Who's to blame? Individual vs. corporate action in the world of environmentalism.
In researching environmentalism over the last few months, two questions have popped up time after time: Who is to blame for this mess we're in? and by extension - Who's responsibility is it to sort it out?
Accusations of blame usually point towards one of two culprits - big business or us, the consumer.
However, in the last year, in particular, we have seen many more attempts to push the blame onto the consumer in the form of anti-plastic campaigns and the popularity of zero waste lifestyles to name but a few.
I agree to some extent that personal consumption of non-sustainable materials certainly is a part of the problem but I don't feel it is the only way to address the fight for our planet. Instead, more overwhelming for me is the how this non-sustainable consumption is encouraged by big business and their profits which are being prioritised within a capitalist system. As a result, I believe the ones who should be taking the most action are not the consumers but the businesses and governments that hold the power to make a change.
A few examples spring to mind when trying to explain how this shift in power links to a shift in responsibility - plastic packaging, food waste and pollution.
Hot topic at the moment, the debate surrounding disposable plastic packaging is a great example of how the lack of corporate action encourages and often sentences consumers to lead less environmentally friendly lives. Currently, in the UK, other than the plastic bag charge in supermarkets, it is extremely hard to buy items such as fruit, veg, meat and bread without also buying into a tonne of plastic packaging. Often if you want to avoid plastic, it's either more expensive than your usual purchases or you have to visit a specialist (again, often a more expensive store) in order to find so-called 'naked' food. Most people don't have the time, energy or budget to be able to make these decisions to help the environment and I see it as unreasonable to assume that everyone has the ability to make this change to their lifestyle. Whilst I would love to see a world where everyone brought their own bags and containers to do their weekly shop, most mainstream supermarkets do not facilitate this as an affordable or convenient option if at all. Realistically, chain supermarkets have a much greater ability to make change through both their power and relative impact but their interests lie in making profit alone. Something as simple as making all own brand fruit and veg loose would have far larger an impact than a privileged few using their own bags on the small range of 'naked' goods currently available. Supermarkets could make a change if they actually wanted to but they don't and as a result, as consumers, we are limited in our ability to make a significant change to reduce our plastic waste. Businesses hold the power and are using it for self-interest rather than that of the planet and by extension it's inhabitants.
A similar criticism can be applied to local and central government when looking at the problem of air pollution in our cities. If our city councils had more money from central government and public transport was state-owned, city networks could be centrally planned and integrated with both the environment and public health in mind. In Southampton, the council is proposing funding HGV companies and taxi firms so that they switch their fleet to more eco-friendly models - which is a start. BUT, HGVs and taxis actually represent a smaller proportion of harmful emissions in the city than private vehicles for personal use (cars, motorbikes, vans etc.). Therefore, surely this money and effort would be more productively spent investing in and subsidising stronger public transport links which would limit people's genuine need to use a car for everyday journeys such as going to work or dropping their kids at school. Not only would this have an amazing impact on lowering air pollution but it would also increase social mobility linking poorer areas of the city currently neglected. If public transport and active transport was better integrated with the cities needs and were more affordable (in an ideal world free) it would take away the need for so many people to use private vehicles for their everyday commute or errands. Public ownership is also necessary in an ideal world as the idea that 'the market' allows for the best solution to problems in our society is totally dispelled when it comes to environmental issues such as pollution. Private businesses do not have the public good in mind, they have the good of their shareholders and executives in mind - those who can afford to live outside the heavily polluted inner-city areas. How can we blame people who work long hours for little pay for not wanting to take a couple different buses and pay over the odds for an often inconsistent service? Really, we can't. Instead, we should be rallying behind our local representative to demand more funding for public and active transport. Central government has the power to grant funds to local councils in order to solve these problems but, instead, they encourage private firms to take control of public transport absolving themselves of any responsibility for pollution in our cities.
In both of these examples, it isn't to say us as consumers are blameless as we could adopt lifestyles that are more environmentally friendly in a multitude of ways. However, it is clear that most of the problems we face can be boiled down to the corruption inherent to a capitalist society and wealth inequality. Quite simply, if we attacked the capitalist system we would be able to take away the barriers that stop people from leading a more environmentally friendly life and you wouldn't need to be a huge zero waste living eco-activist to make a difference. Lifestyle change is a part of it but what choice do the majority have when environmentally friendly swaps aren't always the cheapest and buying a train season ticket to London could set you back as much as 5k?
In my view, focusing on lifestyle changes is counterproductive and only deals with part of the problem. You can avoid as many carrier bags as you like but if supermarkets are still dumping their leftover food and councils aren't funding proper recycling plants, the real damage is still being done. This is not to say that individuals cannot make a difference alone but I am cynical of the genuine influence of eco-trends such as going 'zero waste' as they remove the responsibility from big business and government and put it on the consumer and their personal 'greed'.
However, if you do have the financial power or the free time that allows you to choose more environmentally friendly options in your day to day life, I am not by any means saying you shouldn't choose them. I am simply saying we should direct more of our fight towards those doing the really extreme damage to our planet rather than making people feel guilty for something that is often out of their control.
To conclude, I believe the power dynamics under capitalism make it fundamentally difficult for individuals to have a significant impact to help the environment as big business holds the true power.
As a solution, I propose that both individual and corporate action should be combined in our fight towards a better planet as it should be down to businesses and government to enable the public to make better lifestyle choices with environmentalism as a priority.
Sooooo, socialist rant over (kidding it's never over). I wanted to make this post as some background to my perspective on environmental issues and to make it crystal clear who I believe is to blame for the lack of largescale environmental action in the UK. This will be a common theme in my blog so if you hate the poor I'd probably call it quits now :)
As a quick summary, I just wanted to say: Fuck the Tories. Love the environment.
Peace and love,
Bethany x
P.s: If this is something you are interested in and want some good resources, I'd recommend looking at anything written by Caroline Lucas MP, and George Monbiot who both offer left-wing environmentalist perspectives. Also, Greenpeace's journalism project has some great articles on this subject which you can find here.
Additionally, in the interest of balance, I want to follow this post up with some genuine and reasonable lifestyle changes that people can make if they want to make a difference in their personal lives to help the environment as I do believe this individual action is worthwhile. So look out for future posts!!
Accusations of blame usually point towards one of two culprits - big business or us, the consumer.
However, in the last year, in particular, we have seen many more attempts to push the blame onto the consumer in the form of anti-plastic campaigns and the popularity of zero waste lifestyles to name but a few.
I agree to some extent that personal consumption of non-sustainable materials certainly is a part of the problem but I don't feel it is the only way to address the fight for our planet. Instead, more overwhelming for me is the how this non-sustainable consumption is encouraged by big business and their profits which are being prioritised within a capitalist system. As a result, I believe the ones who should be taking the most action are not the consumers but the businesses and governments that hold the power to make a change.
A few examples spring to mind when trying to explain how this shift in power links to a shift in responsibility - plastic packaging, food waste and pollution.
Hot topic at the moment, the debate surrounding disposable plastic packaging is a great example of how the lack of corporate action encourages and often sentences consumers to lead less environmentally friendly lives. Currently, in the UK, other than the plastic bag charge in supermarkets, it is extremely hard to buy items such as fruit, veg, meat and bread without also buying into a tonne of plastic packaging. Often if you want to avoid plastic, it's either more expensive than your usual purchases or you have to visit a specialist (again, often a more expensive store) in order to find so-called 'naked' food. Most people don't have the time, energy or budget to be able to make these decisions to help the environment and I see it as unreasonable to assume that everyone has the ability to make this change to their lifestyle. Whilst I would love to see a world where everyone brought their own bags and containers to do their weekly shop, most mainstream supermarkets do not facilitate this as an affordable or convenient option if at all. Realistically, chain supermarkets have a much greater ability to make change through both their power and relative impact but their interests lie in making profit alone. Something as simple as making all own brand fruit and veg loose would have far larger an impact than a privileged few using their own bags on the small range of 'naked' goods currently available. Supermarkets could make a change if they actually wanted to but they don't and as a result, as consumers, we are limited in our ability to make a significant change to reduce our plastic waste. Businesses hold the power and are using it for self-interest rather than that of the planet and by extension it's inhabitants.
A similar criticism can be applied to local and central government when looking at the problem of air pollution in our cities. If our city councils had more money from central government and public transport was state-owned, city networks could be centrally planned and integrated with both the environment and public health in mind. In Southampton, the council is proposing funding HGV companies and taxi firms so that they switch their fleet to more eco-friendly models - which is a start. BUT, HGVs and taxis actually represent a smaller proportion of harmful emissions in the city than private vehicles for personal use (cars, motorbikes, vans etc.). Therefore, surely this money and effort would be more productively spent investing in and subsidising stronger public transport links which would limit people's genuine need to use a car for everyday journeys such as going to work or dropping their kids at school. Not only would this have an amazing impact on lowering air pollution but it would also increase social mobility linking poorer areas of the city currently neglected. If public transport and active transport was better integrated with the cities needs and were more affordable (in an ideal world free) it would take away the need for so many people to use private vehicles for their everyday commute or errands. Public ownership is also necessary in an ideal world as the idea that 'the market' allows for the best solution to problems in our society is totally dispelled when it comes to environmental issues such as pollution. Private businesses do not have the public good in mind, they have the good of their shareholders and executives in mind - those who can afford to live outside the heavily polluted inner-city areas. How can we blame people who work long hours for little pay for not wanting to take a couple different buses and pay over the odds for an often inconsistent service? Really, we can't. Instead, we should be rallying behind our local representative to demand more funding for public and active transport. Central government has the power to grant funds to local councils in order to solve these problems but, instead, they encourage private firms to take control of public transport absolving themselves of any responsibility for pollution in our cities.
In both of these examples, it isn't to say us as consumers are blameless as we could adopt lifestyles that are more environmentally friendly in a multitude of ways. However, it is clear that most of the problems we face can be boiled down to the corruption inherent to a capitalist society and wealth inequality. Quite simply, if we attacked the capitalist system we would be able to take away the barriers that stop people from leading a more environmentally friendly life and you wouldn't need to be a huge zero waste living eco-activist to make a difference. Lifestyle change is a part of it but what choice do the majority have when environmentally friendly swaps aren't always the cheapest and buying a train season ticket to London could set you back as much as 5k?
In my view, focusing on lifestyle changes is counterproductive and only deals with part of the problem. You can avoid as many carrier bags as you like but if supermarkets are still dumping their leftover food and councils aren't funding proper recycling plants, the real damage is still being done. This is not to say that individuals cannot make a difference alone but I am cynical of the genuine influence of eco-trends such as going 'zero waste' as they remove the responsibility from big business and government and put it on the consumer and their personal 'greed'.
However, if you do have the financial power or the free time that allows you to choose more environmentally friendly options in your day to day life, I am not by any means saying you shouldn't choose them. I am simply saying we should direct more of our fight towards those doing the really extreme damage to our planet rather than making people feel guilty for something that is often out of their control.
To conclude, I believe the power dynamics under capitalism make it fundamentally difficult for individuals to have a significant impact to help the environment as big business holds the true power.
As a solution, I propose that both individual and corporate action should be combined in our fight towards a better planet as it should be down to businesses and government to enable the public to make better lifestyle choices with environmentalism as a priority.
Sooooo, socialist rant over (kidding it's never over). I wanted to make this post as some background to my perspective on environmental issues and to make it crystal clear who I believe is to blame for the lack of largescale environmental action in the UK. This will be a common theme in my blog so if you hate the poor I'd probably call it quits now :)
As a quick summary, I just wanted to say: Fuck the Tories. Love the environment.
Peace and love,
Bethany x
P.s: If this is something you are interested in and want some good resources, I'd recommend looking at anything written by Caroline Lucas MP, and George Monbiot who both offer left-wing environmentalist perspectives. Also, Greenpeace's journalism project has some great articles on this subject which you can find here.
Additionally, in the interest of balance, I want to follow this post up with some genuine and reasonable lifestyle changes that people can make if they want to make a difference in their personal lives to help the environment as I do believe this individual action is worthwhile. So look out for future posts!!
Comments
Post a Comment