CLIMATE. “The opportunity with the Stockholm + 50 conference is to get us back to focusing on fundamental global risks. At the same time as the ongoing war takes up a lot of attention”, writes Waldemar Ingdahl of the Global Challenges Foundation.

Sweden is hosting, together with Kenya, the UN’s climate conference Stockholm 50+. Fifty years after the UN’s first environmental and climate conference took place, the Stockholm Conference in 1972. It led to the “do no harm” principle, namely that states are obliged to prevent, reduce and control the risks of environmental damage to other states. It also led to the creation of the UN Environment Programme UNEP and the establishment of World Environment Day, held on 5 June each year.

 The ambition of Stockholm+50 is to draw attention to the 50th anniversary of the world’s first environment and climate conference and to make courageous science-based decisions to act against contemporary crises in climate and biodiversity, prosperity, and the economy.

 The intention is for multilateralism to be discussed as the basis for achieving current goals and future prosperity and well-being and to act as a springboard for reform work. Stockholm+50 is designed as a collaborative and multi-party meeting, open to various participants who are invited to share experiences and initiatives to protect the planet and contribute to sustainable and inclusive development.

 As Stockholm+50 is not part of the UN’s climate convention UNFCCC or the convention on biological diversity CBD, the meeting is outside the processes by which the world community makes decisions. Criticism has been leveled at the conference for not appearing to lead to a sharp resolution, which in turn would mean that the conference’s objectives are unclear. 

Climate change has been a hot topic and a political priority for a long time, and we are already doing much, at a significant cost. 

Greta Thunberg’s famous “blah, blah, blah” speech could perhaps be repeated this year. The situation looks depressingly familiar for an observer who participated during Stockholm + 50 this year and still has last year’s COP26 in fresh memory. Then as now, young environmental activists see the conference as a slow and insufficient way of dealing with acute problems.

 Much of the focus of the COP 26 conference ended on the global divide between north and south. The Western world’s efforts to deal with environmental degradation and overpopulation were opposed to the desire of developing countries for industrialization and prosperity. Knowledge of an ongoing environmental crisis is circulating globally, but it was perceived and handled differently by the conference’s different power blocs and countries.

Climate change has been a hot topic and a political priority for a long time, and we are already doing much, at a significant cost. 

However, the idea, expressed in Greta Thunberg’s “blah blah blah” speech, that we are not currently doing anything about the problems is unreasonable. It is difficult to think of any other issue where there is such a broad consensus despite a divided world, which includes all major political parties, trade unions, employers’ unions, the research community, and civil society. The consciousness about the issue is clearly present.

It is good to discuss and know where you are going, not least about climate change and biodiversity loss, whose conventions and meetings are so technical. They are closely related but have rarely been discussed. But it is important to see where the problems lie and how risks are affected. This is to prepare for future agreements and upcoming conferences.

There are now so many climate-related instruments that climate and development policy is often messy and inconsistent. The challenge is not to “do more”, but to sort out, rationalize, and streamline the policies to strive for environmental goals more rationally and cost-effectively. Where can the easiest efforts be made, not least in a world strained by war with nuclear threats, pandemics, and what seems to be a severe recession?

 To get a kind of overview and try to understand what needs to be done is global “tipping points”.

 A tipping point is a critical turning point, where a minor system disturbance initiates a self-reinforcing process that irrevocably drives the system further and further away from its initial state of equilibrium. Ecologists have long been aware of tipping points in local and regional ecosystems. Now they are used to explain and understand shifts in biophysical systems, while the concept was previously used in changes in markets or major crimes in societal patterns and norms.

 There are long-term costs of not making well-planned decisions and examining which reforms or new global institutions may be right. Therefore, a scientific understanding and dissemination of knowledge about global decision-making systems is good to discuss. Tipping points are also useful for understanding when the action really has an impact so that we do not stop too soon or stick to it even if its benefit is low.

The Stockholm + 50 conference opportunity is to get us back to focusing on fundamental global risks. This at the same time as the ongoing war takes up a lot of attention. Therefore, it is important to achieve peace on earth and peace with the earth.

The post New solutions for global risks? first appeared on Opulens.

ART. A rare occasion to view Barbara Hepworth’s (1903-1975) works of art presents itself this winter at Musée Rodin, in collaboration with Tate. The museum is an ancient palace situated in a wonderfully kept garden. Some of the famous French sculptor, Auguste Rodin’s, works are displayed outside, but most of them are shown inside the palace. His pupil and muse, and to my mind at least, more sensitive sculptor, Camille Claudel, is exhibited there as well. Nevertheless, there is also an exhibition hall for temporary expositions, such as the one with Barbara Hepworth’s works (until March 22, 2020).    

Barbara Hepworth

Musée Rodin

77 rue de Varenne

75007 Paris

This contemporary of Henry Moore, Picasso and Mondrian, among others, brought a new and fresh ethical sense to sculpture. Barbara’s approach is inspired by the poetry of nature, resulting in organic sculptures of remarkable originality. It was difficult to refrain from caressing these pieces, displaying a woman’s sensitivity and sensuality. Only the severe glare of the guard refrained me from doing so.

Barbara Hepworth gained recognition in France during the interwar period. In the 1930s she discovered the European avant-garde with the recently founded “Abstraction-Création” movement. Sculptors such as Jean Arp, Alexander Calder and painters Robert Delaunay and George Braque invited her to exhibit with them.

The first exhibition room puts her work into context, showing several photographs of the sculptor working or contemplating, catalogues and smaller drawings. In the second room, the visitor gets an idea of her atelier with her tools etc. A movie also shows how she worked and polished her sculptures to their soft and smooth texture. It was filmed in St Ives, in Cornwall, where she had an atelier, and where the surrounding landscape by the sea continually inspired her.

Some paintings are present in the exhibition as well, but I was mostly taken by her sculptures that display a magical combination of inner vision, landscape and material. It is very actual in our times of ecological development and fossil-free world that many are striving towards. A back to nature movement we so desperately need starts with the heart: to value what we have and desire to keep it, we must first see and appreciate it. Barbara’s sculptures also serve that purpose.

The post A British sculptor in Paris   first appeared on Opulens.

CLIMATE. Large scale protests are taking place around the world, from Hong Kong and Chile to Sudan, Lebanon and Barcelona. We might be experiencing a different global new age of echoing common cause. People, especially young generations, have felt anger and a strong inner urge to revolt against the current status quo, even before knowing what shape a revolution might crystallise in.

Protesters are fuming in accord, against various common denominators. Bearing this in mind, we cannot compare Sudan’s and Hong Kong’s enduring uprisings against oppressive regimes and the actions undertaken by protesters there to achieve desired change to the ones recently expressed by Extinction Rebellion (XR).

XR’s protests have gained remarkable speed and size over the past year, spreading information across digital channels as fast as people could click on the share button, with climate change messaging being adopted as a mainstream language. Week-long occupations of entire streets, bridges and junctions in a city dependent on public transport is well enough when it is coordinated with public authorities, as peaceful protests are an expression of an inherent democratic right.

However, standing on the roof of trains and planes becomes a problem because it is forcefully stopping hard-working commuters from getting home or to work when an alternative route is not the best option. This type of boycott can only lead to loss of support for the cause and bring upon severe opprobrium. XR’s senior leaders have admitted that targeting London’s public transport ”was the wrong thing to do”. This action was followed by many people abandoning the cause.

After being heavily condemned by the public, XR is now having to rethink their strategy while dealing with rogue activists much like the split moments in Life of Brian. The danger of the latest stunts might work against the cause and bring upon its demise, as well as much worse – criminalising these type of protests. XR should be focusing on working closely with public institutions and high-level stakeholders and take a page out of Greta Thunberg’s action book, regarded by many as the de facto leader of the global climate change movement.

XR have been harshly denounced for its fetishisation of mass arrest, and it has been said that many are relying on the precedent of white privilege when it comes to police treatment, with the overwhelming majority of activists being white. This approach is certainly not an option for everyone, as people being disheartened at the threat of jail.

A silver lining is that XR has successfully contributed to adding the climate crisis on the political agenda and turn XR policies into mainstream topics. Nonetheless, having Parliament declaring a ”climate emergency” does not compel the Government to act. Therefore it will have no immediate effect.

In general, people do not contest that according to the latest climate figures, global greenhouse gas emissions are higher than ever before. And as humankind, we will be at the brink of irreparable damage to our planet if we do not take charge, almost 30 years after the UN Climate Change Convention focusing on reducing CO2 emissions. We get it! It is not that we do not care. However, we need to change the way we speak about climate change.

Climate change is a significant problem, and we are not going to solve it if the governments, industry and people don’ take action. However, doomsday trips are not going to motivate most people to act. What we should ask ourselves is: what types of messages could inspire people to modify their behaviour?

Behavioural science should provide some answers. People’s motivation comes from understanding the bigger picture, how it all fits, what are the consequences on the specific environment they live in, starting from their building, street, neighbourhood, area, city etc. It can be influenced via positive take action messages.

Humans need to see the social impact, feel social pressure, and how they can act meaningfully, making simple changes. Clear and straightforward discourse can bring upon more change than shouting apocalyptic scenarios and no specific actions to follow.

The post Extinction Rebellion (XR): Better actions for large scale transformation first appeared on Opulens.