You can read and even listen to the full text on the Aeon-Website. Here is a small extract from Erik’s piece:
The recently resurfaced planet, I argue, can be traced back to fantasies like Richardson’s. Contemporary planetary governance relies on a specific trajectory of planetary monitoring. Even though efforts to map and measure global space have a far longer history – not least as a primary vehicle of Western colonialism and imperialism – the efforts to monitor and govern planetary dynamics have also relied on a particular history of knowing, seeing and measuring the planet. Thinking of the planet as an interconnected system required quantified and centralised approaches as well as a wide set of scientific instruments and technologies. A specific kind of planet was able to emerge, not by itself, but through the interconnected histories of geopolitics, technology and grand visions of planetary monitoring.
It is no news that we are in a situation of climate crisis right now. Temperatures are going wild in many places of the earth. Already since March a severe heat wave struck Pakistan and India, affecting hundreds of millions of people. In the Pakistani city of Nawabshah a high temperature of 49.5 °C was measured. In the meantime, people have to pay more and more worldwide to get food onto their tables, while “over 2 billion people live in water-stressed countries”. The Great Barrier Reef, giving home to a unique biotope and one of the natural wonders of the earth has recently suffered a mass bleaching event and will most probably be gone soon. The situation is not coincidental as it is a clear result of accelerated humanmade climate change.
A recent update from the World Meteorological Organisation puts this into perspective. It says that there is a “50:50 chance of global temperature temporarily reaching [the] 1.5°C threshold in [the] next five years”. According to the Paris Climate Agreement from 2015, the 1.5°C threshold contained severe but somewhat manageable consequences of anthropogenic climate change. Many countries of the world had ratified this agreement, and ostensibly made it their goal to curb emissions in an effort to avoid a collapse. But instead and despite the Covid-19-recession, global CO2-emissions have been at an all-time high in 2021. The trajectory shows far beyond 1.5°C.
While a temporary increase in global temperature by 1.5 °C does not qualify as a permanent temperature increase, it nevertheless represents a looming cornerstone towards mass extinctions and the threatening of the foundations upon which human existence depends upon. It seems like the chance to act had been forfeited.
Nina Wormbs, Professor of History of Technology at the division, has published an article relevant in the context of the recent COP26 climate summit in Glasgow in the daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter on 17 November 2021. In the following we will present a short summary of its main points in English, while you can read the original in full length and in Swedish here.
Summary:
When climate issues are discussed in Sweden, China is often taken as a comparison. In fact, people use China as an argument to not act in regard to climate change.
During the recent COP26 summit in Glasgow, the focus was also on China, since the country is highly invested in coal both at home and abroad. It is obvious that we need to work with China together, since its emissions are enormous. Despite this, China has recently undertaken steps towards a sustainable society.
In particular, it has become normal to point to China in a debate, if one does not want to engage with those questions the current climate crisis is bringing up. This can include coal power plants but also a justification for flying to Mallorca or Thailand for fun, because Chinese tourists could be seen in Gamla Stan. In order for this practice not to spread further, we have to understand why those arguments are not valid and what they result in.
First, it makes no sense to motivate one’s own harm-doing by arguing that someone else would produce even more harm.
Secondly, the comparison with China’s emissions are an eternal but nevertheless problematic way of relativising one’s own influence. Because you are always able to find someone who produces more emissions than yourself. More than Sweden. More than Europe. Of course it is important how much we emit as humanity, but the China-argument suggests that there would be some form of give- and take, like as if life would be a zero-sum-game. Instead, it is the opposite: every ton of CO2 counts.
Additionally, the China-argument points to an understanding, in which one does not have to do a tiny bit of right, while someone else does so much wrong. Maybe this argument is spreading, because more and more people repeat it. People in Sweden have limited knowledge of China. China is bigger, has more people, and all of them are striving towards a better life. That’s why it might be easy to point to China, in order to relativise one’s own responsibility.
Thirdly, China is often portrayed as an enemy in Swedish media. It can therefore be seen as a nation different from Sweden, being imagined like the negative “other”.
Why are the USA never mentioned in this context, despite their higher historical and per-capita-emissions (IPCC and carbonbrief.org)? Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates are also hardly ever named, even though they are leading the per-capita-emissions statistics.
If one looks into the emissions of production chains of consumer goods, of which a lot are produced in China but used somewhere else like in Sweden, the territorial basis for emission-calculations seems off.
Furthermore, within most individual nations the gap between rich and poor gets bigger, which means that the individual emissions are not what the average suggests, but rather high if you are rich, or low if you are poor. Therefore, it would be a great idea to change the focus from nations to individuals, like Chancel and Piketty suggested in 2015. This makes even more sense, since the richest 10% of the world’s population accounted for 50% of emissions since 1990. Those 10% can be found in every country, but they are not evenly distributed. More so, since 40% of those live in the USA, while only 10% live in China. It might be a cold shower for a Swedish discussant that every Swede with a monthly income of over 27,500 SEK belongs to this group.
This is not being written to support China’s climate policies. Instead, it is to show that China is not relevant if one wants to discuss a domestic climate action plan, as the relationship between being rich and producing lots of emissions is evident – and Sweden is one of the richest countries on earth.
Authors: Alejandra Mancilla, professor in Philosopy, UiO & Peder Roberts, associate professor in Modern history, UiS & researcher, Division of History of Science, Technology and Environment, KTH
The most recent IPCC report paints a dark picture. Among other things, melting Antarctic ice could put many parts of the world underwater. We therefore want to pose two questions: do we have the necessary tools to preserve Antarctica, and thereby also the world? And can the Antarctic Treaty states (including Norway) claim that they are fulfilling their commitments under the Treaty when they continue to pursue oil-focused policies?
Photo by Derek Oyen on Unsplash
Norway is one of the 29 consultative parties to the Antarctic Treaty, which marks its 60th anniversary in 2021. Many celebrate that the treaty has achieved peace and scientific cooperation. Additionally, it is 30 years since the Protocol on Environmental Protection (widely known as the Madrid Protocol) was agreed. Since then no further legal instruments have been developed to deal with new challenges – above all, the climate crisis. We argue that the Antarctic Treaty does not lack the necessary tools to address this challenge, and that instead it is a matter of more ambitiously interpreting the texts that already exist, and the responsibilities of the individual countries involved.
The Madrid Protocol states that the parties commit to protecting “the Antarctic environment and dependent and associated ecosystems.” This phrase (which occurs nineteen times in the text) leads to the question: what does it mean to protect ecosystems that are dependent and/or associated with Antarctica? The Protocol, like the Treaty itself, covers the area from the South Pole to latitude 60 degrees south, but to attain that goal it is necessary to act further north. Actions outside the geographic boundaries of the Antarctic Treaty should therefore be taken into account when evaluating the extent to which a state fulfills its commitments to protect Antarctica.
The Protocol also asserts that Antarctica has “intrinsic value”. Intrinsic value stands in contrast to instrumental value. Using Antarctica as a laboratory is an example of the latter, where Antarctica functions as a means to achieve the end of increasing scientific knowledge. Intrinsic value, on the other hand, demands that we treat Antarctica as an end in itself. What exactly that means is a discussion that the Antarctic Treaty parties are yet to have, but which could lead to a more ambitious interpretation of the Protocol’s mandate.
The processes that drive climate change and loss of biodiversity do not follow political geographical boundaries. For Antarctica, it is not enough to regulate activities within the Treaty area itself: activities beyond must also be considered. The states that signed the Madrid Protocol committed themselves, in a way, to protect the whole world. It is high time that citizens of the signatory states voiced that demand, particularly in the context of elections. Committing to meet or exceed the targets set in the Paris Agreement would be a good start.
Map of the South Pole Traverse
As a founding member of the Antarctic Treaty that continues to be active in the continent, Norway should take the lead in this process. The country has a self-image as an enthusiastic advocate of human rights and environmental causes at the global level. If it wishes to live up to its reputation, Norway ought to begin by stopping issuing new permits for oil exploration and taking concrete steps toward reducing fossil fuel production. Thus can Norway truly make a contribution to protecting Antarctica.
Division professors Sverker Sörlin and Nina Wormb’s article “Environing technologies: a theory of making environment” from the 2018 December issue of History & Technology, is available open access. Read the abstract and find the link for the full article below
Abstract
The central proposal of this article is that environing technologies shape and structure the way in which nature becomes environment, and as such used, perceived and understood. The argument builds on the understanding that environment is the result of human intervention. Technology is here understood broadly as a terraforming practise, materially and conceptually. We suggest that the compound environing technologies enable us to see environmental change on multiple scales and in new registers. That technologies alter the physical world is not new; our contribution focuses on the conceptual, epistemological, economic and emotional appreciation of systems and aggregates of technologies that is part and parcel of material change. The environing technologies that enable such articulation and comprehension hold potential in the future transformation that our societies need to undergo to overcome the crisis of environment and climate.
Under the theme of remembering the text (being a division of history after all) we will start a series of re-published texts from the enormous archive of different publications at the Divison. First out is Irma Allen’s review on Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming’ by Andreas Malm (Verso Books). This was originally published in the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, and then later in the Ecologist.
Irma is a doctoral student within the EHL at the Division. Her research focuses on how coal, as a substance and a material of labour, has shaped ideas of the Polish nation. She will defend during 2021.
From front cover of ‘Fossil Capital: The Rise of Steam Power and the Roots of Global Warming’ by Andreas Malm (Verso Books).
We all know that coal and steam vanquished over water power in Britain’s – and the world’s – industrial revolution, writes Irma Allen. But as Andreas Malm sets out in his fascinating new book, the deciding factors in that victory were the unconstrained mastery over people and nature that coal provided mill owners. And so the model was set for the fossil age that may only now be coming to an end.
We are the victims of a planet that is warming and ice caps that are melting, pushing sea levels higher and swamping the land that we have traditionally occupied.
Commodore J.V. Bainimarama (Prime Minister of Fiji)
Because of climate change, many people around the world face serious consequences, including the threat of losing their homes. One of the most serious inhabited areas now under threat is the nation of Fiji. By discussing the case of the Fijian village Vunidogoloa, we can see the tangible effects now facing thousands of communities that are being displaced worldwide as a result of our burning planet. In addition, we can learn about the current best practices of community-based relocation.
The story of climate change, though widespread, is not common, and, in many ways, must still be told. The gases in the earth’s atmosphere regulate our climate. Nevertheless, the vast majority of global transportation systems and industries rely on burning fossil fuels which increases the proportion of some gases in the atmosphere. For instance, agriculture and meat industries release high levels of carbon dioxide and methane. These gases are responsible for trapping ongoing longwave radiation in the climate system. Through such artificial augmentation (by human activity), the natural greenhouse effect becomes stronger and the earth warms. As a result, forests and oceans that have acted as “sinks,” absorbing part of the emissions of greenhouse gases have become “full.” Their capacity to absorb industrial emissions has failed due to various effects such as acidification, warming and pollution. Consequently, climate change now leads to a global warming of the layers of earth, oceans, a change in precipitation patterns, the melting of glaciers, sea level rise, ocean acidification, and frequency of extreme weather, namely storms and heat waves.
One of the locations most impacted by this changing climate are small islands. Regardless of their location, small islands are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Due to their limited size, their natural and socio-political resilience to weather natural hazards and external shocks is much lower than other countries, exposing them to greater risks.
Leaving Vunidogoloa
In the case of Fiji, the country is witnessing the worst impacts of climate change such as sea level rise, warmer temperatures, ocean acidification and intensified ‘El Niño’ patterns (interaction of the oceans and atmosphere modifying temperatures). This intensification of weather events due to climate change implies higher risks of drought and floods, endangering drinking water resources. Indeed, due to coastal floods, the incoming saltwater has destroyed crops, augmented water- and food-borne diseases and endangered the nation’s coral reefs. Such an impact on the ecology of the islands and health of its people is further exacerbated by extreme weather events, such as tropical cyclones and heat waves, that have caused injuries and illness namely vector- and water-borne diseases as well as augmented the risk of malaria and dengue fever.
Vunidogoloa was the first Fijian village to experience the impacts of climate change. Located on the island of Vanua Levu, the village was composed of 26 houses in which 32 families lived. Starting as early as 2006, floods and erosion caused by both sea-level rise and increased rains, started to become stronger, reaching homes and destroying crops. The situation was getting worse every day, with water coming in and taking the land away progressively. The mangroves that used to cover the whole coast were absorbed by the sea. Some houses were, in the words of the headman of Vunidogoloa, “like ships in the water.” The community feared for their children, suffered from agony and experienced the worst consequences on their land: crops destroyed, scarcity of drinking water resources, fewer yields from fishing and endangered access to roads. It ceased to be the idyllic spot it used to be decades before.
In order to manage the risks and impacts of climate change, the village undertook several adaptation action programs. Several of the homes most affected early on were moved using Vunidogoloa’s own resources. They also petitioned the Japanese government, who funded the construction of a seawall to protect from sea-level rise and inundations. However, this ended up being more harmful afterwards. Water that breached the seawall could not flow back unobstructed to the sea; the seawall actually exacerbated flooding.
Broken seawall. Tronquet, Clothilde, From Vunidogoloa to Kenani: An Insight into Successful Relocation, found in The State of Environmental Migration.
Progressively, the severity of floods and erosion made relocation the only hope for the citizens of Vunidogoloa. Considered a last resort, relocating the village seemed their only remaining hope. Hence, the villagers asked the help of their government in 2006. Unfortunately, steps towards a relocation plan were not taken until 2012, when the National Summit for Building Resilience to Climate Change was held. From the beginning, the relocation process was driven by equality concerns and based on consultation, consensus and participative decision-making process. As a result, 30 identical houses were built in accordance with the villagers’ choices, which treated all residents equally. Counting with the works of qualified volunteers provided by ILO (Edwards, 2012), the own villagers and unemployed people, a more sustainable concept of residences was promoted. This included the insertion of solar panels and natural system of draining water. In 2014, the relocation process started, transferring the villagers from the coast to a nearby location (also in Cakaudrove Province) further inland and at higher altitude. The residents named their new home, Kenani, from the biblical word Canaan, meaning promised land.
Satellite view of Vunidogoloa and Kenani. Tronquet, Clothilde, From Vunidogoloa to Kenani: An Insight into Successful Relocation, found in The State of Environmental Migration.Houses under construction in August 2013. Tronquet, Clothilde, From Vunidogoloa to Kenani: An Insight into Successful Relocation, found in The State of Environmental Migration.
Adapting to Kenani
But the move to the promised land is not all honey and locusts. Relocation is difficult, with significant economic, social and psychological impacts on those making this journey. For instance, relocating a village is expensive. In the case of Vunilodogoa, the move cost a total of 980,000 USD. The Fijian government paid approx. 740,000 USD, and the community paid out approx. 240,000 USD in the value of the logs used to construct the new houses and taken from Vunidogoloa. For the villagers, relocation was also described as “the saddest event of their lives.” Fijians consider their land as part of their identity, as something belonging to their ancestors and in need of care to ensure its prosperity as a dwelling space for future generations. To lose it constitutes a physical, emotional, and psychological ordeal. Leaving the village led the villagers to make the traumatic decision to exhume the remains of their ancestors. Luckily, the local church provided the transfer of the burial site. Now, the cemetery is closer and more convenient according to one elder villager.
In addition, resident diets and food practices changed with the move. They started planting bananas and pineapples tops provided by International Labour Organization. Additionally, as direct fishing from the ocean was no longer feasible, a shift to fish ponds was made, with the contribution of the Ministry of Fisheries who provided the fish and prawns. In addition, the relocation project aimed to “improve” the lifestyle of the villagers, providing them with separated kitchens, bathrooms and individual taps for washing. Likewise, access to the hospital is not any longer a challenge thanks to the village’s proximity to the main road.
Such changes affected, in particular, women, the elderly, and children. Regarding women, moving impacted them negatively at the outset. Whereas they used to fish daily in Vunidogoloa, men used to work in the farms. However, in Kenani, the sea is not nearby the village, which means that going fishing would involve an extended period of time. Thus, their husbands—decision-makers in their patriarchal society—would not allow them to go fishing but rather focus on household labor. This made women more dependent on their husbands to subsist in an early stage. However, as fish farms started to be installed, women were able to resume fishing activities. Moreover, having individual taps for washing allowed women to spend less time waiting at the community tap and socialize with other women or recreational activities such as mat weaving. Likewise, many rural women received empowerment training in solar engineering provided by a female villager who completed a UN Women-funded programme on solar engineering. For the elderly, the new location reduced their movement due to its higher position and terrain. Their social daily activities, walking, going to the church, or visiting relatives, were reduced. Children are now able to attend school daily, as they no longer have to cross a tidal river (dangerous under bad weather conditions) and can use the local bus to get to school instead.
Final Thoughts
In the National Climate Change Policy (NCCP) approved in 2012 by the Fijian Government, the report mentions a need for post-relocation monitoring and consultation to identify any long-term issues for relocated or host communities. In an interview, the climate change unit of the ministry of foreign affairs and international co-operation responded that this was to ensure the sustainability of the relocation process for the affected community. However, it remains unclear the consideration of the psychological or social impacts of relocation in such a monitoring program.
Nevertheless, in many respects, relocation has been a temporary lifesaver for this community that—although having contributed very little to climate change—has been severely affected by it. As noted earlier, this process involves losses and damages; yet, overall, the sources I’ve analyzed outline its success. Some former villagers of Vunigodoloa have even defined their lives as “easier” than before. It seems that women were impacted mostly at the beginning of the relocation process. Still, in a source from 2017, the situation of the elderly did not seem to be improved. Hopefully, we all can learn from Vunidogoloa a lesson of endurance. Moreover, may it serve as a call for action to industrialized countries and future decision-makers the timeliness and urgency for addressing the loss, damage and traumas that come as a result from relocating due to climate change.
Charan, D; Kaur, M; Singh, P, “Customary Land and Climate Change Induced Relocation—A Case Study of Vunidogoloa Village, Vanua Levu, Fiji” in Leal, W, “Climate Change Adaptation in Pacific Countries” [2017].
Giulia Borsa is an International Human Rights jurist. Giulia has been working as a postgraduate researcher for the past two years, and this blog entry is the outcome of her collaboration with the project CLISEL – a Coordination and support action of Horizon 2020. She was one of the participant to the Environmental Humanities Training School that the KTH EHL, organised in Naples in December 2018 on “Loss, Damage, and Mobility in the context of Climate Change.” She holds a bachelor’s degree in law from the University Autonoma of Barcelona and an LLM in International Human Rights Law from Oxford Brookes, with a dissertation written on climate change related displacement. She has also been coordinating the division on Climate Change and Human Rights of the International Organization for Least Developed Countries (IOLDCs) in Geneva, and she is currently working at Ecovadis. She has won several awards, including the Ideas that Change the World Competition in Oxford in 2018.
Travelling by train should not be understood as an inferior alternative to the plane. Trains should not even try to compete with planes. Trains can offer something different, something unique, something which is sorely needed among professionals: time for yourself. This is the value of slow motion.
Am I nuts? So, I am travelling to London from Stockholm for a three-day work session… by train? It takes two days there and two days back, including an over-night hotel stay in Hamburg both ways. It costs my employer around €1,200 or at least three times the cost of a flight ticket. Seriously?
This incident of economic insanity of course has its background. It is called climate change. Our failure to meet the necessary reductions of GHG emissions is out in the open. We’re heading full speed towards 2 or 3 degrees of global warming. We know this; still the polluters keep polluting. Air travel is increasing fast on a global scale and I just don’t want to be part of that trend.
Air travel might only be contributing a few percent of the greenhouse effect. But our flying is emblematic of the carbon-fuelled lifestyles that are really the problem. After all, it is the most carbon-intensive activity (per time unit) you can undertake as a human being. A particularly sad state of affairs is that the scientific community that brought us all the undisputable facts about global warming, is at the same time one of the biggest emitters. Being a successful scholar means jetting all over the world between conferences, guest appearances, exchange visits and field work. This undermines our legitimacy badly. If scientists don’t follow their own advice, why should anyone else?
Climate friendly – an European solar park
Trains instead of planes. Some say that the train is not so much better for the climate than the aeroplane. This may be true in some exceptional cases, e.g. if planes running on renewable fuels are compared with coal-powered trains. But in the majority of cases, with current technology, the train is far better. No need for additional proof here, let’s just work with this fact for now. The question is then: is it possible to be a successful scholar without using the aeroplane? Or to succeed in any kind of international career for that matter?
Obviously, many physical meetings can be replaced with virtual meetings. Skype, Hangout and WhatsApp are examples of tools that already have changed how we interact and collaborate over distance. In preparing for this trip I have already used two of them. But they did not replace my trip. We will have more digital interaction, but there will still be instances we need to travel. Can the train really be an alternative for others than green fanatics? Simply put: what is the business case for attracting professionals to do long-distance travel by train?
Hamburg Hauptbanhof
Capturing the value of slow motion. In a recent doctoral thesis at KTH, Stefan Tongur showed that when new technology enters the market, commercial actors often try to exploit them through already established business models. The problem is that the value offered by new technology– in Tongur’s case electrical road systems – cannot be captured using the old business models. On the other hand, commercial actors can pack existing technologies into new business models, thus capturing value brought about by changed value perception among the users. Netflix, Uber and RyanAir are well-known examples of this.
Railway technology is as old as industrial society itself. Today’s high-speed trains with air-conditioned coaches equipped with wi-fi and espresso machines are really just incremental innovations, mimicking both airplanes and the urban cafe. But the new and untapped value lies elsewhere. It lies in our insatiable desire for more time. In a world where we live our lives constantly online, surrounded by more and more time-saving devices, having enough time to do things slowly has become a luxury. The lack of time for reflection stands out as a problem every year in staff surveys at KTH. In our quest for organisational efficiency and instant needs fulfilment, the ”click society” offers no time for slow thinking, for concentrated work without distractions, or for just enjoying sensorial experience from our physical surrounding. Train travelling, with its fixed time tables and train changes offers a script for doing precisely this.
Checking out from the click society
The future of professional travel. With the right business models, railway technology doesn’t have to improve one bit to capture the value of slow motion. But today long distance trains seems to be nobody’s business. Large organisations such as universities must demand better services from their travel agencies, in terms of train booking and trip planning, along with personalised accommodation, and why not; suggestions on good restaurants and sights along the way.
Travelling by train should not be understood as an inferior alternative to the plane. Trains should not even try to compete with planes. Trains can offer something different, something unique, something which is sorely needed among professionals: time for yourself. This is the value of slow motion.
Enjoying Hamburg
As I am finishing this text I am on the EuroStar bound for London. The journey so far has not been without its hitches but on the whole it has been incredibly valuable. Two full days of undisturbed slow working, enjoying great scenery, everyday life and curious food at my stops in Copenhagen, Fredericia, Hamburg, Hannover (where I nearly missed the connection), Köln and Brussels. The trip generated a nice suite of photos on my Facebook page, and a string of surprised, envious or supportive comments. This is luxury after all.
This is the second time I travel long-distance by train. I will do it again, because it offers value that other parts of my professional life cannot. Perhaps it can inspire a colleague or two but they have to make their own decisions. The real challenge for me up ahead is that one trip per year I make for field studies in Uganda and Kenya. I managed to cut down from two or three annual trips by engaging local universities instead, which has added a lot of value. I hope one day to travel to Mombasa by cabin hire on a container ship, work for 6 months in the region and then glide back, in slow motion. Imagine the amount of work, and all the thinking I could do, in 6 weeks on a cargo carrier. Is that the future of professional travel? Who knows.
David Nilsson
Researcher, Division of History of Science, Technology and Environment
The Swedish Climate Policy Council will start its activities in January 2018. The task of the council is to evaluate how the policy of the Swedish government is compatible with the Swedish climate goals. The secretariat will be placed at the research council Formas. (quote from Formas.se)
David Nilsson