When I was growing up in Stockholm I had
never heard of the word 'sustainability, or its Swedish equivalent 'hållbarhet'
- a not entirely literal translation coming from the idea of 'hålla', to hold, to
maintain. In Swedish, it's also a word that applies to objects
or products meaning to last a long time, to keep, as in longevity, before a
food stuff may go off. It is a practical, hygienic term in keeping with the
Swedish preference for clear unambiguous communication.
Somersaulting back to
English such clarity around sustainability eludes me. Indeed the very concept
of sustainability I sense is in need of replacing, implying as it does the need
to hold onto something, to maintain, when it is our holding on to our current lifestyles and consumption patterns that
is at the root of the problem. Many people have already questioned the term,
its meaning and usefulness. Robert Engelman concludes in State of the World that what he calls, sustainababble has a high cost. "Through overuse, the words
sustainable and sustainability lose meaning and impact. Worse, frequent and
inappropriate use lulls us into dreamy belief that all of us—and everything we
do, everything we buy, everything we use—are now able to go on forever." We are holding onto what Charles Eisenstein calls, the "Story of the
People, in which humanity was destined to create a perfect world through
science, reason, and technology: to conquer nature, transcend our animal
origins, and engineer a rational society."
Whilst agonising about
vocabulary (a common affliction for migrants who have tried to master the
English language) I'm nevertheless here now with B and D to discuss
sustainability, leadership and societal change as part of my Postgraduate Certificate in Sustainability Leadership at IFLAS. I'm interested in the tension between provoking
change from within 'the system' - meaning the corporate world, and outside, through the actions and voices
of those who have rejected participation in institutions and organisations more
explicitly through what may be called 'alternative' lifestyles. There are more
subtle perspectives. Bendell
in his research on the corporate responsibility movement references the idea of
the 'tempered radical' as an 'outsider within' able to effect change which may
be at odds with corporate aims. It may be an oversimplification therefore to
have selected two people representing two quite different systemic positions;
one a phd student and director of a large telecommunications company; the other
an artist, small business owner, community activist and home educator of her
three children. Both fulfil the criteria set in my brief to choose people I
consider to be 'more senior and influential' than ourselves.
In choosing my
interviewees, I'm playing at the tension between such apparently disparate
lifestyles and possibly viewpoints. Can we set up a temporary slack line
between two previously unconnected points, test common ground, create possibilities
for dialogue, galvanise action however wobbly? I had asked my participants to
discuss what sustainability meant to them
personally and in their roles in the community, professionally, and family. Do
they consciously try to influence others and if so, does this constitute a form
of leadership?
Yet in hindsight, there was
a deeper question to both of them. Help me make sense of this; I don't know
where or how to sustain enough anger and energy that goes with that illusory
creature - the leader change agent.
In less than two hours we
had covered a range of loosely associated topics. Many sources of change and
examples were mentioned, from the Cafe Gratitude D had visited on holiday, to the necessity of
consciously adopting what Brian Eno coined as The Long Now, to counter our addiction to novelty where everything
has to be "exciting, fast, current,
and temporary".
There was disappointment
in lacking access to the scale and type of multi-generational community where
we can co-exist without the rules of hierarchy "I feel like I'm living
life in permanent protest, part conscientious objector, part victim-martyr
" said B. How much potential to
influence and lead are we missing out on through making it so damned hard to
participate and have a voice, without conforming to overly controlling
structures and institutions such as education? There was a sense in which
provoking and participating in change towards sustainability is in itself
contingent on a level of security to "thrive, not just neurotically
survive" which is easier to leverage with a firm foothold inside an
organisation. Freedom to reject and challenge, to thrive and participate on
modest financial means is challenging even in our so called developed country,
yet these are the qualities which are surely essential to deal with the now
unstoppable consequences of climate change. (Any residual scepticism about this fact can
quickly be dispelled by skimming through the introduction to Naom Klein's This Changes Everything) D is more
outwardly content, perhaps more economical with his change agent energy,
perhaps more willing to make compromises.
Running through our
discussion was an unconsciousness ease with which sustainability and its
intrinsic value to us in whatever role we operate, does not need to be
justified or explained. I discovered that we are all finding means of
expressing ourselves within our particular environment and context; of carving
out roles and fields of activity where we can explore and innovate; B through
numerous community forums and ad hoc debating societies together with her
one-woman crusade on facebook for the Citizens Income initiative, D through setting up a technology Forum
for young entrepreneurs to promote
sustainability and global consciousness.
'Personal leadership comes first; be the change you want to see' they told me, by way of concluding wisdom.
In the abstract, both sustainability
and leadership are terms that seem diluted to the point of meaninglessness,
victims to semantic bleaching. If we can't connect emotionally with these terms, we
are left with what John Berger describes as "such dead “word-mongering” that wipes out memory and
breeds a ruthless complacency." At heart, sustainability, like leadership,
only becomes meaningful in the context of human exchange and interaction. It's been comforting and hopeful to enjoy what
B calls 'an outbreak of conviviality' and this, surely, is worth holding onto.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Cumbria or any other organisation.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Cumbria or any other organisation.
Paula Lernelius |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.