginalized (as seen in France). But it also dangles a real incentive for citizens to actually demand a carbon tax.
Higher energy prices would still encourage a shift to renewables, and any energy conservation by consumers would financially benefit them even more. This is the core of the “Canadian backstop” proposal.
Carbon taxes could yield cash immediately — and loads of it. An estimated carbon price of US$40 to US$80 per tonne of carbon dioxide is needed by 2020 to achieve the Paris accord goals. Yet, in the 48 OECD and G20 countries (accounting for 80 per cent of global carbon emissions), 46 per cent of emissions are not taxed, while another 13 per cent was charged less than US$6 in 2018.
Science academies should take the lead
If governments are unwilling to convince the public of the personal benefits, the respective national academies of sciences should use their expertise on science and economics to take the lead. Citizens around the world should know how much “carbon dividend” a working family could earn every month if carbon revenues are returned as a dividend.
Even with a modest tax of $20 a tonne, the Canadian federal backstop would return $300 a year more to 70 per cent of the households affected. A more ambitious tax, say $60 per tonne, could be combined with explicit policies to return nearly all the revenue to households with the amount depending on their income levels.
A modest portion from the world’s biggest economies could be earmarked for climate adaptation in the most vulnerable developing countries. At minimum, this might ensure agreement with, or even widespread demands, for a carbon tax.
The best-case scenario is that a critical mass of citizens then starts showing interest in this extra income, and politicians respond with pragmatic carbon pricing design without alienating their core support base. If the estimated carbon dividend could be paid a year in advance, it would only sweeten the deal.
So let’s pressure the politicians across different political systems to act, or they risk alienating citizens who are waiting for their carbon dividend cheques.
IRES current students and alumni, including Sameer Shah, Lucy Rodina, Edward J Gregr, Mollie Chapman, Steve Williams, Nicole J Wilson, and Graham McDowell, teamed up in a new publication which highlights questions of justice, equity and ethics in transformations research. They suggest that more precise indicators of change, a more explicit understanding of system boundaries, and a dual focus on process and outcomes will help advance our understanding of the social-ecological implications of transformations.
Tugce completed her PhD with Prof. Stephanie Chang at IRES in 2018. For her PhD dissertation research, she investigated the use of coastal green infrastructure (CGI)—natural and nature-based flood and erosion protection methods—as a measure of sea level rise adaptation. She is a Planner II at the City of Vancouver’s Intergated Sewer and Drainage Planning Branch. Her work focuses on advancing planning and policy initiatives to manage rain and storm water as a valuable resource, implementation of Rain City Strategy governance and Action Plans, and the development of a One Water Framework for her division.
As a Master’s student at IRES supervised by Dr. Hadi Dowlatabadi, Arielle analyzed carsharing usage and visibility patterns across Metro Vancouver municipalities, as well as Transportation Demand Management (TDM) policy levers designed to discourage personal vehicle ownership, encourage public and shared transit behaviors. Her professional background is in international electric utility regulation, wholesale/state power markets, and renewable energy policy. She is currently a Policy Analyst at Arcadia, a climate crisis-fighting tech company connecting utility customers with community solar. Arielle is a 2022 Fellow at the Clean Energy Leadership Institute (CELI) working on developing policy solutions for equitable clean energy justice and access.
Managing human-dominated landscapes at multiple scales for ecosystem services and multi-functionality
Abstract:
How can we effectively manage human-dominated landscapes for both people and nature? This is a critical question as people increasingly impact and modify natural landscapes, but also expect these areas to provide multiple ecosystem services and conserve biodiversity. Using examples from agricultural, urban, and natural ecosystems at local to regional to national scales, I will show how landscape structure underlies many of these relationships, that it is equally important to understand where ecosystem services are provided by ecosystems and where they are demanded by people, and describe new and novel methods to pinpoint critical locations for ecosystem service provision and conservation planning. Working to integrate this knowledge into current decision-making should lead to landscapes that better meet the needs of both people and nature.
Dr. Matthew Mitchell
NSERC Postdoctoral Fellow
Bio:
Matthew Mitchell is a NSERC Postdoctoral Fellow at UBC’s Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, with an adjunct position at The Centre for Sustainable Food Systems. He completed his Ph.D. at McGill University in 2014, M.Sc. at the University of Alberta in 2006, and B.Sc. (Honours) at the University of Victoria in 2002. His research focuses on how to manage human-dominated agricultural and urban landscapes for both biodiversity and ecosystem services, with the goal to provide knowledge that can inform and improve land management decisions for both people and nature.
Photo Credit: Robin Harder, Postdoc Fellow at IRES
