Feed aggregator
Iguana chase wins Bafta for Planet Earth II
Dinosaur asteroid hit 'worst possible place'
Killer whales swim past Orkney fishing boat
Louisiana floods: how a displaced community fought back - video
Torrential downpours in Louisiana led to catastrophic flooding in August 2016, submerging entire communities and displacing thousands of residents. Volunteers did whatever they could to help – rescuing stranded people, organising food and shelter and providing security. In their own words, members of the self-styled ‘Cajun army’ tell the inspirational story of how a natural disaster made their community stronger
Continue reading...Adani may be forced to revamp Carmichael coalmine clean-up plans
Reforms touted by Queensland government would mandate targets and ratios for progressive rehabilitation of land
Adani may be forced into an expensive revamp of its Queensland coal plans if mining rehabilitation reforms touted by the Palaszczuk government prevail after the next state election.
The environmental group Lock The Gate says Adani now plans a “lowest cost” program to rehabilitate its Carmichael mine, including waiting 39 years to start on rehabilitation of huge open-cut pits that will leave more than 3,300 hectares “completely un-rehabilitated”.
Continue reading...Could these mini reactors replicate the power of the Sun?
What types of people will lead our great energy transition?
We sit transfixed, watching the Great Barrier Reef bleach, while our leaders brandish lacquered lumps of coal and energy policy is shaped by tweets.
Each day reminds us of the line credited to the US poet Dorothy Parker: “what fresh hell is this?”
Her contemporary Antonio Gramsci, got it about right when he wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.
We are (we hope) in the middle of a “socio-technical transition”. “What’s that?” I hear you ask.
A transition has been defined as a “radical transformation towards a sustainable society as a response to a number of persistent problems confronting contemporary modern societies”.
It’s “socio-technical” because there are going to have to be some rather dramatic and rapid changes in how we do things, both in our societies and our technologies (the two are intertwined).
How does a transition happen?One recent strand of work that hits the sweet spot (in that it keeps academics in grant funding and lattes while also being of actual use to civil society) is the study of who does what in a transition – the so-called “structure/agency/power issue”.
Classically, overarching theories of long-term change overlook the power of individuals and small groups to shape history, focusing instead on whole social classes or new technologies. But the reality is that we are not (usually) dupes, victims of impersonal social forces. As academics Frank Geels and Johan Schot wrote in 2007:
…actors try to make sense, change perceptions as they go along, engage in power struggles, lobby for favourable regulations, and compete in markets.
Academics who study social power have endless chicken-and-egg debates about structure and agency – how much wiggle room do “entrepreneurs” have to change the system from within?
The typical answers to these questions can leave even the geekiest academic punch-drunk. But to misquote Steve Winwood, we have to “role with it” , by which I mean think about the roles that individuals and groups perform in any social transition. Let’s have a look at some of them.
The controversial author Malcolm Gladwell has argued that three types of people can speed an idea through society: connectors, mavens, and salesmen.
Connectors are people with lots of friends and acquaintances who spend time maintaining these connections, leveraging the strength of weak ties.
Mavens gather information, evaluating the messages that come through the network and amplifying those they like.
Salespeople are persuaders who are capable of propagating messages using the force of their character.
Recently, two researchers at Melbourne University’s Sustainable Society Institute produced a very readable (and freely available!) report) called “They make the change: roles of actors in transitions”.
In it they suggest four particular social roles (they have others in mind too – stay tuned):
Frontrunners are “geared towards making alternative solutions known and available early on” and “act upon their own personal values”. In other words, these people are the pioneers, the dreamers who want to build something better.
Connectors (in agreement with Gladwell above) do two forms of connective work. They connect solutions to systems, and also try to embed them (finding ongoing budget streams, creating constituencies) and secondly connect actors with other actors, creating alliances and coalitions (for [advocacy of policies, technologies and so on.)
Topplers introduce change and “phase out institutions to make way for alternative solutions”. They “articulate the values that connect allies and coalitions”, or in layman’s terms, they have the gift of the gab.
Supporters are not transformative themselves but when they start using (buying, sharing) solutions proposed by frontrunners, this “provides the legitimisation, and expresses the societal need for the new solutions and changed systems”. Think baby-boomers buying solar panels in their millions.
Nice and neat, isn’t it? But as these authors would tell you, there are many caveats. Three will do for now, all fairly obvious.
First, academics warn that there is never merely one actor (or one type of person) driving a transition.
Second, things change. As two academics recently wrote:
Agents are not “just there” with a stable, uncontested identity, instead they constantly need to (re)define who they are and why they are a relevant voice in a policy discourse.
Other academics concur:
…instead of being predefined and static, roles such as policymaker or citizen seem to always be in the process of being constructed, deconstructed, reconstructed, contested, as well as enacted, made and used.
Third, what of hybrid identities like “prosumers”? And what about those who are just trying to maintain the status quo?
Academics, always hedging, will tell you that everything is in flux, so there are no hard and fast rules. That’s true, but only up to a point – don’t expect Malcolm Roberts and Adam Bandt to be teaming up any time soon.
So far, so abstract. But how does all this play out in Australia’s great energy transition?
Well, you have pugnacious entrepreneurs - “topplers” - trying to undermine the traditional norms (hello Richard Denniss and the Australia Institute).
Some “frontrunners” switch from advocacy to opposition (hello, Prime Minister) or, conversely, from digging up coal to powerful climate evangelism. Some outlive their funding, if not their usefulness - the soon-to-be defunct Climate Institute was a “connector” par excellence.
Of course, this is a problem we should to be solving quicker than we are causing, and we need to be more “transruptive”. Therefore, I have two questions for you, gentle reader.
First, what kinds of people - besides those trying to throw sand in the gears - are missing from the above typology? And second, how can those pushing for change - the frontrunners, the connectors, the social movers – sustain and escalate their pressure, and meet not just the scale of the challenge, but also its speed?
Answers in the comments, please.
Top UK fund manager divests from fossil fuels
Archbishop of Canterbury plays crucial role in BMO Global Asset Management’s decision to dump £20m of shares in firms such as BHP Billiton
One of Britain’s biggest managers of ethical funds is to dump £20m of shares in fossil fuel companies in one of the biggest divestments so far because of climate change.
Shares in BHP Billiton, the Anglo-Australian mining giant, will be among those sold by BMO Global Asset Management’s range of “responsible” funds, which manage £1.5bn of assets. They were previously known as the “stewardship” funds, the first ethical funds launched in Britain.
Continue reading...Doctors call for stricter pollution license fee system to protect health
Uni Newcastle team tests “printed solar” panels in Australian first
Know your NEM: Looking to the future of energy prices
Why do some graziers want to retain, not kill, dingoes?
Vast, ancient, nutrient-poor, with wild swings between droughts, floods and fires: this describes much of the Australian continent. Livestock grazing and farming in such a land is certainly not without its challenges.
Where we’ve failed to work with the local conditions, we see barren plains, dust storms, the extinction of native species, and the repossession of properties by banks, among many ills.
But such a dire picture is far from universal, and belies the fact that many who live on the land are also among our most innovative land managers. Many projects offer potential benefits for livestock production and the environment alike, but without support progress may be hindered.
Putting dingoes to workOne of the most contentious examples involves encouraging dingoes. Many pastoral areas require land managers to take “all reasonable and practical steps” to manage the risk of dingoes, which are classed as pest animals.
But a growing body of research argues that dingoes can be effective at controlling kangaroo and feral goat populations, especially on cattle stations.
A Western Australian couple, David Pollock and Frances Jones, were recently featured on Australian Story for their decision to regenerate their property, Wooleen, by de-stocking, encouraging local flora and fauna, and investing in ecotourism.
Their neighbours, including sheep graziers whose stock are vulnerable to dingoes, feel this is an irresponsible decision. Graziers have a mandate to control dingoes (“wild dogs”, to many) and dingo-domestic dog hybrids — which can’t be easily and reliably distinguished in the wild.
Dingoes are known to be very effective at controlling kangaroo populations. Angus EmmottWhile the impacts and merits of encouraging dingoes in sheep country are hotly debated, their role in the management of cattle stations is much better understood. But restrictive legislation and the stigma attached to dingoes are frustrating for those who see them as having a vital ecological and economic role for their properties.
Queensland grazier Angus Emmott writes that his beef cattle enterprise, Noonbah station, has benefited from leaving dingoes and kangaroos alone:
We run a beef cattle enterprise in the top end of the Queensland channel country, southwest of Longreach. As a part of our management plan, we leave the dingoes and the ’roos alone. We see a range of benefits to our operation.
When the dingoes don’t have their social structure disrupted by poison baiting, trapping and shooting, only the apex bitch breeds, once a year at most. These family groups have strictly defined ranges, and they kill or chase off other wild dogs or dingoes that intrude. They also keep kangaroos down to very low numbers, which is a huge benefit in regards to pasture growth and being able to rest our paddocks. The dingoes also keep down feral pig, cat and fox numbers.
Yes, dingoes do take some of our calves, but the benefits of pasture growth and feral animal control result in a net benefit of better land condition and a greater dollar return. Dingoes also benefit biodiversity conservation and soil condition. We acknowledge this management model does not work in sheep country, including for some of our nearby neighbours, and in these cases we need to look at different forms of management, such as fencing and/or companion and guardian animals.
Research supports the financial benefits of this approach in certain circumstances. Some studies have found that, perversely, taking lethal action against dingoes can increase the incidence of attacks on stock and boost the population of herbivores that compete with cattle for pasture.
Solutions for protecting livestock against attack, such as guardian dogs, are also at hand and may be considerably cheaper than constructing and maintaining extensive predator-proof fences. Livestock guardian dogs have been shown to be effective in numerous locations across Australia, on large and small grazing properties. But investment from state and federal government (and related agencies) aimed at encouraging such innovation has been lacking.
Kangaroos can become very abundant following rain and without control by dingoes. Angus Emmott Working with the landRegardless of whether graziers take the drastic steps seen at Wooleen, now is the time to reflect on the direction of Australia’s land management.
If we’re to overcome the many challenges we face, including the impacts of climate change on food production, then we need to support the bold new thinking emerging from rural and regional Australia, and our scientific institutions.
Such ideas could include making better use of native animals – better suited to Australian conditions – as sources of meat, and reforming land use legislation to allow new industries.
Seeing some of the worst land degradation first hand it’s easy to think that it’s all too hard and that environmental repair will take decades, if not centuries. This can invite inertia and apathy, the enemies of positive change.
But the stories of Wooleen, Noonbah and other innovators show us what is possible. Science has helped demonstrate ecological repair can happen faster and to a greater extent than many might appreciate.
Big changes certainly carry risks, and these must be managed carefully, but new and sometimes brave ideas will always improve our understanding of the land. Whatever the outcome, such knowledge helps guide better decisions for more sustainable grazing, farming and bio-diverse conservation.
Euan Ritchie would like to acknowledge the contribution of Angus Emmott to this article.
Euan Ritchie receives funding from the Australian Research Council. Euan Ritchie is a Director (Media Working Group) of the Ecological Society of Australia, and a member of the Australian Mammal Society.
Coalition attempts to rewrite history on support for wind, solar and RET
Coralroot, a rare beauty among the old graves
North Wessex Downs, Hampshire Cow parsley and common vetch crowd around the carved words of grief and remembrance
My right hand, flushed with warmth after a day’s walking, is refreshed at the touch of the stone gate post. Standing at the entrance of an abandoned church, I can see it has been worn marble-smooth by the hands of the long-vanished faithful. Centuries of their feet, too, have passed this way and carved a dip into the threshold of one of its ancient doorways.
Although they are faint and rubbed, I’m nonetheless able to trace the radiating spokes of the witches’ marks that decorate the stone lintel. And above the squat and timbered tower a weathercock, long since rusted in place, cannot turn to greet me but instead shudders in the spring breeze.