Can We Adapt Ourselves? Or Do We Have to Rely on Politicians?

by Emma Dozier

As environmentally friendliness becomes mainstream, everyone wants a piece of the green. Businesses get money by boasting their energy-efficient products. Politicians get votes by touting their plans to solve the predicted energy crisis. Students like us get stuck in the middle of all the talk. What products should we buy? Who should we vote for? Will either action really make a difference?

Being a conscious citizen doesn’t mean you have to be a tree-hugging hippie any more. There are two main theories of how humans can change their habits to hurt Mother Earth a little less. Mitigation is the process of using laws and regulations to punish those who abuse mommy dearest and rewarding others who are good little children. Adaption, on the other hand, encompasses all non-legal things – through economic, social or ecological systems – as the slightly selfish means of becoming the favorite kid.

Adaption is more prevalent now than in previous environmentally-conscious fads because we are finally seeing real effects of global warming. Greenland, just as one example, has to deal with melting ice caps and shorter winters. Farmers are growing more vegetables simply because they can with this new friendlier environment. It sounds all well and good until you think about the long history of Greenland’s potatoes-only diet and ecosystem. How will these new species affect the delicate balance of life on this unique island?

It is too soon to tell, and this fact is one of the reasons that many scientists are concerned with the results of adaption. Generally short-term reactive measures are not as successful in the long run as well-thought out strategic decisions.

Some big corporations, on the other hand, are being very economically strategic in their decision-making. General Electric, for example, uses two slogans - "Imagination at work" and “Ecomagination” - to represent its corporate strategy to develop cutting-edge products that drive company growth while solving the world’s energy and environmental problems. It makes smart economic sense because consumers buy GE’s efficient product line to get an easy way to help the environment. It makes smart environmental sense because they limit the greenhouse gas emissions that come from running household appliances.

Other than buying energy-efficient products, the every-day consumer can also focus on other simple adaptive solutions. Recycle more, throw away less (plus the trash doesn’t have to be taken out as often). Drive less, walk more (can’t hurt your figure either). Turn off the tap water when you brush your teeth and wash your hands (take that extra time to scrub extra hard). Guilt-trip your friends into doing the same (peer pressure, anyone?).

These adaptive measures are easy for the average citizen, and it’s easy to want to help the environment as we see the increasingly harmful effects of global warming. Although I’m willing to bet you don’t exactly want a big brother government monitoring your tap water use, there are some things that do need to be regulated.

Some scientists argue that the gung-ho capitalist market and beach-front property owners who freak out and move inland when the seas begin to rise won’t do enough to neutralize the effects of global warming. Therefore, policy makers need to step in.

It all started in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s (the time of the hippies!) with the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency and the introduction of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.  But the extent to which these laws are enforced depends on each administration, and often, the local setting. It is up to us citizens to decide if we want a strict environmentalist in office or not.

Some county governments are filling in where they think the current federal administration has left gaps. Fairfax County, though a suburb of D.C., set itself apart from the capital and joined other counties around the nation who are pledging to reduce their carbon emissions.

Scientists in favor of mitigation know local government leadership is a good thing. National laws are more difficult to enforce and also may not adequately represent what a local environment needs to stay healthy.

Whether laws cover local, state or national environmental policy, mitigation is necessary because of its strategic oversight. Lawmakers have access to more research and can make decisions that minimize the future, predicted affects of global warming. They can also make sure that a large group of people all coordinate in their environment-saving efforts.

Big business is again a big target. Most proposed green laws at this time include taxing carbon emissions over a certain limit from the biggest greenhouse gas producers. Other mitigation techniques also affect Average Joe’s life – such as enforcing efficient engineering for building a city’s supply of water and electricity.

Mitigation’s large reach, then, has a better chance to be able to prevent the possible negative side effects of short-term adaption.  But adaption has a personal, feel-good side to it: you aren’t being forced to obey politicians. It looks like we need a combination of strategic thinking by those whose job it is to look out for our well-being, as well as some personal and tactical motivation (whether that comes from saving money, demonstrating your love for the environment or protecting yourself from the extreme environment of a warming world).

Whether you’re changing your light bulbs to compact fluorescents or voting the greenest (and I don’t mean with envy) politician into office, lessening our negative impact on the world has to start somewhere. Cooperation must come from everyone – from the most conservative and influential regulator to the lowest on the hippie totem pole. You fall somewhere in between, so why not start with you?

Bibliography

Adger, W. Neil; Arnell, Nigel W.; and Emma L. Tompkins. “Successful adaption to climate change across scales.” Global Environmental Change Part A 15.2(2005): 77-86.

Fitzgerald, Merni. “’Cool Counties’” Launches Major Global Warming Initiative.” FairfaxCounty.org. 18 Nov. 2007. Fairfax County Government. 16 July 2007 <http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/news/2007/178.htm>.

 “GE Ecomagination.” GE Ecomagination. 18 Nov. 2007. General Electric Co. 2007 <http://ge.ecomagination.com/site/#newsmain>.

Lyall, Sarah. “Warming Revivies Flora and Fauna in Greenland.” The New York Times. 3 Dec. 2007. The New York Times Co. 28 Oct. 2007 <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/world/europe/28greenland.html?_r=1&oref=slogin>.

 “Major Environmental Laws | Laws and Regulations | US EPA.” 3 Dec. 2007. US Environmental Protection Agency 6 Nov. 2007 < http://www.epa.gov/epahome/laws.htm>.

Zinn, Matthew D. “Adapting to Climate Change: Environmental Law in a Warmer World.” Ecology Law Quarterly 34.1(2007): 61. EBSCOHost Academic Research Premier. James Madison University Libraries, VA. 18 Nov. 2007 <http://www.ebscohost.com>.