written by Beth Lewis (she/her) - Co- President of BTC (@ecogrief.exeter), about my experiences at COP 26 in Glasgow.
I spent 4 days in Glasgow running around trying to learn, document and experience as much as I could. I wasn’t there to talk, I was there to listen. I had tickets to the Green Zone, which was where NGOs, activists, scientists and yes, government officials, were educating and engaging the public on topics relating to COP. The policy negotiations and debates were held in the more exclusive and out of reach Blue Zone, across the river. I’m glad I got into the Green Zone because of the connections I made from every continent, whose voices I would never have heard without being in Glasgow. I attended panel events about indigenous knowledge and technologies, climate change communications, youth leadership, and coastal conservation from scientific and community level perspectives. Below are some lessons I’ve learnt from being in that chaotic place for just 4 days.
(Beth Lewis in the Green Zone at COP 26.)
Indigenous Peoples are hurting and we are not helping as much as we think we are.
I mean, this is obvious. We need to not only listen but to let them lead negotiations and discussions, after all it is their land, bodies and communities that capitalist systems are destroying. I read Klein’s ‘This Changes Everything’ earlier this year, and she gave an interesting perspective that complicates my relationship with indigenous communities. Western capitalist societies have been for centuries extracting indigenous knowledge, land and power from these communities, and in 2021 we have now come to realise that they hold the answers to protecting what is left of our biodiversity. Now we, as white environmentalists, come in and ask the same indigenous peoples to protect these lands from corporate interests that still want to extract and pollute their land. We have already taken so much from these communities, yet we are still asking for more. It sounds exhausting for indigenous communities to be literally fighting to survive and keep their tradition alive as they see their lands polluted, and then even more so for them to travel all the way to Glasgow, be ignored by decision makers and constantly questioned by environmentalists ‘how do we make politicians care?’, ‘what do we do?’. I don’t know what answer I can give here, but I think we need to start asking ourselves what we can do for indigenous communities, not just in terms of platforming their struggles, but in learning their ethics, traditions, and in even sending resources over to resistance movements.
2. It’s about local, but it’s also not!
I honestly believe that the answer is in the local in terms of climate resistance. The best way to find connection and peace within your activism is to find local action and make your home a more resilient place. But at the same time when politicians turn around and repeat this back to me, it feels like they’re telling me to stay in my lane. Greenhouse Gases don’t see national boundaries, and as this is the root of all our problems right now, I think we need to remember that it's OK to be brave and step out of our local communities and demand change internationally. Systematic change needs a lot more than staying local.
(Photo from Climate Justice March- November 6th, Glasgow)
3. We need to stop ‘celebrifying’ environmentalists.
OK, I’m definitely guilty of this. Greta Thunberg has been made into a celebrity through the media. Social media also facilitates this. Being viral is what most environmentalists strive for, not always for fame, but for reach and recognition that their struggle is valid and globally important. Social media has obviously connected so many of us to the environmental movement, but by putting individuals like Greta on a pedestal takes away from what we are all fighting for. It is upholding the current system that some are better than others, because of how viral they can go. It therefore makes others feel powerless to do anything, because it sends a message that action is only important if it is viral and recognised. It distracts us from our missions and honestly just adds to the unnecessary noise of social media, which is pretty deafening right now. Greta stood down from speaking at the Climate Justice March for this reason. She has spoken at the Fridays for Future March the day before and felt that it shouldn’t just be about her.
4. The 1.5’c To Stay Alive is Misleading.
This was brought up at a 360 degree film screening of Climate Crimes, by Adrian Lahoud and Michaela French, which brought attention to the climate justice dimensions of aerosol pollution for those in the Sahel region of Africa. They taught me that if we aim for a 2 degrees global warming since pre industrial levels, this is an average. It actually means a 3.5 degree warming for those on the Equator, and less than a 2 degrees warming for people like us in the higher and lower latitudes. So the next time you think we need to keep warming to a certain level, whatever number you think that may be, understand the systemic inequality wrapped up in a single figure like this. It may be 2 degrees for you and me, but not for the Sahel, or for Pacific low lying Islands.
(Informatic from https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-global-warming-varies-greatly-depending-where-you-live which shows regional variations in warming, if the average warming is 2.7’c globally, for example (bottom left). )
5. Quantity or Quality?
Another thing the panel discussion brought up after the screening of ‘Climate Crimes’ is that with all the noise out there on social media it may be better to reach a quality audience, rather than as many people as you can. This means that if you create a film or blog, focus on getting it to the right people - either those who it relates to, those with potential to care, or those who can make a difference. Start ignoring the likes and comments, stop trying to go viral. There is too much noise on the internet to care about everything. It is a waste of energy to get unrelated people to see your media piece. One thing I would question about this thought, is that it would be difficult to start tailoring your activism to specific people without starting to reduce accessibility for the public. There is no point in gatekeeping our knowledge.
(photo from Climate Justice March- 6th November, Glasgow)
6. There are many ways to enact change
In this point, I want to highlight the legal action that many Latin, Central and South American countries are taking against the Western high emitting nations. They are demanding monetary reparations for Loss and Damages brought on them by the West. They see our historical emissions of GHGs since the Industrial Revolution as causing huge economic damages to their nations, as they have to recover constantly from increased tropical storms, climate change induced disasters and rising sea level. However they did not cause this. The Americas see this as a direct infringement of their human rights, and by placing the climate crisis in this legal context, they have an opportunity to sue these high emitting nations for loss and damages reparations. At COP26, no monetary assistance in this form was promised, apart from £2m from Scotland. And the leader of COP26, the UK, has actually cut aid! Instead, ‘technical assistance’ was promised, which is not good enough. I want to show our members that direct action is so important, but not the only effective way to deliver climate justice.
(Photo from Panel on Human Rights and Climate Impacts in Latin America. Felipe Andres Fontecilla Gutierrez from CERES Speaking. Watch here: https://youtu.be/IpSv8VkaXBM )
7. Ecogrief is not as obvious as you may think
I honestly thought I was over my emotional response to COP26. It was exhausting, frustrating, and gave me eco anxiety and grief over the fact that I am part of a country and society that is led by utter idiots who don’t care one bit about the lives of others. They do not care at all. It is really hard to understand people who don’t care about the lives and quality of living of others. And I thought I’d got over my grief after a week of being home, but then after being in Exeter Forum, and trying to express my thoughts about COP to students some of whom cared and some who didn’t, I realised I wasn’t over it at all. I am so angry at the fact that the University employs climate scientists to deliver research that says we need to reach Net Zero emissions by 2030, then completely ignores that research and believes 2050 is a good enough goal. I am at once being educated by this institution and being betrayed by it. I am on the inside of this University and yet on the outside. It makes me really angry. I want others to know that ecological grief comes out unexpectedly and you may not see it as climate related until afterwards. That’s OK. What we are trying to achieve is hard.
And that brings me to my final point.
8. The University of Exeter is not doing enough to protect its students.
If they really cared about the research they put out, they would reach Net Zero by 2030. In their Strategy 2030, they call for leading ‘meaningful action against the climate emergency and ecological crisis’. That’s a load of rubbish.
(Screenshot taken from Strategy 2030 Document)
Message Be the Change on Facebook if you want to learn more about action on campus.
For More Information:
https://www.exeter.ac.uk/strategy2030/ Exeter University Strategy 2030 Homepage
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/13/what-is-loss-and-damage-and-why-is-it-critical-for-success-at-cop26 For Loss and Damages Facts
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-global-warming-varies-greatly-depending-where-you-live For information about regional variations of global warming
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyiVEaIGxX7Y0KX7e8TZ3YA You can see all Green Zone Panel Events here!
Follow @ecogrief.exeter on Instagram for resources on emotional resilience in the face of the climate crisis.