Lecture 6 - Environmental Problems SOC100 Fall'24 PDF

Not on the test. Lecture 6 Environmental Problems SOC100: Intro to Sociology Dr. Mitchell McIvor 1 Where we’re at Not on the test....

Not on the test. Lecture 6 Environmental Problems SOC100: Intro to Sociology Dr. Mitchell McIvor 1 Where we’re at Not on the test. We’re Here Tutorial #4 runs this week, please make sure to bring an electronic device. Second Optional Debate Paper grace period ends Friday Our Midterm is IN-PERSON next week during class time. 2  House Keeping- Midterm The midterm test is worth 20% of your final grade. Though it can be replaced by the final (if, and only if, your final exam grade is higher). It will be held next week (Thurs, Oct.17) during class time 4:10-6pm at the exam center (255 McCaul Street). Room Capacity Students Assigned to Room (by last name) EX100 309 A to Lai EX200 336 Lao to Xie EX310 108 Xiong to Z I will provide a full a minimum 2 practice tests by Monday, October 14th. There is also the course study guide, the Midterm FAQ & a Midterm Discussion Board. 3  House Keeping- Midterm Dates, specific statistics, and assigned material (except where it appears in lecture as well) are NOT on the test. Concepts, theorists/people, trends, and lists are definitely fair game and should be studied. Tutorial content is also fair game. It is 50 multiple-choice and true-false questions. Distribution of questions by lecture is: Lecture 1: Intro to Class- 7 questions Lecture 2: Education- 7 questions Lecture 3: Education II- 8 questions Lecture 4: Health & Mental Health- 8 questions Lecture 5: Social Class & Economic Inequality- 8 questions Lecture 6: Environmental Problems- 8 questions Tutorial 1, 2, 3, & 4- 1 question from each 4  House Keeping- Make-Up Midterm If you have another test within 48 hours days of our midterm, and it is or could be worth more than 15% of your final grade then you can apply to the make-up midterm form to do the make-up (the make-up is the week after during class time—i.e. Wednesday 12-2pm on October 23) A list of students approved for the make-up midterm so far can be seen here. PLEASE APPLY FOR THE MAKE-UP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE & BY FRIDAY AT THE LATEST IF YOU ARE REPORTING A COURSE CONFLICT. There is NO assigned material and assigned material quiz this week since the midterm (not a lecture is next week). There are NO tutorials next week. I hope this goes without saying, but there is also NO class next week during the midterm because the midterm is running during class time. 5  Part 1: The Problem 6 Why Discuss Environmental Problems as a Lecture Put simply, because they are likely the greatest current social problem society faces today. I say this for three reasons: 1. They have the greatest potential for catastrophic results. 2. Our entire economic system is set-up in a way that has resisted and will continue to resist environmental protection. 3. It’s a global problem that requires a global solution, yet the world remains organized as competing nations more than allies willing to work together (ex: rising nationalism like Britain First, America First, and so on) 7  What Environmental Problems? o Humans are having serious effects on the planet’s ecosystems, which are a delicate balance. World Population of humans Animal o World Wildlife Federation & Zoological Society of London found 70% loss of wildlife Extinctions on average since 1970 (Guardian, 2023) 8  What Environmental Problems? One example of ecosystem and food chain effects is coral bleaching caused by increasing micro-plastics, ocean acidification, and rising ocean temperatures. o The coral reefs are home to 25% of ocean life directly, and as a food source they sustain the majority of ocean life—i.e., the loss of reefs have major food chain effects (USEPA, 2024). 9  What Environmental Problems? o Have you have heard of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia? It is one of the seven Natural wonders of the World and pictured above? 10  What Environmental Problems? o Did you know that scientists estimate that 74% of the Great Barrier reef has experienced bleaching (ICRI, 2024). 11  What Environmental Problems? Another example is the effect of pesticides (meant to protect crops from insects) on the bee population. o Studies find that bees have experienced colony loss/collapse of between 25 and 50% between the 1960s and 2000s (Potts et al., 2010; Vanengelsdorp & Meixner, 2009). Studies also show that our ability to match food production to population increases over the next 50 years will not be possible without a significant change in this trend (McCarthy et al, 2018). o Ecosystem effects like this will affect human life as we are also part of the food chain. If we lose a large amount of ocean life due to coral reef loss this will severely affect a major food supply—16% of our protein comes from the ocean (EU, 2017). If bee populations decline, we would be in BIG trouble—bees pollinate 90% of the crops we rely on for food (Yang et al, 2023). 12  What Environmental Problems? According to NASA (2022), there are unprecedented levels of carbon dioxide & other greenhouse gases in the air that go far beyond normal historical fluctuations. 13  What Environmental Problems? Increases in global temperature are the result (Rohde, 2024) 14  What Environmental Problems? The increasing number of wildfires caused by climate change (Liu, 2022) 15  What Environmental Problems? Including abnormally high numbers and intensity of fires in the arctic. 16  What Environmental Problems? An increasing prevalence of droughts (Liu & Chen, 2021; Vicente-Serrano et al, 2020). 17  What Environmental Problems? Stronger and more frequent hailstorms (Raupach et al, 2021), Hurricanes (Camelo et al, 2020), Tropical Cyclones (Gori et al, 2022), and more (Clarke et al, 2022). SOURCE: National Hurricane Center, 2018 SOURCE: US National weather Service, 2018 18  What Environmental Problems? Increasing number of natural disasters in general (Aalst, 2006; Banholzer et al, 2014; Sauerbon & Ebi, 2012). Figure 1: Number of natural disaster events in Canada requiring Federal Government Assistance SOURCE: Statistics Canada, 2022; Public Safety Division 19  What Environmental Problems? Increasing number of natural disasters in general 20  What Environmental Problems? This is what we are seeing with environmental changes, on their own each example could be random but there are too many anomalies and too many sources that are telling us otherwise. As the Last Week Tonight video assigned accurately stated. There is a 97.1% consensus in the scientific community that humans have severely affected the Earth’s climate and that it’s reaching dangerous levels (Cook et al, 2013). So is it too late then? 21  Is it too late? The answer is that these environmental changes are not thought to be permanent yet, but we’re reaching a critical point where they soon may be. Projected emissions based on current policies According to the Paris Climate Agreement Timetable: Current emissions 22  Is it too late? The answer is that these environmental changes are not thought to be permanent yet, but we’re reaching a critical point where they soon may be. Projected emissions based on current According to the Paris government pledges Climate Agreement Timetable: What’s needed to reach 1.5 degree Paris Agreement goal. 23  Is it too late? Next big milestone in Paris Agreement is 2030, so the next 6 years are crucial. The Paris Agreement stated a goal of having emissions be halved by 2030, but based on current policies global emissions will simply have plateaued (not increased, not decreased, just stayed the same). The agreement was signed in 2016. So is reaching Drawdown (the point in time when atmospheric greenhouse gases begin to decline on a year-to-year basis) possible? Yes, and you saw in the TED Talk what it would take. 24  Project Drawdown Current spending on climate change worldwide is roughly US$632 billion per year (CPI, 2021). The price tag estimated to enact all of these initiatives is US$29 Trillion. 25  Is it too late? So how did we get here? What has to change? How do we make sense of this all? 26  Part 2: Lessons from Structural Functionalism 27  Structural Functionalism Remember the 4 tenets of STRUCTUAL FUNCTIONALISM. The main points of Structural Functionalism are: 1. Functionalism stresses that human behavior is governed by relatively stable patterns of social relations, or social structures. 2. Functionalism underlines how social structures maintain or undermine social stability. 3. Functionalist theories emphasize that social structures are based mainly on shared values or preferences. 4. Functionalism suggests that re-establishing equilibrium can best solve most social problems. 28  Structural Functionalism In terms of how it analyzes issues then: You look at society as different parts and try to identify the relationships between them (how one part leads into and affects other parts). If there are problems, you figure out what is causing them by taking a holistic and big picture perspective. This is why Structural Functionalism is considered a Macro theory, it’s more concerned with the overall picture than any specific or smaller parts. The way problems are solved is by restoring balance to the system. Not by completely overhauling society, but by adjusting the current structures and by using the current shared values and understandings. 29  Imbalance In The Equilibrium What’s gone wrong and what continues to go wrong? 1) a growing human population creating greater strain on the environment; 30 31  Imbalance In The Equilibrium So what went wrong that led to environmental problems? 1) a growing human population creating greater strain on the environment; 2) greater scientific developments allowing us to exploit resources and change the environment more than ever before (ex: nuclear technology, new drilling techniques like fracking, use of fertilizers and pesticides, etc.), and… Even the development and expanded use of generative AI like ChatGPT affects the environment as it requires immense energy to run AI systems (for example, see here and here). 32  Imbalance In The Equilibrium So what went wrong that led to environmental problems? 1) a growing human population creating greater strain on the environment; 2) greater scientific developments allowing us to exploit resources and change the environment more than ever before (ex: nuclear technology, new drilling techniques like fracking, use of fertilizers and pesticides, etc.), and… 3) a human culture/society that has never had to prioritize the environment over the economy before. This is where we face the biggest challenge. 33 8 relate to food & diet 2 related to reducing gender inequality. 4 related to how we use land 1 to material 5 related to energy 34  Structural Functionalism It’s important to remember that environmental issues like climate change ARE NOT the problem. They are the symptom or the effect of the problems that cause it. The problem is that the way our societies are currently set-up and operate are NOT environmentally sustainable. They never were, and the only reason we’ve gotten away with it so far is because of smaller populations and less technology, but we have now passed the population and technology thresholds for it to still be sustainable. This means that what is required is a significant rethinking of all of our social structures. So in what ways is our society set-up to hurt the environment and why haven’t we solved this issue? 35  1. Earth as an Externality An externality is a business term that refers to “situations when the effect of production or consumption of goods and services imposes costs or benefits on others which are not reflected in the prices charged for the goods and services being provided” (OECD, 2022) In simpler, less jargony terms, it’s when in business the act of producing something has a cost or benefit that the producer themselves doesn’t incur or have to deal with. Pollution is a terrific example of this. If you own a company that creates a product (say carpets for homes), and your company uses toxic chemicals that end up in the air and water. That pollution is an externality in that you are not charged for polluting the air and water, and so you don’t have to then charge your customer for it. 36  1. Earth as an Externality The issue here is that Nature/the Earth doesn’t charge us when we pollute, extract resources, or harm it in any way. It’s free for us to do and always has been. Consider the following cost calculation for gasoline (the numbers are made-up for the example). $0.30 - Cost of acquiring oil from ground $0.70 - Cost of processing oil into gas $0.30- Cost of transporting oil to purchasing point $0.20- Profit margin for oil company FREE – environmental damage done as part of oil & gas production, and gas consumption. This is the externality part 1.50 price per litre of gas 37  1. Earth as an Externality Historically, as we’ve learned about the harmful effects of pollution or certain toxins, governments will ban them or make them illegal. Or they may introduce a regulation, i.e. a rule or law that aims to restrict or alter certain actions or behaviors (Brittanica, 2022). For example, a government may regulate how many trees you can cut down, how many pollutants can be released into the air or water during manufacturing, and so on. But these regulations ‘hurt’ business in the sense that they add cost to the producer, who then adds that cost to the price of their product for consumers to bear or deal with. 38  1. Earth as an Externality Now there is a cost to pollution (like climate change), but the key here is that it is not a cost the business or the individual pays directly. Thus, there is little incentive not to do it beyond good moral character (which is also requires belief that it is a problem). The only way to stop this, is to have governments act through laws or regulations, or through trying to place a cost to actions like polluting and thereby ceasing for it to be an externality (for example, paying for plastic bag use or recycling deposit-schemes). Canada’s carbon tax is another very good example of this. With this action the government sets a price that polluters must pay for each ton of greenhouse gasses they emit. 39  1. Earth as an Externality Such taxes, however, are often unpopular because they lead to higher prices and, as a result, hurt the economy (something Ontario Premier Doug Ford has expressed strongly). And opponents are right that carbon taxes or other such measures that charge for harming the environment will raise prices. Before, polluting the air by driving a car was free (in that it hurts our environment but doesn’t hurt our wallets). But with a carbon tax we have to pay more for gas to pay for that pollution. The money collected is used on environmental initiatives, but it costs us more. 40  1. Earth as an Externality Consider the following cost calculation for gasoline again (the numbers are made-up for the example). $0.30 - Cost of acquiring oil from ground $0.30 - Cost of acquiring oil from ground $0.70 - Cost of processing oil into gas $0.70 - Cost of processing oil into gas $0.30- Cost of transporting oil $0.30- Cost of transporting oil $0.20- Profit margin for oil company $0.20- Profit margin for oil company FREE – environmental damage. $0.10 – carbon tax → environmental damage. This is the externality part $1.60 price per litre of gas $1.50 price per litre of gas So the first problem we have is that we currently benefit economically by there being no cost to harming the environment and there is NOT strong support for governments to implement such costs. For example, Reuters (2023) found that 70% of Canadians want the tax gone. 41  2. Path Dependency Earth as an externality is the first issue that we encounter in understanding the broad nature of the problems causing environmental issues. Our discussion of the carbon tax leads into the second… Path Dependency. Simply put, Path Dependency is defined as “the dependence of future societal decision processes and/or outcomes on those that have occurred in the past” (Preston, 2013). It refers to how it is almost always easier to continue on the current trajectory than it is to switch trajectories or start a new one. The key component of this theory, is that this remains true even if an alternative trajectory is preferable. 42  2. Path Dependency You can almost think of it as current trajectories having momentum to them. In other words, once we start down a path it’s hard to turn off the path abruptly. For example, imagine you realize that you chose the wrong major in your 4th year, it’s more likely you will finish the current degree (to keep going down the current path) because the cost of changing paths is too great (e.g., spending more years in school). 43  2. Path Dependency Another example is our reliance on fossil fuels. Fossil fuels have been what we’ve relied on historically, we are used to them; It’s how our cars, furnaces, airplanes, and so on are already designed and set-up and it will cost and is costing us a great deal to change this; many people are employed in these sectors (~73,000 in Canada) many large and powerful business rely on the sale of them ($188 billion made on Oil and Gas in Canada in 2023). Thus, there is support for these industries and it’s much easier to keep on a path where we rely on them until we MUST change. This is the second barrier in the way of environmental solutions, it leads into the third which is… 44  3. Moral Foundation Theory Related to Path Dependency, we need to also consider the foundations of people’s political preferences. Structural functionalism states that our societies are based on shared values and preferences and, as a democracy, this is certainly true of Canada and any other democratic nations. If we are to solve climate change, it will require voters making the environment a top political issue and priority. Thus, it is important to understand people’s political preferences and voting behavior. Moral Foundation Theory (Haidt & Graham, 2004) has emerged as one of the best tools at understanding differences in political preference. 45  TED Talk on Moral Foundation Theory Linked here if you are interested. 46  3. Moral Foundation Theory It’s important to remember that our culture itself is shaped by historical path dependency. There has been a tendency to see humanity as above the natural world, but more and more we’re seeing a recognition of humanity’s past and how it shapes our present (like the need to have in-group loyalty). This recognition falls under the theoretical framework of Evolutionary Sociological theory (Blute, 2012). Moral Foundation theory explores the moral foundations of beliefs, and it helps us understand one of the key political differences we encounter. That is, the difference between liberals or left- leaning people and conservatives or right-leaning people. So, what are the 5 types of moral foundations that we all hold naturally or instinctively? 47  3. Moral Foundation Theory I. Harm/Care Bonding with others, caring about others, feeling compassion for others and especially the weak and vulnerable. In other words, we are social animals, and we come with the ability to empathize. SOCIAL PART: How much we learn to empathize and how we justify the suffering of others can differ though (example, Opioid addiction vs. COVID). 48  3. Moral Foundation Theory II. Fairness/Reciprocity A society free from discrimination, having society built on mutually beneficial exchanges or, in other words, justice. Often summarized as the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself. SOCIAL PART: Now again, while we all feel a natural inclination for fairness, the social part means we differ in what we see as fair (for example, welfare/social assistance). 49  3. Moral Foundation Theory III. In-Group Loyalty Rousseau and natural man, humans MUST work together. We are a weak species otherwise (especially pre-science and technology developed through cooperation). SOCIAL PART: We differ in who we consider our in-group. For example, should you care about citizens of other countries or only citizens of your country; i.e. nationalism (identifying with one’s own nation) versus cosmopolitanism (believing that all of humanity belongs to a single community versus separate national communities). We also differ in levels of loyalty (for example, how patriotic you are). 50  3. Moral Foundation Theory IV. Authority/Respect Authority not based on power and brutality but voluntary deference. Typically, this refers to respecting the authority of tradition and ‘legitimate authorities’ (i.e. police, government). SOCIAL PART: we differ in who we consider valid authority figures and will weigh other aspects like Justice against Respect for Authority. Everyone may weigh that differently. 51  3. Moral Foundation Theory V. Purity/Sanctity Disgust for things that you feel violate purity or the way things should be done (can be in regard to food, sex, tradition, deference to the past, and so on). SOCIAL PART: What we find violates purity and the areas we think need to be kept pure (sex vs. food, for example) differ between all of us. 52  3. Moral Foundation Theory Typically, these 5 traits are grouped into two higher-order clusters. Individualizing Bonding Care Loyalty Fairness Authority Purity Both Liberals & conservative value harm most. But conservatives value Authority, Ingroup Loyalty, and Purity MUCH more than liberals. And liberals value Fairness MUCH more than conservatives (least for them) 53  3. Moral Foundation Theory Liberals= Fairness, Harm Conservatives = Ingroup loyalty, Purity, Authority/Respect Liberals Conservatives It is not fair to leave the world I need to take of my family, my people, worse for future generations and my country first (Ingroup loyalty). (fairness). We can’t completely disregard It is the poorest in the world that everything that got us here, there is are and that will be the hardest hit value in tradition (Respect/Authority). by climate change. Many people Our society, our way of life, our country will be harmed by it (harm) isn’t evil or doing wrong (Purity). These are the roots of differences in many political preferences including environmental issues (Milfont et al, 2019) 54  4. Immediacy Bias Immediacy bias refers to the simple process by which our brains tend to prefer instant gratification or reward over something potentially of more value in the future. This one is easy to understand. It’s the cause of procrastination when we choose to watch Netflix versus getting an early start on studying. It’s the cause of why I don’t have a six pack due to choosing grilled cheese and other delicious food over salads. And it’s also why in politics and public opinions we often focus on issues most presently affecting us versus things that may affect us more in the long term. For example, our last election focused more on COVID and economic recovery than climate change and environmental danger. 55  4. Immediacy Bias Essentially, immediacy bias suggests to us that until Environmental Problems begin having a significant effect on our daily lives that it won’t be a major problem of concern. Indeed, studies such as that by the Pew Research Center (2019) in the US have found that regions most affected by climate change through events like droughts and wildfires are also the most likely to see climate change as an imminent problem. So if we turn our heads sideways and squint really hard, we can maybe see the increased negative repercussions of climate change around the world as a good thing in that it may serve as a wake-up call. ( how’s that for optimism) 56  5. Misinformation So far we’ve talked about: 1. How it is free for us to pollute the earth (nature doesn’t send a bill); 2. How society has a tendency to stick on its current trajectories; 3. How differences in morals leads to differences in political opinions. 4. How we tend to have immediacy bias and neglect things that seem like far off problems. If that wasn’t enough, we also have the problem of misinformation about climate change and environmental degradation. 57  5. Misinformation Due to increasing engagement with the internet and increasing technologies that make it easier to always be connected, we are seeing a significant rise in the ability to share information, which includes our ability to share misinformation. This access to diverse and seemingly endless information, when combined with confirmation bias and other types of bias like affinity or in-group bias—our natural gravitation towards those who are like us in beliefs and/or backgrounds—means that people can always find arguments, information, and others who believe what they do. This then creates echo chambers or “an environment in which a person encounters only beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own, so that their existing views are reinforced, and alternative ideas are not considered” (Oxford Dictionary, 2022). 58  5. Misinformation Thus, the fifth major barrier we face is simply that many people still do not believe the climate is a major threat or, in more extreme cases, believe that the climate is even changing. 59  5. Misinformation Why would many people see misinformation about climate change as legitimate? A big part of it is because there are a lot of very well-paid lobbyist and spokespeople that make these arguments in the media and other spheres like politics that give them legitimacy. For example…. You watched the debate from PBS (one of the more objective news channels in the US and equivalent to CBC) on the Paris Climate Agreement and whether the US should remain a part of it. As was mentioned in the Last Week Tonight Video, this one-on-one debate lends legitimacy to the idea that there is a debate. But let’s look at this a little closer… 60  The PBS Debate on the Paris Agreement Who was on either side of that debate. I think most people would watch this video and think: “both made some good points.” But let’s just check their qualifications and motivations. Pulling out of Paris is Bad Pulling out of Paris is Good by Michael Oppenheimer by Phil Kerpin I was not able to find any education PhD in Chemical Physics credentials, he doesn’t list any anywhere. Employed as a Professor of Founded the organization, American Geoscience and International Commitment, funded by Koch Industries, Relations at Princeton. which made over 125 billion in 2023 off of On Multiple United Nations fertilizer, asphalt, chemicals, natural gas, petroleum, and other similar products. committees on climate change WON A NOBEL PRIZE!!! That’s it, those are his credentials. It’s hard to fathom how this debate is considered legitimate, but it is common when discussing environmental issues to bring someone from the other side on. 61  Not on the test. Professor McIvor TV: Breaking Debate!!!!! 62  Not on the test. Is Basketball really a Sport? Arguing Yes! today… Arguing No! today… Lebron James Greg One of the best basketball Greg is the founder of players in the world and idontreallylikebasketball.com possibly of all time. His website is sponsored by Major League Baseball, the National Football League, the National Hockey League, and Major League Soccer. None of us would accept this as a legitimate debate. 63 Later on Professor McIvor TV 64  Not on the test. Is Kendrick Lamar a good rapper? Arguing Yes! today… Arguing No! today… Snoop Dog It’s Greg again Acclaimed rapper over the Greg is also the founder of last 4 decades idontreallylikekendrick.com 17 Grammy nominations, Greg and this website are BET and American Music sponsored by Drake Award winner. Considered one of the greatest rappers of his generation. None of us would accept this as a legitimate debate either. Yet both of these silly examples are no different than the one PBS showed. It again illustrates why you need to always engage in critical thinking when it comes to popular media. 65  Part 1 Summary Structural functionalism asks us to look at social relations and structures, how they maintain/undermine stability, and how they are based on shared values/preferences. Using this perspective/theory we determined: 1. Equilibrium thrown off by population growth, better technology, and never having a need to prioritize environment AT ALL (environment as an externality); 2. How stability is maintained by path dependency and the difficulties therein; 3. How shared preferences and values differ and the ways in which they differ lead to different priorities (moral foundation theory); 4. How preferences and values tend to focus on the present (Immediacy bias); 5. How doubt is created and leads to many not believing in climate change strongly (misinformation) 66 Let’s Take 5 Minutes 67  Part 3: Lessons from Conflict Theory 68 Let’s do a thought experiment Here is the scenario 69 Thought Experiment: Aliens from another planet show up one day. 70 Thought Experiment: Now at first, we’re all a little freaked, but the aliens turn out to be really cool. They are super funny, really chill, and they help us out a bunch by showing us the cure for cancer. The thing about these aliens is that: (1) they eat mass amounts of natural raw resources (fish, animals—not us thankfully, wildlife, trees, minerals, oil, coal, anything they can get their hands on from the environment really; and (2) they poop precious diamonds, gold, and other gems (in other words, they have limitless $$$$$). 71 Thought Experiment: The aliens come to you for help. They secretly confide in you that they want to consume all the worlds resources, and they want to do it without going to war. They hire you to advise them on how they can attain their goal (eat as many resources as possible) with minimal violence. Remember, they literally poop gold/precious gems so your money is limitless. What are all the strategies you would recommend to the aliens for them to consume as much of the world’s natural resources as possible? 72 This is just for fun (i.e., you don’t have to do this) but try to think it through for at least a bit. If you have unlimited funds, how do you consume as many natural resources as possible without going to war or risking arrest? Try to think up some strategies with a few people around you. 73  If I was Advising the Aliens 1) Buy private property. First, almost all countries have private property rights so we can begin just by purchasing land and consuming the resources there. We have unlimited funds and what we do with the land once we have bought it is generally up to us (there may be some regulations, but they are minimal). This is 100% legal and the right to do what you want with your private property is a generally accepted practice worldwide so even if it begins to cause problems (for example, deforestation and/or consuming the rainforests), you are still not breaking any laws, customs, or norms. About 60.2% of all land in the US is private property, in Canada about 11% of land is private property. So how effective this is will differ by country, but it’s a start. 74  If I was Advising the Aliens 2) Dealing with Governments. The primary threat we have to our scheme already is governments because they have the ability to set regulations that limit what we can do with our land. Further, a great amount of land is owned by the government (or “the crown” as it is called in Canada) so we will need to negotiate with them and keep them on our side. Now different governments pose different levels of threat, which require different strategies. 75  If I was Advising the Aliens 2) Dealing with Vulnerable or Concentrated Power Governments There are many countries that are run as dictatorships (defined as “form of government in which one person or a small group possesses absolute power without effective constitutional limitations”, Britannica, 2022) In addition, other countries are Military Juntas (defined as “a military government in which power is taken by force versus elections and military officers rule”, ibid) Finally, there are also many countries with ‘fragile governments. For example, the fragile state index by FFP defines state fragility by 12 factors including: extensive corruption and criminal behavior, inability to collect taxes or otherwise draw on citizen support, large-scale involuntary dislocation of the population, sharp economic decline, group-based inequality, institutionalized persecution or discrimination, severe demographic pressures, brain drain, and environmental decay. 76  If I was Advising the Aliens 2) Dealing with Vulnerable or Concentrated Power Governments In these cases of governments with concentrated power, we simply need to appeal to the person or group of people in power. Historically, due to a lack of checks and balances to the leader’s power, dictatorships and military juntas are prone to greater corruption (Treisman, 2000) because the leader or leaders personally benefit from the deals that are made. In terms of the dictators, think of people like Kim Jong Un of North Korea. In terms of Military Juntas, Myanmar is currently a good example. 77  If I was Advising the Aliens 2) Dealing with Vulnerable or Concentrated Power Governments In terms of state fragility here is the 2021 twenty most fragile states (FFP, 2021). In cases where fragile governments exist, we can either negotiate with governments and provide funds in exchange for natural resources. Or, if they aren’t agreeable, we can fund other groups to de-stabilize and overthrow them. In such cases, as long as our funding is not public or obvious, the world generally does not intervene in domestic (within country) disputes. Do you think it’s true that the world won’t care about another country’s civil war even when outside influences are involved? 78  Yemen’s Civil War Yemen’s civil war is an ongoing conflict since the start of 2014. The UN estimates that roughly a quarter of a million people have died thus far as a result of the war. “Yemen’s civil war began in 2014 when Houthi insurgents—Shiite rebels with links to Iran took control of Yemen’s capital… Beginning in March 2015, a coalition of Gulf states led by Saudi Arabia launched a campaign of economic isolation and air strikes against the Houthi insurgents, with U.S. logistical and intelligence support” (CFR, 2022) 79  If I was Advising the Aliens 2) Dealing with Wealthy Democratic Governments It is likely we will face more resistance here than in poor countries. Governments are less corrupt and harder to overthrow in wealthy nations. We will have to win politicians “fairly” versus outright bribing or overthrowing them. We could talk to them and see which politicians align with our interests, then we could fund those politicians and their campaigns. We just need to find politicians willing to compromise on letting the aliens eat resources in exchange for the money they need for their goals like re-election. 80  If I was Advising the Aliens ii. So what are some of the other goals or issues we could get the politicians to focus on and make the political conversation about instead of focusing on us aliens eating all the natural resources? It will have to be stuff people care about as much or more as the environment…. how about… Immigration National Security & Threats from other countries Student Loans Abortion National Daycare Transgender athletes Vaccines Crime Corruption Women’s Rights Black Lives Matter Personal Freedom Political Correctness White Supremacy Defunding Police Gender Violence & #MeToo The war on drugs Spending $ on Refugees Government Surveillance 2SLGBTQ+ adoption rights Quebec or Western Sovereignty Indigenous Issues Health Care Terrorism Assisted Suicide 81  If I was Advising the Aliens 2) Dealing with Wealthy Democratic Governments All we have to do is make sure the political conversation is focused on all of those controversial issues and not about alien consumption of resources. How? Fund any group, non-profit or otherwise, that focuses on any of those other controversial issues. Make sure they have a strong social media and protest presence (for example, the NRA). Influence the media to focus on those issues by buying media outlets or through advertising $$$ Make donations to any politician in either party that prioritize issues other than alien consumptions of resources. Make sure they have the financial means to run ads and win over the public. Dig up as much political dirt as possible on anyone that opposes our agenda, try to discredit them as much as possible. Create international competition and demand for wealth, other countries will then agree to exchange resources for gold and we can play them off each other. For example, give Russia a bunch of gold for resources that they spend on the military and the US and other western countries will feel the need to do the same. 82  If I was Advising the Aliens 3) Dealing with Citizen Resistance in Concentrated Power Countries So after we start influencing government, the next group that may resist is actual citizens through protests, non-profits, or other forms of community organizing. In these cases, we can try to bribe community leaders. If that doesn’t work, then in countries where we can get away with it, we can disappear (i.e., discretely murder) community leaders or, if we have the government on our side, then we can use the legitimate means of force/violence (i.e. police and military) to deal with troublemakers. 83  If I was Advising the Aliens 3) Dealing with Citizen Resistance History, including recent history, is full or the military and police in some countries disappearing people who go against government policies.. 84  If I was Advising the Aliens 3) Dealing with Citizen Resistance in Wealthy Democratic Countries These tactics will be harder to use in some countries, so other tactics are needed. In the case of protests, if government is on our side/we are following the laws then we can use the legitimate means of violence like police to control and limit them. The real threat of protests is making alien resource consumption of resources a major political issue that affects democracy. So we must delegitimize the protests in the media, claim that it is biased anti-alien sentiment and hold up the accomplishments of aliens. We cured cancer. We contribute immensely to the economy. We can take actions like paying people to replant trees, we can also tout the number of jobs that are created in paying people to extract resources for us. 85  If I was Advising the Aliens 3) Dealing with Citizen Resistance in Wealthy Democratic Countries In terms of academics and scientists that will inevitably say we’re causing climate change and environmental harm, we can discredit them through the media and create doubt by funding our own research studies with our own scientists that say our resource consumption is within sustainable limits and not problematic. It took roughly 13-14 years between when scientists started reporting that smoking caused lung cancer in 1950 before governments took action on that evidence. The US Surgeon General Acknowledged the link in 1964. In Canada, the health minister acknowledged it in 1963 so we can buy some time. Further even then we didn’t put warning labels on cigarettes in Canada until December 2000. 86  What is the Point of All This Craziness? The point of this thought experiment is to show how the world is currently set-up to provide power and influence based on money and wealth. If you have that you can do almost anything you want, the unchecked power of money is the primary critique of capitalism (Gilens & Page, 2014; Brownlee, 2005) In this example, the Gold Pooping aliens are an imperfect analogy for corporations. Do corporations really fit this example though? Yes, that’s where I got these strategies. 87 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 1) Buying private property to consume resources? Check Doesn’t need much explanation, this is not controversial. This includes the sale of mineral rights even on public or crown land in Canada. 88 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 2) Influence of foreign governments in poor countries? Check For example, in Year 501: the Conquest Continues (1993) by Noam Chomsky, he illustrates how economic aid, international financial institutions, and military interventions serve the interests of powerful countries, often at the expense of the sovereignty and development of poorer nations. Fernando Cardos & Enzo Faletto (1979), in their book Dependency & Development in Latin America, illustrate how multinational corporations, often with the support of foreign governments, extract resources and profits from poorer countries while limiting their ability to develop independently. These corporations often enter into alliances with local elites, perpetuating a system that benefits foreign interests at the expense of domestic development. John Perkins (2004) book Confessions of an Economic Hitman details how multinational corporations and foreign governments, especially the United States, exerted economic and political control over poor countries through debt, coercion, and manipulation. Finally, Stephen Hymers (1976) The International Operations of National Firms: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment is as foundational for understanding the operations of multinational corporations (MNCs) and their economic and political influence on developing countries. His analysis focuses on how MNCs create global hierarchies that perpetuate the underdevelopment of poorer nations by exploiting their resources, labor, and markets. 89 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 2) Influencing Wealthy Democratic Governments? Check As a corporation you will only fund those who will further your interests, why else give them money? Donations are legally considered free speech in the US so are protected by law (US Supreme Court, 2022) 90 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 2) Influencing Wealthy Democratic Governments? Check Canada is not much different (though, unlike the US we do NOT allow anonymous donations over $20). 91 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 3) Horrific Dealings with Citizens in Poorer Countries? Check Coca-Cola, Chiquita brand bananas, and others have been found to have funded para-military groups (armed groups that resemble a military but are not part of a state’s formal armed forces, i.e., paid mercenaries) to keep worker unions in line (Leech, 2002; Keen, 1998; Carmichael & Kent, 2014). Corporations doing business with non-democratic dictators is established fact. Corporations taking advantage of poverty in developing countries is a fact (for example, free trade zones, maquiladoras, sweat shops). 92 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 3) Horrific Dealings with Citizens in Poorer Countries? Check Again, Canadian corporations are involved in such actions as well. 93 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 3) Stopping Citizen Resistance in Wealthy Democratic Countries? Check While anti-corporate protests have become less common, major protests like those in Canada and the US over fair global trade were met with intense police presence. Battle of Seattle, 1999 G20 Summit Protests, 2010 Toronto 94 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 3) Stopping Citizen Resistance in Wealthy Democratic Countries? Check Other protests are de-legitimized by many in the media, through public spokes people, and by politicians. For example, the Occupy Wallstreet Protests in 2008 after corporations were bailed out by governments were widely delegitimized. 95 Gold-Pooping Aliens as an Analogy for Corporations 3) Stopping Citizen Resistance in Wealthy Democratic Countries? Check Finally, we also know that funding spokespeople and ‘scientific’ studies that contradict what peer-reviewed academic studies find is also common. We saw this with the PBS debate discussed earlier. We also see it in the Canadian thinktank The Fraser Institute (which is funded completely by private and corporate donations). Hence findings like these: “A Fraser Institute paper (PDF) authored by Ross McKitrick suggests that there has been no statistically significant temperature change for the past 15 to 20 years.” 96 So here is where we are at…. 3 Reasons Environmental Problems are the Greatest Social Problem we Face 1. They have the greatest potential for catastrophic results. 2. Our entire economic system is set-up in a way that has resisted and will continue to resist environmental protection. 97 So are corporations just evil psychopaths? No! 98 Two sociological principles helps us understand corporations Competition as ‘external coercive law’ (Karl Marx) Bureaucracy (Max Weber) 99 Famous Sociologist Karl Marx & The Capitalist Principle Capitalism is a competition. The profitable companies survive and those that are not profitable die, this is called... Competition as ‘external coercive law’ It refers to how business is a competition where the businesses or corporations that make the most money have the ability to outlast and drive their competition out of business. For example, one company lowering prices to drive competition out of business. In other words, if a corporation wants to survive it needs to prioritize profit and only profit. Doing anything else will just lead to bankruptcy and going out of business. 100 Famous Sociologist Max Weber & Bureaucracy Weber called bureaucracy a “polar night of icy darkness”. He said it turns human into machines, but what does this mean? To Weber the threat of bureaucracy was that it creates a structure of positions with duties and obligations, each position in the structure ensures the other positions do their job so that no individual can upset the structure. In other words, it takes away a person’s ability to use their morality and judgement within their position. Instead, they must do their job (the duties and obligations of the position) or be fired and replaced. The benefits of this is the structure maintains its main goal, the downfall is that it turns people into machines. 101  Weber & Bureaucracy As an example, imagine you work at a restaurant and a person struggling with homelessness comes in. You use your moral judgement and give them a free meal because they are hungry, but what will happen as a result? The restaurant may fire and replace you. If you want to keep your job, you must follow the rules, duties, and obligations of the job. If you don’t, they will just replace you. In other words, you do not get to use your judgement in the role, you just do the job the way you are told to do it. This ensures the structure, in this case the restaurant, protects it goal, which is making profit and staying in business. The beauty of bureaucracy is that it wont even be the owner that fires you it will be a supervisor or manager who themselves are just doing their job. This is the hierarchy that protects the structure further. 102  Not on the test. Main take away from this… Among men, having a beard is a sign of being a great Sociologist. Karl Marx Max Weber Professor McIvor 103  Actual Main take away from this… Corporations are not evil, they are not people, they are a system/structure designed to make profit in order to stay in business. Competition as coercive force- ensures profit remains the goal. Bureaucracy- ensures corporations meet that goal because the organization’s structure protects it. So what can we do? Do we have power over corporations? 104  Bright Side The answer may surprise you, it is yes that we have complete control. o Unlike the aliens who had unlimited funds, corporations are limited by profit. o This means that they are limited by supply and demand. If people don’t buy a corporation’s products, then they won’t make money. Therefore, if people don’t buy their products due to bad environmental or other practices then they will change their practices so customers will return and they can make profit again. o Examples of this are things like organic products and hybrid cars. People desired these products, corporations realized they could make profit off them, and hence we see them in the market and can buy them if we choose. o In this way we have COMPLETE control over businesses and corporations. The people will get what they want, that’s how supply and demand works. Your dollars are your vote. The question is: when do people decide they are willing to spend more for environmentally friendly products? 105  Part 4: Lessons from Symbolic Interactionism 106 So here is where we are at…. 3 Reasons Environmental Problems are the Greatest Social Problem we Face 1. They have the greatest potential for catastrophic results. Theory of Structural functionalism, tells us to look at how everything is connected, how balance may be thrown off, and the consequences. 2. Our entire economic system is set-up in a way that has resisted and will continue to resist environmental protection. Conflict theory tells us to look at where there is conflict and to determine how the groups in conflict are able to exercise power and authority. 3. It’s a global problem that requires a global solution and we are still set-up as competing nations (i.e. as competing countries). This reason is tied to the Sociological theory of Symbolic Interactionism. 107  SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM o The four key principles of Symbolic Interactionism are: 1. focuses on face-to-face communication or interaction in micro-level social settings. This feature distinguishes it from both the functionalist and the conflict paradigms; 2. emphasizes that an adequate explanation of social behaviour requires understanding the subjective (i.e. personal) meanings people attach to their social circumstances; 3. stresses that people help to create their social circumstances and do not merely react to them; 4. validates unpopular and nonofficial viewpoints by underscoring the subjective meanings that people create in small social settings, increasing our understanding and tolerance of people who may be different than us. 108  Social Constructionism Social Constructionism argues that the objective reality is often less important than the way it is constructed through social relationships. In other words, subjective reality is more important. This theory would tell us that when viewing a social problem, like environmentalism, we must look at how it is constructed to someone. Consider different media outlets as people’s sources of information. How someone views a problem is often dependent on how it is presented to them. For example, take the US under President Trump… 109 Symbolic Interactionism & Environmental Problems We’ve seen what structural functionalism and conflict theory would say about environmental problems, but what about symbolic interactionism? It would focus on meaning, interactions, and symbols. One way to focus on meaning, interactions, and symbols is to consider how environmental problems must be solved. Environmental problems are a global issue that are typically not confined to national borders. For example, pollution in China & India sent into the air becomes part of the atmosphere that affects climate everywhere; overfishing and loss of the barrier reefs in East Asia and Australia affects ocean life all over the world; water pollution in Canada flows down to the US through rivers, same for water pollution in the US which flows to Mexico, and same for the water pollution that all countries with coasts let flow into the ocean; and so on. In other words, the environment is an international problem that requires cooperation between individual nation states (i.e., individual countries). There are two main issues with environmental problems being international and society being organized into nations. 110  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons A “common” is something all or most people have access to that is not regulated or not well regulated (regulation= a rule made and maintained by an authority, usually a government). The tragedy of the commons refers to how when someone does not own something, and everyone has access to it people will abuse and exploit it. For example, in international waters you can fish as much as you like and can earn great amounts of money from this, so people overfish and deplete the fishing stocks beyond a sustainable level. (Example of Japanese Whale Fishing Today) 111  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons Another example is hunting in early North American history where animals like the Buffalo were over-hunted to the point of near extinction because there was nothing to stop people from doing so and people could gain financially from it. 112  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons This idea supports the notion that if you want someone to take care of something you must give them ownership of it. Tragedy of the commons was actually a key rationale for why laws around private property were developed. For example, town bike programs (free bikes in a town for everyone to use) often are destroyed and used irresponsibly (left random places or stolen) versus when people own their own bike that they invested money in and subsequently take care of it. 113  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons Another example is having roommates where each person keeps their room clean but common areas like the living room and bathroom are a mess. The tragedy is that each person would benefit from the common areas being clean, but how as soon as one person doesn’t do their fair share of cleaning the others may stop cleaning because it is unfair. In other words, it only takes one person to ruin it for everyone. 114  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons Another example: Do you like doing group projects? Why or why not? Free Rider Problem: when not everyone who stands to benefit from something does their fair share of the work, i.e. some people try to get a “free-ride” 115  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons Once one person or group begins abusing a public good, then more people are likely to also begin abusing it to ensure that it is fair. For example, with the environment. If one fisherman or one county’s fisherman are overfishing in international waters and making profit from it, then fisherman of other countries feel it is unfair to hold themselves to a different standard. Feelings of inequality are strong motivators and a natural response to inequality is anger. You saw this in this week’s assigned material. 116  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons The only way to resolve a Tragedy of the Commons situation is for the different parties/countries to come to an agreement. And, sadly, often you have to wait until the situation gets so bad that everyone is willing to agree. There are 3 solutions to a tragedy of the commons: 1. Unfair Share Solution: despite someone not doing their fair share, the rest of the group picks up the slack, accepts that it is unfair, and continues to respect the public good. 2. Everyone loses solution: the rest of the group decides that if one group will not do their fair share then they won’t either. This results in whatever the public good is (a group project, wild buffalo, etc.), usually being depleted or destroyed. Sometimes the rest of the group will allow this to occur so that the one party not doing their fair share will agree that a solution is needed and accept their share of responsibility. 3. Violent Enforcement: the final option is for the rest of the parties to create rules and enforce them with violence if necessary to ensure everyone respects doing their part. A good example of this is laws & police to ensure we don’t all just steal from each other. 117  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons Let’s show how these 3 options would work with the roommate example. For example, imagine one of the roommates REFUSES to clean up or take care of the bathroom. What would the options look like: 1. Unfair Share Solution: the other roommates just let it go and continue to clean the bathroom despite not getting help from that one roommate and feeling that it is unfair. 2. Everyone loses solution: the other roommates say “heck to it” and also refuse to clean the bathroom. The bathroom becomes EPICLY disgusting. Then either that’s how the bathroom stays or it gets so bad that the roommate who refused to clean initially agrees to help now. 3. Violent Enforcement: the other roommates get together and tell the one who refuses to clean that either they pull their weight or you’ll kick them out of the house or fight them. 118  Issue 1: Tragedy of the Commons The environment is the same. It is a shared resource (the air or oceans for examples) that we all have access to and can all abuse to our own benefit (for example, having fewer environmental regulations that stop companies from polluting to boost the economy). Taking care of the environment requires agreements and international cooperation which does not always work well. Why do agreements in cases of tragedy of the commons often not work though? I think it is best to illustrate this with an example. 119  Old Class Exercise I would put students into groups of three and ask them to choose Option A or B below. I told them that I will legitimately stick to the outcome of this exercise, so it wasn’t just a game, the consequences were real. OPTION A: I would give each person in the class 3% extra on the midterm. The condition is that every group must choose this option, if even one group chooses option B instead then anyone that chooses this option will receive nothing. OPTION B: I will give your group, and only your group, an extra 15% on test 1. The condition is that you have to be the only group to choose this option, if more than one person chooses it then everyone in the class receives nothing. Potential outcomes of this experiment: (1) they all pick Option A and all receive 3% extra on test 1, (2) only one group picks Option B and receives an extra 15%, or (3) more than one group chooses Option B and no one gets anything.  Issue 2: The Social Contract That class example is a real life tragedy of the commons. The class was better off all working together and choosing option A. However, if everyone agrees to work together except one party, then that party benefits tremendously (this is the roommate that doesn’t clean if the other roommate’s decide just to pick up the slack; this is the one person that chooses Option B when the rest choose A and gets an extra 15% instead of 3%). If there is not enough trust and/or cooperation then everyone loses. 121  Issue 2: The Social Contract This specific example is called the prisoner’s dilemma. Two people that committed a crime together are arrested. Unknown to them the police do not have enough evidence to convict either one of them so if they both stay silent they will go free. However, each is isolated and told that if they snitch on the other person (say the other person’s involvement in the crime) they will go free, and the other person will go to jail. But if both snitch on each other, then they both go to jail. B Stays Silent B Betrays A (Defects) The Prisoner’s Dilemma (cooperates) A Stays Silent (cooperates) A serves 3 years in jail, Both go free. B goes free. A Betrays B (Defects) A goes free, Both serve 3 years in B serve 3 years in jail jail. 122 Issue 2: The Social Contract You heard of this before? Gangs and criminal organizations understand the prisoner’s dilemma well, which is why a key code in any gang is that you never talk to anyone about the gang’s activities. This is a social contract enforced by violence within any gang and often extends even to the community the gang operates in. 123  Issue 2: The Social Contract This prisoner’s dilemma and the class example shows how it is often best to work together, but how this requires a trust or contract that when not present leads to a worse scenario for everyone. The contract is necessary to ensure everyone benefits, i.e. all parties forsake individual interest for group interest, and such contracts are called social contracts. Society exists based on a social contract. For example, we would all gain personally from stealing from each other. But its worse for all of us if we all start doing this so we agree not to and make laws to uphold this agreement. When people do not agree we use violence against them (i.e. the police), which is the third solution to the tragedy of the commons discussed earlier. 124  Issue 2: The Social Contract International agreements on environmental issues are similar. They require cooperation, good faith, and trust. If one nation breaks that trust and refuses to cooperate in a way that benefits themselves over the common good, then it becomes harder for all other nations to sacrifice for the greater common good. In other words, it is now unfair so why should they do it? The US decision to pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement, which was signed by 196 countries and is the primary international agreement to help mitigate global warming, is an example of this. As some of the sources you watched stated, with the US leaving and the agreement being non-binding (i.e. following the rules in it are voluntary) other countries began to choose national economic interests over collective good environmental considerations. I mean why sacrifice for a shared resource (the environment) when other countries aren’t? 125 Video 2: Speech on Pulling out of Paris Agreement The Trump administration made the announcement on June 1, 2017. “I can put no other considerations above the well-being of American citizens.” If the other countries act the same as they would if the US stayed in the agreement, then this will be a win for the US; i.e. the US becomes the roommate not cleaning the bathroom and benefitting from it being cleaned by the other roommates. But it could also lead to a tragedy of the commons situation where other countries follow suit and prioritize their interest over the environment. 126 Symbolic Interactionism & Environmental Problems Why is being organized into nation states a symbolic interactionism approach? Nation states are not handed down by a divine force, they are rooted in history but they are arbitrary. Nation state borders change, names of countries change, how they are governed differs and changes (for example, the individual provinces/states in Canada, the UK, and Australia are much less independent of federal government than in other places like the US). In other words, nations are social constructs. 127 Symbolic Interactionism & Environmental Problems Why is being organized into nation states a symbolic interactionism approach? Yet being part of a nation state and looking out for it’s interests first over the interests of the collective whole is rooted in how we interact and create meaning (Countries build patriotism through things like singing the national anthem before events, saying a pledge of allegiance at school, annually celebrating the birth of the nation, competing in Olympics or other national competitions). Looking at this created meaning (i.e. I am a Canadian first, not a world citizen), the symbols associated with them (ex: the flag, the pledge of allegiance, the beaver), and the way they shape interactions (ex: nationalism or ‘my country’ first policies) is a symbolic interactionist approach. It shows how labelling and social constructionism affect even big issues like environmental problems. 128 Symbolic Interactionism Bright Side The US has rejoined the Paris agreement after now President Joe Biden was elected. While nationalism has been growing (e.g., Trump’s Presidency, Brexit), Cosmopolitanism has also been on the rise for many years (consider even the creation of the Paris Agreement signed by 196 nations, the creation of the EU, NATO, UN, World Health Organization, increasing international free- trade agreements, and so on). We are a more cooperative global community than ever before so there is hope. 129 130