On my mind

In much the same way as Penelope in her post about a homeless family, I've been thinking a lot of something recently.

Two weekends ago I went to Torino, Italy for a symposium organized by my alumnae association. As a volunteer of sorts for the European alumnae club, they asked me to do a little write up for the magazine, so I decided to go.

The theme of the symposium was "The paradox of plenty: redefining La dolce vita". There were some really great speakers, including the secretary general of Slow Food and the US ambassador to the UN Food Aid Organization.

One of my former professors summed it up in his introductory speech: there are more and more people on the planet, and fewer and fewer resources. Climate change has arrived. Technological advances are replacing jobs. What are we going to do, in our societies based on capitalism and free choice, to convince people they have to change their behavior? consume less?

We talked about the declining value associated with producing food. No one wants to participate in food production anymore. Our love of steak and ribs contributes to global warming and our love of sushi and grilled fish have left tuna and swordfish on the brink of extinction. When you think about it, there is no logically explanation for why bananas and mangoes are available in Alaska. Farmers are exporting those crops instead of growing a mix of food that could be sold and eaten locally.

We talked about education and jobs, and as someone justly said "We always say 'education will get you ahead'. But of what? Of whom?". As countries develop, no one wants to stay in the village because success means making money in the city. What will it mean when most of the world lives in urban areas?

We also talked about the link between energy use, climate change, and the fact that in the next 50-60 years as oil reserves decrease coal burned for electricity will probably rise, and thus increase pollution. Population increases will also drive a surge in energy production.

And we talked about how improvements in technology are replacing humans to the point of potentially destroying the economy. If cars are all built by robots, how are all the former factory workers going to buy a car? As an Italian business consultant said 'In 30 years, what are all the people who are not producing going to do?' Striving for improved efficiency and constant growth will hurt us more than help us.


Then I came home and went shopping at Carrefour. I bought some new headbands at the Claire's in the galerie marchand, but I left the shop knowing I had more or less purchased junk. What is a plastic headband? Something that was brought to France by boat or plane, will last a bit, and then find its way to a landfill, or be burned, and it certainly didn't allow the factory workers in China who made it to earn a decent wage. And my example is only a headband.

The last part of the symposium was to work in a group of about 15 people to come up with some concrete actionable suggestions for how to get people to change their behavior. We're not high powered politicians who can change a country, but the intellectual challenge was interesting. Because what can you suggest, as a concrete action to take, that will lead people to change what they're doing?

I've heard that consumption levels of the 60's are a good standard as a sustainable level for the planet (but then again, at what population?), and this symposium really got me thinking about what the real ramifications would be for people's lives. In the 1960's families only had one car, one tv, and one phone. Are you ready to give up a second car? What about clothes? A truly sustainable economy and environment probably means no more cheap made-in-China clothes and shoes. Are you ready to have a smaller wardrobe? Are you ready to keep the same shoes for years and repair them at the cobbler's? If you really take the idea of sustainability all the way out, it means no more fake leather shoes or purses that don't last long and end up in the trash. What would you own if you couldn't get 'affordable' imitation accessories?

Back at Carrefour I was motivated to make good decisions, kind of a vote-with-your-wallet approach. But it's practically impossible. Everything has too many additives, too much packaging, and comes from too far away. The truly sustainable choice would be to make as many things as possible from scratch and to grow some of your own vegetables if possible. That means having the time to prepare in season, local food, and having time to buy that at the market. That means possibly cutting back on work, or at least realizing that having a job that makes cooking from scratch difficult or impossible is part of the problem. But would you accept a job with fewer hours and lower pay in order to cook more because it's better for the planet? Or would you take the better paying job, eat more prepared/industrial food, and use your money on travel or entertainment?

My own personal contribution is that I bike to work now, mostly because it's the quickest way to work, but also because it's a 'less is more' choice. There is a cost though: I have to make wardrobe choices based on my mode of transportation. A professor who lives about the same distance as me from the university always comes by car because, I think at least, she always dresses nicely and carries a lot of things back and forth. So how do you get people to accept the idea of biking to work with their work clothes? Will employers have to install showers/locker rooms where people can change out of bike conducive clothing into their work outfit before behavior will change?

Anyway, I know I can't obsess about this all the time because, as my friend said, you can't live if you do. But I feel like so many things about the future are interconnected, and that people need to realize the practical day to day implications of reducing their consumption. Wearing a bracelet and talking about 'awareness' are one thing, but choosing the more expensive local food over the cheaper imported stuff is the real test.