Politics, Post-Truth and IEM
An IEM approach is meant to be a strategic process that integrates various principles to arrive at a ‘meta-theory’ that can broaden perspectives to inform analysis of the problems (Buhrs, 1995). Multi-institutional, legislative and policy approaches must then be incorporated into the decision-making for environmental problems. Identifying and assessing sticking points and core problem causes is essential to effective IEM (Buhrs 1995). The previous blog introduced the documentary, Hot Air by Alister Barry which investigated the pitfalls for policymakers that attempted to implement measures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) outputs in New Zealand.
The changes that took place for the New Zealand government as a result of neoliberal economic ideals during the 1980s, 90s and 2000s transformed policy approaches. Alister Barry investigates this topic in his documentary Someone Else's Country.
There was a distinct shift from being a highly regulatory government, to favour a ‘free-market’ approach that allows private companies to self-regulate, and assumes that commerce and trade has in-built mechanisms that self-correct where needed. But this is not always so. As shown within Hot Air , misinformation, political lobbying, industry lead policies, soft government approaches, misguided media reporting and political pressure by industry groups were used to influence and ultimately weaken government’s efforts to reduce GHG outputs. Petrochemical and other large companies such as Fletchers, Dairy NZ and Carter Holt Harvey were represented by the Business Round Table who along with the Greenhouse Policy Coalition became strong critics of government in their efforts to mitigate climate change. Not only did these companies and lobby groups seek to influence ministers directly, they also sought to coerce them indirectly by influencing public perceptions.
Various industries seek to influence public thinking through disinformation. This phenomenon has been termed ‘post-truth’. McIntyre (2018) posits that post-truth is a hidden agenda that seeks to create alternative truths that align with sociocultural biases. Watch the interview with McIntyre, who states that 'post-truth' is a political subordination of realty.
As McIntyre points out, there are five main tropes that align with post-truthism,
1. Cherry picking evidence
2. Relying on fake experts
3. Denigrating true experts
4. Illogical reasoning
5. Insisting the science has to be perfect (2022).
The 100% Pure New Zealand branding programme could be deemed post-truth. When interview by BBC in 2011, then prime minister John Key asserted “If anybody goes down to New Zealand and looks at our environmental credentials…then for the most part, I think on comparison with the rest of the world we are 100 percent pure.” Regardless of the peer reviewed science, the prime minister thought that his opinion was more important. Moreover, Key denigrated the science on freshwater, used illogical reasoning, cherry picked weak evidence, and inferred that opinions were as good as science.
McIntyre also points out within the interview that building trust through face to face discussions, remaining non-judgmental, and discussing the views and evidence calmly is essential to overcoming misinformed views and biases. This could mean that attaining a genuine IEM approach to mitigating harmful land-use practices through effective policy approaches could be possible.
However, it requires government and non-government commitment to ongoing improvements, not just letting off hot air. Some critics might say that carbon farming and trading is 'code' for allowing business as usual without having to reduce pollution at the source.
Is carbon farming and trading that seeks to off-set carbon outputs from industry and government really going to address the adverse effects from all human activities?
How can a government that relies on votes really be effective in managing climate change which is a super-wicked problem that extends beyond boarders?
More specifically, what will be the impacts for hill country sheep and beef farms that are converting to tree farming?
These questions will need to be considered if we as a nation can move towards an IEM based solution for carbon farming and trading. As with many large scale activities, there will be a plethora of environmental, political, economic, social and cultural concerns that are interrelated. The topic of hill country sheep and beef farms converting to tree farming will be a scenario task for a group assignment. In coming weeks, 'the group assignment' is likely to bring much thought, feeling, discussion and learning. As mentioned in previous blogs, an essential component of effective IEM is to agree on the problem, and this could be a major hurdle to surmount. Depending on the scope of analysis for this problem, it will be useful to consider how problems can be created through post-truth (a political subordination of realty) narratives that become an emergent problem that supplants the real problem. And that is, you guessed it, human activities such as burning fossil fuels, deforestation and agricultural practices.
Stay tuned to find out how an IEM process and approach can be developed.
Comments
Post a Comment