The global scientific consensus on climate change is clear. Unless we move toward a sustainable path soon the choices available will become fewer and more drastic. In the UK context, sustainability policies in recent years have been subject to vast fluctuations as government has pivoted from seeking to build consensus around net zero to utilising it as a wedge issue to shore up dwindling political support.
Following its landslide election victory, the new Labour government – having exercised caution in opposition – now has an opportunity to be bold. The early narrative provides grounds for optimism. Net zero has been described as an opportunity not just for meeting the challenges posed by climate change, but for delivering the high-quality jobs and economic growth so urgently needed. This is a welcome shift but one that only takes us so far. The focus of sustainability policy is often technocratic – harnessing new technologies that will enable us to continue to live our lives without having to make difficult trade-offs. However, this approach means we are likely to miss the biggest opportunities of all.
Our journey towards a sustainable society can be a beautiful one. Unfortunately, this is not how it is usually portrayed by the media or approached by policy makers. The narrative of sustainability is often couched in a language of scarcity, deprivation, and that which must be foregone. Even environmentalists generally present sustainability as a sacrifice: a necessary sacrifice that we need to make to save the planet, but nonetheless a sacrifice.
This is completely wrong, not only from a moral point of view, but also from a scientific perspective. As a matter of fact, embracing sustainability could result in having more, not less: more of the things we truly need to live fulfilling lives. Take health as an example. The very same consumption habits that are destroying our natural ecosystems (by causing pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, for example) are also undermining our personal health. Processed food has a massively negative ecological footprint and, at the same time, it causes various metabolic, chronic and degenerative diseases, which place a heavy burden (and cost) on healthcare services. Eating more locally produced organic food would help the planet, our bodies and the local economy. It’s a win-win, not a sacrifice.
Take energy too. Fossil fuels are notonly causing climate change, but they are also polluting the air we breathe. Moreover, we are forced to buy fossil energy from foreign countries, generally enriching adversaries, who then may use the same money for nefarious purposes. Shifting to renewable energy means reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving life expectancy and supporting the national economy, because green energy is home-grown and produces decent, long-term jobs across the country. By investing in our own sustainable energy infrastructure, we also strengthen our independence and autonomy vis-à-vis external threats: autocrats and foreign corporations may stop oil and gas supplies but can’t switch off the sun and the wind. Green energy means more energy for all, not less.
The same argument can be made about transport, infrastructure and many other sectors. Shifting to sustainable consumption and production means improving national wellbeing. It means having more time to spend with our families and friends, building resilient communities, which results in less crime, less apathy, less alienation, less loneliness and more happiness for all.
Letting go of what hurts us equals having more of what strengthens us. Our generation can turn the sustainability journey into an opportunity to redesign all those societal processes that we should have reinvented anyway – even if the environment was not under threat. Sustainability is not about saving the environment: it’s about saving ourselves. It’s about thriving as a species by halting the self-inflicted pain of blind consumerism.
Labour’s mission-driven approach to government is refreshing. In focussing on core areas where there is a role for government (supporting economic growth, moving to clean energy, breaking down barriers to opportunity) the government creates a framework and leaves space for social as well as scientific innovation. There is nothing inherently wrong with a technocratic approach, it appears that many were crying out for it after a chaotic period of governance. But technocracy still requires to be fed a vision to be truly transformative. At a time when economic reality requires delivering transformative change with scarce resources, perhaps this is the biggest opportunity of all.
