{"id":519,"date":"2024-09-05T18:17:19","date_gmt":"2024-09-05T08:17:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/aninconvenientspecies.com\/?p=519"},"modified":"2024-09-08T13:06:35","modified_gmt":"2024-09-08T03:06:35","slug":"a-highway-to-hell-paved-with-flawed-communication-strategies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/aninconvenientspecies.com\/?p=519","title":{"rendered":"A 'Highway to Hell' - paved with flawed communication strategies"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

When will environmental campaigners think beyond 20th century environmental messages like \"BE VERY AFRAID AND VOTE BETTER?!?!\"<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A friend and colleague asked me to read a recent Quarterly Essay article by an apparently well-respected climate scientist. So I did - with a certain degree of reluctance. I was disappointed - but NOT surprised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You would think that with 50 years of human systems change know-how widely available, sustainability campaigners would have noticed the 20th century Theory of Change that basically says \"be terrified, use less and lobby your political representatives\" HASN'T produced great results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You would think that when those passionate environmental campaigners (particularly the scientists amongst them trained in the scientific method) recognise the ineffectiveness of the common communications strategies of the past 50 years <\/strong>(since THE LIMITS TO GROWTH), they would try something different.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some more experienced and enlightened veteran campaigners have moved beyond fear, shame and blame \u2013 including Paul Hawken and Al Gore and Bill McDonough and Kate Raworth and Dame Ellen Macarthur and L Hunter Lovins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunately, way too many still seem to be ignoring Einstein\u2019s definition of insanity. (Doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My colleague pressed me for my thoughts on this article, so I wrote them down. But first\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Who am I to have an opinion?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m a veteran supply chain systems consultant (30 years) turned coach (5 years) turned writer and podcaster (ongoing). My accumulated formal qualifications include Psychology, Information Systems, eCommerce and Ontological Coaching.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I got hooked into the solutions side of \u201cthis sustainability thing\u201d in 2002, when I read NATURAL CAPITALISM and CRADLE TO CRADLE and BIOMIMICRY and CONFESSIONS OF A RADICAL INDUSTRIALIST within a 4-week period during post-graduate studies. I\u2019ve been researching the development and implementation of regenerative solutions ever for two decades.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This portfolio of business-based innovation experience gives me a VERY different perspective than academia \u2013 particularly on the high growth field of Innovation Delivery. (What IS my perspective? Check it out here: Think Act Regenerate<\/a><\/strong>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based on that experience, here are my specific, sequential responses to that essay, followed by some more general concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A disclaimer up-front<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

At NO point in this post am I suggesting that government action - including substantive policy change - is unnecessary or unimportant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What I'm questioning is whether it's the most effective, engaging way to communicate <\/strong>about the 6 major, global ecosystem boundaries that our industrialised society has already exceeded. Particularly if your goal is to accelerate the implementation of today's rich smorgasbord of regenerative, commercial solutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My specific, sequential responses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

I wasn't prepared to read the essay more than once - so I captured my thoughts sequentially as I went.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

...too complicated and overwhelming...<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

p.2 \u201cFor most people trying to get on with their lives, climate change feels too complicated and overwhelming, especially in an era of war, pandemic and financial pressure.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

My first response was a primal \"Well, der! That's how humans are.\" <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Next was \"OK, so what else is there? What OTHER motivators can we apply - other than piling on fear and anxiety and blame (including of politicians) and demands for politicians to change policy (even though they haven't for DECADES)?\"<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What Professor Martin Seligman (founder of the Positive Psychology movement) proved decades ago, and documented in his 1975 book LEARNED HELPLESSNESS<\/em> is that when humans believe a problem is permanent, pervasive and personal then that is likely to generate HELPESSNESS- unless they have access to immediate, practical, personal action options.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

30 years on from the 1990 GPCC report, is it really <\/strong>useful to keep repeating and repeating the message that: \"our political leaders have failed us so far - you uncaring, over-consuming citizens have to vote better and use less\"? Without any mention of the wealth of actions available today that make the world better today?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By contrast, here\u2019s what Paul Hawken said in his latest global best seller REGENERATION: ENDING THE CLIMATE CRISIS IN ONE GENERATION<\/em> (2021) Hawken acknowledges this human reality in the book's introduction, and the Project Regeneration website catalogues today's accessible actions (visit the Project Regeneration Action Nexus<\/strong><\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

p. 10 \u201cIf we want to get the attention of humanity humanity needs to feel it is getting attention.
If we are going to save the world from the threat of global warming, we need to create a world worth saving. \"<\/p>\nPaul Hawken, REGENERATION<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

...the most powerful thing we have to influence society \u2013 our vote...<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

p2. \u201csquander the most powerful thing we have to influence society \u2013 our vote\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

1 What's focal is perceived as causal!!!<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Studies of human psychology and neurobiology tell us that \u201cwhat\u2019s focal becomes causal\u201d (Read PRE-SUASION<\/em> by Dr Robert Cialdini)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The human brain simplifies and generalises the messages it receives. This can mean that if we constantly and insistently reiterate \u201cuse less and vote better\u201d then we risk our listeners thinking that this is \"enough\". They could well think that if they protest and vote better, then they can get on with their busy, complex lives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps \"voting better\" is the most powerful thing an academic researcher who believes in top-down command-and-control innovation can imagine doing. However - given today's rich smorgasbord of commercial solutions and design frameworks - anyone who works in any sort of business role could vote better AND<\/strong> take direct solutions action:<\/p>\n\n\n\n