Skip to main content

IRIS Director Blog

“Climate Change is NOT a Hoax” (B. Obama) Blog #1: Cognitive Dissonance and Denial

Published by

The relevance of Twitter and Tweets to my life and society at large continues to elude me, even though we have had an IRIS twitter account for several years. Mostly, Twitter reminds me of the Roald Dahl book, The Twits! (By the way, the Roald Dahl museum in Great Missenden, UK has a Sustainability programme)

Nevertheless, I felt compelled to Tweet what President Obama said about "climate change not being a hoax", during his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. A ton of other people also tweeted this! Obama's comment has inspired me to write a series of 10 blogs exploring why the president of the USA actually had to make this statement. He might equally have said "there is no evidence that mermaids are real."

I spent a good part of the last year, while living in the USA, trying to wrap my head around why so many of its citizens are able to dismiss the evidence of human-induced climate change. I have given a lot of thought to the link between science, policy and politics. As well, I have been reading about personality types, learning styles, economics, etc. etc.

Which brings me to Cognitive Dissonance. This is the state of holding conflicting cognitions. As in, for example, refusing to believe that IPCC scientist reports that carbon emissions from human sources are causing climate change, while at the same time, happily living in a country where most of the infrastructure is directly based on technology that comes from the very same scientific method. To a rationale thinker, who respects the power of peer-reviewed research and logical thought, this particular example of cognitive dissonance is puzzling and unfathomable. But it's so widespread that I have been compelled to ask - what's the science behind this?

Two excellent CBC radio programmes about Risk in the IDEAS series currently being (re)broadcast in the afternoons, directly address my question.  Additionally, in a study published earlier this year in Nature Climate Change, Yale University researchers found that climate change denial was associated more with cognitive dissonance than scientific illiteracy.

Here's a summary: "On the simplest level, we take risks to derive benefits. If the benefit outweighs the risk, we've made a good decision. But decisions are subject to bias, even those of experts. How do we live with uncertainty and make good decisions? Vancouver broadcaster Kathleen Flaherty talks with risk takers, risk managers and risk assessors to find out." (from the Ideas with Paul Kennedy website)

Clearly, if human-induced climate change is real, then NOT taking serious steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions constitutes extremely risky behaviour. Why aren't people in the countries with the highest carbon footprints, such as Canada and the USA NOT acting more decisively? Obviously, they must be thinking that the experts are biased. Even though we are talking about widespread scientific consensus!

The interviews and conversations with researchers and authors in the programmes explain how and why people react to uncertainty and risk with inaction. Basically, people avoid thinking uncomfortable thoughts by convincing themselves that everything is ok. How so? Well, for a start, they tend to hang out with others who have similar outlooks and beliefs, which leads to all kinds of fundamentalist and dogmatic denialist thinking, because there is no one there to challenge them.

The example of the consequences that can come from surrounding oneself with "yes men", that is given in the programme, is that of Lord John Browne, former CEO of BP. BP had failed to address poor safety practices at the Texas City oil refinery where there was an explosion in 2005. Apparently, Lord Browne has said in subsequent interviews that he was not questioned and challenged enough by those in his immediate circle, or something to that effect. But, of course, as Kathleen Flaherty  pointed out, the membership of his top management team was his choice.

I strongly recommend this programme to everyone wanting to understand how denial arises in the face of bad news and uncertainty - and climate change. This is the process of self-delusion. Of course, the extreme irony about using Lord John Browne as an example of the tendency  to avoid those speaking inconvenient truths to power, is that in 1997 he was one of the only Big Oil executives to publicly endorse the IPCC consensus on  climate change being related to human activities, and to refer to its second assessment. Browne also rebranded British Petroleum as BP, and "Beyond Petroleum", and is considered a visionary.

And, one last thing: the programme gave an alarming statistic that 30% of US white males interviewed believed that all activities are risk-free. This contrasted with women, and African American men and women amongst whom there was hardly anyone holding this view. This lack of ability to detect and acknowledge risk would, logically,  be occurring amongst white male bankers. And, we all know what happened on Wall Street a few years ago!  You can download the podcasts here

Dawn Bazely

 

Food Blog no. 10 – cities as sources of food – The Toronto Urban Veg Tour 2012 & 2011

Published by

The City of Havana, Cuba produces a tremendous amount of the food for its citizens, as we see in the BBC show, Around the World in 80 Gardens. In the 2004 documentary, The End of Suburbia, the futurist, James Kunstler talked about how people living in the 'burbs, will, in the future, use their front gardens to grow food.

Just how close are we to this being the case in Toronto? Based on my experience across the city, with schools, neighbours, various botanic gardens and teaching the Plants course, I would say that we are still pretty far off. But, there has been movement and a steadily increasing interest amongst youth (for me, that's everyone under 30) in gardening and growing food over the last 5 years - the same trend is happening for knitting. One example of why I think we are far off this, is that I spent a good chunk of my volunteer time in the mid 2000s on my knees, digging, with other dedicated parents (see Catherine Majoribanks, Pete Ewins, myself, Sheila O'Connell and Jeff Hanning above), and restoring an overgrown public school butterfly garden to have a focus on food and herbs, and installing a new native species garden. My various strategic attempts, at that time, to make the sporadic efforts of parent-driven efforts in school gardens more sustainable and widespread over incoming generations of parents, teachers and children, failed. There was simply not a broad enough interest and uptake on multiple fronts - in other words, the tipping point hadn't been reached.

In 2011, The Horticultural Societies of Parkdale and Toronto became a part of the local urban food movement. In an initiative led by Beth Kapusta, a resident of the High Park-Roncesvalles,  the Society supported the highly successful Veg Tour 2011. When Beth was looking for local gardens to include in the tour, my family's garden got volunteered as a stop on the tour by the owner of our local cheese shop, the Thin Blue Line.

In 2012, instead of a public Veg Tour the local gardeners previously involved in the tour visited each others' gardens as well as new gardens, and exchanged ideas, as well as a taste of  food grown in our' gardens (those are my tomatoes and nasturtium pesto on the tray - photo by Howard Rideout, used with permission).
 It was very interesting and educational. This year's tour was an illustration of the principles of successful grass-roots movements. First, it was notable that the leads and participants in the Veg Tour were neighbours who are activists, gardeners, writers, etc. with lots of background knowledge and experience. For example, the 2011 Veg Tour included gardening writer Lorraine Johnson and social innovator Tonya Surman, while the leader, dynamic Beth Kapusta, grew up in Delhi, Ontario, a farming community. What the tour did, was to allow us to aggregate as a group. Reaching critical mass is important for grass roots efforts. As we say at IRIS, "if you're not networking, you're not working".

There are two main challenges for local urban food movements like the High Park-Parkdale Veg Tour. The first is to broaden the community participation to include diverse gardeners from varied cultural backgrounds, who might not normally think about getting involved with such a group. A few years ago, the Toronto Botanical Garden held a workshop aimed at figuring out how to be more relevant to the broader Toronto community. I, along with others suggested the idea of asking culturally diverse gardeners to plant gardens characteristic of those that various waves of immigrants to Toronto created when they arrived: so many immigrants have brought with them knowledge about growing crops. Many of us at the workshop also suggested increasing engagement with school gardens.

A second challenge facing these urban food movements is to transfer the knowledge to less experienced and skilled, but interested youth. Bottom line, is that sustainability-ideas such as growing more local food  in urban locations is not new. It's about getting to a tipping point where a critical mass sustains the movement. In Cuba they had no choice. In Toronto, it's more of a choice, at the moment.

Here are some of my favourite veggie gardens in my west Toronto neighbourhood.

 

Dawn Bazely

PS Through the Veg Tour events, I discovered some interesting York University connections. Clement Kent, the president of The Toronto and Parkdale Horticultural Societies is a post-doctoral fellow in the Biology Department. He was  featured in a Y-file article, about the Pollinator Advocate Award that he received for his Pollinator Garden Project.

‘Better than TIFF – York U screens Return of the Far Fur Country Friday 14th 7 pm

Published by

The last time I attended TIFF was in 1983 because a friend of mine had helped a friend of his out by appearing as an extra in a movie! It was not a particularly memorable film.

TOMORROW'S (FRIDAY) EVENT WILL BE BETTER THAN THAT AND BETTER THAN SCRAMBLING FOR TIFF TICKETS - come to Nat Taylor Cinema (Ross North 126) tomorrow night, for an event organized by Robarts Centre for Canadian Studies, and supported by IRIS, to see Return of the Far Fur Country, featuring rare archival footage shot in Inuit and First Nations communities in 1920, by cinematographers from the Hudson's Bay Company, to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the venerable company (founded in 1670). As the arctic melts, these records and stories constitute the legacy of what was once there and what will, in all likelihood be much reduced or radically altered.

Whether or not you are a fan of the current incarnation of HBC, which was bought in 2008 by a USA-based company - the parent of Lord and Taylor, every Canadian should be aware of the hugely important role that the Hudson's Bay Company played in the history of Canada. Peter C. Newman's 1985 book, the Company of Adventurers, is a fascinating read. It was followed by two other books and a PBS tv series, Empire of the Bay.

Personally, I have been very impressed with how an American company has marketed and merchandized the iconic Hudson's Bay logo and products such as the classic Hudson Bay pure wool blanket. My sister is an archaeologist, and a couple of years ago, we gave her a small version of the blanket and the accompanying book about its history as a gift. She loved it.

Dawn Bazely

Photo from the HBC archive, of a 1920 cinematographer

 

Robert Watson, then and now: the former chair of the Inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change who was removed by President George W. Bush in 2001

Published by

In May 2012 , Professor Sir Robert Watson FRS gave a very informative lecture at Oxford University, entitled:

Climate change and biodiversity loss - the importance of scientific assessments to national and international policy formation

The talk was sponsored by the Biodiversity Institute (which hosted me during my sabbatical time at Oxford this year), one of the interdisciplinary Oxford Martin Schools. It was important for several reasons.

First and foremost, Robert (Bob) Watson is an excellent example of a scientist who is actually well versed in the ways of anti-science politics. He gave a detailed explanation in his lecture of how evidence-based policy ought to be formulated. The UK National Ecosystem Assessment, of which he was co-chair provided a case study.

I was excited to be able to ask him my current standard question for colleagues in the science community:

"What can Canadian scientists based in Universities do to bring attention to the current anti-climate change science and anti-peer-reviewed research policies of the Harper government?"

Who is better placed to be asked this question than the man who was was pushed out of IPCC by George W. Bush in response to pressure from Big Oil? Was Robert Watson demoralized by  his experience? Absolutely not - he's dynamic, positive and inspirational. This makes him an important public voice in advocating for evidence-based policy. He has continued to serve in a series of high-level science-policy roles as well as being a professor at the University of East Anglia.

In responding to my question, Prof. Watson indicated that he is very up-to-date on the Harper government's track record on Kyoto. He is also well aware of its gutting of Statistics Canada and of the political ideology driving this and other cuts. Why wouldn't he be? He was, himself a victim of political ideology.

In a nutshell, he advised that scientists MUST go directly to the public to advocate for the importance of peer-reviewed research. So, scientists must invest in learning to not "be such a scientist" outside of their labs and field sites. (For most of my colleagues in the natural and physical sciences, I immediately thought "well, good luck with that - I really don't see it happening!").

I will end this post with the text of his 2000 speech to the COP 6 of the UNFCCC. I have bored many second year Ecology students (BIOL 2050) by reading chunks of it out loud during lectures, when I was teaching this course from  2000-2006....

It might be boring but it's important - so much of it is coming to pass - WE WERE WARNED BY SCIENTISTS...

OK - on balance, perhaps it's more fun to listen to Robert Watson in person, Dawn Bazely

 

 

 

Dawn Bazely on CBC Radio Points North speaking about Invasive Plants

Published by

Invasive plants discussed in Sault Ste. Marie

There are some unwanted visitors creeping around Ontario. And they come in the form of plants.

Listen audio (runs 5:19)

Dawn Bazely mentioned a number of links to help gardeners choose non-invasive plants:

http://www.ontarioinvasiveplants.ca/
http://www.ontarioinvasiveplants.ca/files/GMI_2012_web_North.pdf
http://www.ontarioinvasiveplants.ca/files/GMI2012web.pdf
http://www.invasivespeciescentre.ca/

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/pointsnorth/episodes/2012/08/21/invasive-plants-discussed-in-sault-ste-marie/

Getting my waistline back!

Published by

My 12-month sabbatical ended on June 30th, and in the last 3 weeks, I have been back on campus, teaching and catching up with what's been happening at York while I've been abroad. I am particularly excited by the progress on the subway stations. Back in March 2012, I rode on the gorgeous new subway trains up to York.

The GTA (Greater Toronto Area) now has the longest commuting time in North America - on average, people spend a month a year in their cars. Evergreen at the Brickworks is sponsoring Tanner Zurkoski to live in his car for a month and write about the experience.  I am delighted that before I retire from York U, I will be able to take transit to and from work on a daily basis, without spending longer on the TTC than in my car. At the moment, it takes me 3 hours a day to take public transit to work, in comparison to 1 hour per day spent in the car. So, sadly, it's the car for me.

Yesterday, a very kind colleague told me that I look 15 years younger. A number of other colleagues have commented that I look a lot slimmer. Well, walking 50 km a week for 3 months in Oxford, UK, will do that for a person. Before that, for 6 months, I hiked around the Harvest Forest trails. During my sabbatical I spent hardly any time commuting anywhere in a car.

During the 5 years that I was director of IRIS (2006-2011), long working hours, catered meetings, sitting in my car (instead of walking to work or to the TTC), combined with less in-class lecturing and field work (i.e. severely reduced movement), resulted in me putting on weight. So, ironically, at the same time as I was carrying out research on "human security", including "health security" and writing blogs about the ecology of food production, I was piling on the pounds. There is extensive media coverage of the so-called "obesity" epidemic, including an excellent multimedia series Sick Cities in the Sydney Morning Herald website. This Australian series does a great job of explaining the economic and social drivers behind our collective expanding waistlines, including the lack of exercise incorporated into our daily lives, partly due to poor public transport systems. In Oxford, I walked everywhere, all the time (or took the bus).

During each of my sabbaticals, I have undertaken one "personal" project that will contribute to improved career performance as a professor. In 2004, I worked on being on time for meetings - my entire family is notoriously late for everything and I was right up there with my numerous uncles, aunts and cousins. I worked with a life coach and the book Never Be Late Again: Cures for the Punctually Challenged by Diane DeLonzor. It HAS made a difference. This past sabbatical, and in fact, beginning in January 2011, my goal was to return to my 2006 "fighting weight". I used a pedometer, started mapping my walks and got a hold of a personal trainer, to kick me into lifting weights and meaning it. I am not there yet, but I am moving nearly as much as I did before 2006. This is a GOOD thing. And, the research is in - we evolved, as humans to think as we move. John Medina's excellent book, Brain Rules, explains the research very well indeed. The more we move, the better our thinking.

Along the way, I learned from my personal trainer, who also has a B.Ed. degree, that the multibillion dollar fitness industry exists simply because people are, in general, fundamentally lacking self-discipline, and the ability to keep on task. You DON'T need a fancy gym or classes to keep fit. You just need to keep on doing a bunch of incredibly boring exercises, such as sit-ups, push-ups, squats and lunges, with less than $100 of exercise equipment, that you can keep in your own front room, plus, just walk 7 km a day. The average person just cannot keep this simple effort up by themselves.

This all raises the question of the extent to which education is able to shift societal norms. The reality is that a large proportion of the population is NOT moved to action by education that comes from peer-reviewed research. Indeed, I am a prime example of this, and I am scientist! This morning, I have written this blog, instead of doing the supersets promoted by Canadian Living's fitness advisor, Pam Mazzuca. While living in Oxford, I had no choice but to walk, and carry groceries in my backpack (which took care of the weights).

However, money IS a motivator for many more people than is knowledge and education. An interesting example of this, comes from a relative in the UK, whose family is required to wear pedometers and to upload the data weekly to their health insurance company. The exercise undertaken by the family translates into reduced health insurance premiums. Is this a form of "fat tax"? I'd say so - although it's also a bit like negative billing from cable companies.

Dawn R. Bazely

Director Dawn Bazely is back from sabbatical!

Published by

To quote Sam Gamgee "Well I'm back", after a wonderful sabbatical year, most recently, from 3 months in my old department at Oxford University. Nearly every day I walked past The Eagle and Child pub where JRR Tolkien, CS Lewis and their fellow Inklings hung out. Oxford is dripping with history and it was fun to be back there after 22 years.

I extend my thanks and appreciation to Professor Stepan Wood, for the stellar job that he did as IRIS' Acting Director this past academic year (2011-2012). Details of his and IRIS’ activities can be found in the annual report.

I return as IRIS Director for 2012-2013, refreshed and recharged by the work of my sabbatical, and I look forward to re-engaging with my IRIS colleagues, the York community and fellow Canadians.

The Sabbatical, in which we are paid 80% of our salary for 12 months, continues to be an important perk in Academia. Many consider it essential for allowing quality research to flourish and develop. The concept comes from the biblical tradition of resting every seventh year,

During the past year I had the opportunity to recalibrate my academic reputation and achievements and also to calibrate the standing and achievements of IRIS. I spent the year as a Research Fellow at Harvard Forest, Harvard University and as a Visiting Researcher in the Biodiversity Institute, an Oxford University Martin Interdisciplinary School.

As a science professor, I usually thinking of "recalibration" as sending out pieces of laboratory equipment that measure some factor with high accuracy, for testing and re-setting or re-calibrating. However, a colleague in the UK used the term in relation to some of her team members needing to recalibrate themselves and their achievements against their peers. In other words, it’s a reality check. I predict that "recalibration" will become a new buzzword, given that the title of a recent article in the UK's Daily Telegraph was "We need to recalibrate what we think of as success”. Still, I kind of like it.

So, how did IRIS stack up against Harvard’s, Oxford’s and other institution’s efforts to drive forward the environmental, economic and social sustainability agenda?

Actually, remarkably well.

IRIS has done a lot with very little cash. We have a director who is a full-time faculty member, with course-release, paid for by the university, and a co-ordinator, whose salary is 100% soft-money, plus some office space (that's a big "in-kind"), and access to parts of the university infrastructure. Our business model is that of a small NGO – often running on fumes.

Nevertheless, we have had great success in leveraging the talent and energy of members of the York community and beyond. We have also been innovative and creative in delivering cutting edge research and action on the sustainability front, which compares favourably with far better-funded efforts here and abroad.

I have been gratified to receive many complements and kudos for IRIS-developed programmes from colleagues from across the UK and USA, this past year. I have also received, over the past 6 years, many inquiries about how colleagues from other institutions might replicate IRIS' achievements.

To these questions I usually reply that “it’s xxxxxx hard work – only those willing to roll up their sleeves and pitch in, should consider getting involved here.”

While it's certainly the case that top-reputation institutions like Oxford and Harvard have much deeper pockets than York, it's also the case that they, too, often do a lot with relatively little; there is a high degree of competition for funds in these institutions. What IRIS has in common with sustainability researchers at these institutions is a smart, energetic, positive “can-do” attitude, and hard workers. In this, we stack up well against the best of them. Let’s be clear that the average Harvard and Oxford professor works many more than 40 hours in a week. Excellent research and outreach results come not just from talent and decent funding, but from hard, uncomplaining work.

I cannot emphasize this message enough to the York community and to Canada in general. Particularly in light of Federal Government cuts to Environment Canada, Parks Canada and Statistics Canada. Society as we know it, in Canada is built on the work of dedicated scientists and social scientists. I continue to believe that the average Canadian has relatively poor understanding of the work of scientists and other academics and that that solid advocacy for research funding is one of the tasks of every academic. It’s not enough to say that what we do has societal relevance – we must prove it – every day.

However, there is also no doubt, that given a common buzzword, namely, "austerity", that excellent sustainability research is not enough to guarantee support and funding. In a shrinking pool of resources, the politics surrounding sustainability and other areas of academic are increasingly in evidence. A large part of my research this past year was aimed at gaining insight into the politics-policy-science issue and the question "Why don't ecologists in particular, and scientists in general, get more respect?" I had great fun with this, and you can read about this and my other sabbatical activities in my official report to York University.

Response to “The Sustainability Mindset”

Published by

My comments on Michael Spence Sustainability Mindset
David V. J. Bell

Hi Mike – thanks for sending this along. It is beautifully written, and succinctly lands some very important points.

Your emphasis on education and values is spot on – though I agree that they are necessary but not sufficient underpinnings of sustainability.  I used precisely the same formulation in the conclusion to my book chapter (see p. 21ff.) entitled “Education for Sustainable Development:  Cure or Placebo?”. Ultimately we require a global “culture of sustainability” in order to provide the foundation for sustainability-based wise choices, decisions and policies in the economy, political system, and society generally.

I am reminded of the scenario exercise conducted a number of years ago by the World Business Council on Sustainable Development. (WBCSD)  They outlined three main scenarios, each of which was premised on the increasing environmental toll of economic activity.

The first scenario (“FROG”) led to environmental disaster.  Business As Usual continued under the banner “Forever Recognize Our Growth”. The double entendre of the title referred to the idea that a frog placed in lukewarm water that is gradually heated to the boiling point will fail to “pick up the signals” and instead of jumping our of the pot, will eventually die.  By analogy, the global environment in this scenario deteriorates beyond critical thresholds because governments, businesses, and society in general fail to “pick up the signals” in time to avert tragedy.  (Cf. the last sentence of your piece!).

In the second scenario, GEO, the signals are picked up in time and draconian action is taken under the aegis of a Global Environmental Organization that is given sufficient authority and power to regulate and legislate the world’s businesses, governments and individuals to behave more sustainably.  Disaster is averted.

The third scenario was much preferred.  Entitled JAZZ, it entailed a transformation of behaviour achieved through the influence of education and value change rather than through the power and authority of an all powerful global regulatory body. (I’m using these terms as defined in my book Power, Influence and Authority: An Essay in Political Linguistics.)  Jazz in this case is not an acronym but a metaphor. Jazz musicians are able to co-create music spontaneously and collaboratively by improvising on a structure outlined in a shared “chart” that shows the melody and chord changes.  By analogy, in the JAZZ scenario businesses, governments and citizens/consumers/householders would all be “on the same page” because they would all understand sustainability imperatives and would share the values needed to coordinate actions to achieve sustainable outcomes.  Pretty far fetched to be sure, but an intriguing idea.  What strikes me as useful in this scenario is the notion that a culture shift toward sustainability would make it a lot easier for both businesses and governments to adopt appropriate policies and decisions.

Another key point you raise is the challenge of developing a more sustainable alternative to the growth model.  Basically I think we have somehow to effect a transition from 20th century capitalism to 21st century sustainable enterprise.  But what does this entail?  I’m sure you are correct that this transition will require plenty of invention and innovation (or what I referred to in an earlier comment as “sustainability ingenuity”.)  As you pointed out in your comments back to me, lots of the requisite ingenuity appears to be going on.  But how much more is needed?  How can we hasten it along? And what will a sustainable economy look like?

I think we have a fair idea of the “design specs” for a sustainable economy.  At minimum I think a sustainable economy must:

  • Create sustainable livelihoods for (most of) the world’s 1 billion unemployed
  • Provide products and services that meet basic needs (food, shelter, water, energy) for a population of over 7 billion rapidly growing toward 9 billion
  • Drastically reduce waste  (According to Paul Hawken et al.’s book Natural Capitalism, 99% of everything produced in the USA is in the waste stream within 6 months!!)
  • Reduce throughputs of energy and materials by factor of 10 (or more likely a factor of 20)
  • Operate on a low carbon basis that will allow us to reduce GHG’s approx 80% by 2050
  • Reduce environmental impacts and contribute to environmental conservation/restoration
  • Reduce transportation impacts (for workers, inputs, and products)
  • Encourage sustainable consumption
  • Ensure that all companies and businesses are socially and environmentally responsible
  • Achieve “smart” effective regulation.

For me the most hopeful point you make in The Sustainability Mindset is about the growing attention to sustainability in Asia and throughout the developing world.  No doubt you are doing what you can to encourage this.

Thanks again Mike!

David
David VJ Bell
Chair of LSF

Pro Tem Guest Editorial, By David V.J. Bell

Published by

The following appeared in the February 2012 issue of Pro Tem. David V.J. Bell is an IRIS Executive Board member, as well as the YCAS Director emeritus; BA'65 (York/UofT) AM '67, PhD'69 (Harvard University) is Chair of Learning for a Sustainable Future (www.lsf-lst.ca) and is Professor Emeritus and Former Dean, Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University.

I’m honored to be invited to serve as co-editor for this issue of Pro Tem, a position I last held in 1964-65! It’s gratifying that the name Pro Tem (adopted with tongue in cheek) has survived despite its obvious ephemeral quality. The student founders of the paper were fairly confident that a more enduring moniker would emerge within a few months of the original publication in February 1962. But then the name caught on – and I’m glad it continues.

A bit of personal background. I began my undergraduate life here at Glendon, as a member of the third entering class of York students, 50 years ago this Fall. The total student body numbered around 300 spread over first, second and third year programs of the 3 year “general” Bachelor of Arts program. At that time the
Keele campus had not even been conceived, so we constituted the total student enrolment of York University. There were about 40 faculty members. York was smaller than nearly everyone’s high school.

Despite its tiny student body York was an intellectually exciting place. The vibrant sense of community among students, faculty, and staff extended far beyond the classroom. There were academic clubs and guest lectures and musical performances and foreign films and lively common room discussions. Traditions were emerging. We defined a “tradition” as anything that had been done the year before. The place was alive with pranks and practical jokes and endless amounts of literary humour (including the occasional writings of a fictitious student named Chuck Brayfield, who even managed to get outrageously satirical letters to the
editor published in the Toronto Star).

A distinct intellectual identity had already emerged, inspired by foundingPresident Murray Ross’s writings about The New University. York embraced ideals of interdisciplinarity, the integrity of all knowledge, and a quest for wellroundedness,balance and wholeness. Ross had written “…when specialization requires or implies that knowledge be limited to one narrow area of life, and that an individual’s view of mankind be lacking in perspective and that he be insensitive to the problems of the modern world, then certainly there is need to question the adequacy of an educational system that produces such specialists.” York would strike a new path, true to its motto Tentanda Via – the way must be tried. The sculpture of the “whole Man” reminded us daily that even as undergraduates we were embarked on an intellectual journey that was new and different and wonderful – and a bit scary.

York’s ideals have served the institution well through its first half century. York has innovated in a number of key areas: General education at the undergraduate level; interdisciplinary graduate programs in both the Social Sciences/Humanities and the Natural Sciences; the world’s first Faculty of Environmental Studies (itself highly interdisciplinary); a unique Faculty of Fine Arts, and so on.

But looking ahead 50 years I believe that York’s founding ideals need to be reinterpreted and expanded. It is abundantly clear that in the wealthy countries like Canada and the US; the emerging economies like China and India; and the poorest countries like Haiti, Zimbabwe and Afghanistan: the current trajectory of development is environmentally, socially and economically unsustainable. Although my perspective on the key to a more sustainable future has evolved over the past 2 decades I am now absolutely convinced that education is the sine qua non of a successful transition. I believe that as a species we face an “educational challenge for humankind” – can we learn to live differently on this planet?

Consider this formulation. In the 19th century some people were “pupils”; in the 20th century most of us became “students’; in the 21st century all of us must become “learners.” We must learn to live sustainably on this planet. Educators become less the omniscient imparters of knowledge (access to which is expanding
exponentially through the internet and social networks) than coaches and mentors in the learning process; themselves life-long learners.

If Murray Ross were writing today about the educational underpinnings of a new university he would surely describe sustainability education as required general knowledge for the 21st century.

How does all of this relate to Glendon in the year 2012 and to this issue of Pro Tem? To begin with, the theme of this issue, anticipation, reflects a central tenet of sustainability: “it is better to anticipate and prevent than to clean up after the fact.” (ORTEE - Ontario Round Table on Environment and the Economy 1992.) We need to think ahead and anticipate the future consequences of present day actions such as our wasteful use of energy and our growing reliance on fossil fuels (despite the irrefutable evidence of anthropogenic climate change). We
need to consider the future implications of growing inequality in our society, and of a world population greater than 9 billion half of whom (if today’s situation is replicated in 2050) will be living on less than $2 US per day.

Glendon has the potential to become a living laboratory of sustainable practices and behaviours. Thanks to a group of current students mentored by Sociology professor Stuart Schoenfeld (and assisted by one of Glendon’s first undergraduates John Court), a new website (http://glendon.irisyorku.ca/) situates Glendon in its natural and historical context and discusses “Conservation, Preservation and Sustainability” of the campus. Current students can find out about the immediate environment as a step toward enhancing their sustainability literacy. They can “connect the dots” (one of my favorite definitions of sustainability) between the past and the present, and between the environmental, social and economic aspects of Glendon. They can start “conversations about the future” (my other favorite definition) that they envision for their own and
subsequent generations, expanding their focus from the very local to the global. In short, they can learn and practice attitudes, values, and actions that will help bend the curve toward a more sustainable future.

Merci beaucoup. À l’avenir durable!

Business ethics prof Andy Crane debates Alberta tar sands’ “Ethical Oil” marketing claims

Published by

My friend Andrew Crane, a leading York University business ethics professor and director of the Schulich School of Business's Centre of Excellence in Responsible Business, provided a very thoughtful and incisive counterpoint to oil industry spokesperson Kathryn Marshall on CBC Radio's The Current program on December 6, 2011. The two debated "Ethical Oil," a slick oil industry marketing campaign dressed up to look like grassroots activism. Building on right-wing commentator Ezra Levant's 2009 book of the same name, the central ploy of this campaign is to portray tar sands oil from Canada as a more ethical choice than oil from, say, Russia, the Sudan, Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, because it is produced in a liberal democracy with robust protections for human rights and the rule of law.  While the Canadian oil patch may have a better human rights record than those in some repressive regimes, Andy pointed out that branding tar sands petroleum as "Ethical Oil" is unhelpful for several reasons.

Andrew Crane, George R. Gardiner Professor of Business Ethics, Schulich School of Business

 

For one thing, its narrow focus on human rights and the rule of law distracts attention from the massive environmental damage  and energy consumption involved in extraction and processing of tar sands oil. For another, the claim that tar sands operations fully respect human rights is debatable, with numerous First Nations claiming that these operations impair their rights to clean water and a healthful environment.

It is also hard to miss the xenophobic undertones of the Ethical Oil message--it is no coincidence that most of the countries targeted by the campaign are ethnically, culturally or religiously distinct from the white Canadian majority, and the dangerous "otherness" of the foreigner is a central trope of Levant's book.

Most importantly, as Andy argued forcefully, Canada cannot credibly portray itself as an energy policy leader simply by claiming that the status quo in the Alberta oil patch is preferable to the status quo in certain other oil-producing nations.

Rather, to be a real leader Canada would have to show that it is genuinely committed to progress toward a post-carbon economy and improvement of the human rights records of Canadian companies overseas. This would include holding Canadian oil companies to the same high standards wherever they do business in the world. It is disingenuous to say that oil companies in Canada are ethical leaders if those very same companies are busily pumping oil and propping up those same repressive foreign regimes that the Ethical Oil campaign vilifies.

Way to go Andy! Thanks for bringing some much needed clarity to the "Ethical Oil" campaign's effort to obfuscate the ethical issues surrounding the tar sands.

css.php