Month: June 2022

In their literature review on transformative adaptation, authors Fedele et al. conclude that transformative adaptation might be “the only suitable response to climate change and other complex global environmental issues”, stating that transformative adaptation is needed to “help reach an impact that is commensurate to the extent of the issue, as well as avoid costs and delays due to failures of coping or incremental adaptation” (2019, p.122). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s latest report highlights the three intertwined crisis of climate, biodiversity loss and inequity, emphasizing the need for much more ambitious action than incrementalism (IPCC, 2022). “Half measures are no longer an option” said Hoesung Lee, IPCC Chair (IPCC, 2022).

It is clear, then, that transformative adaptation is what is needed to address the interconnected crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss and global and societal inequities. If all this is true, then what is holding us back? What rational do we still have for choosing incrementalism as a strategy? Certainly, transformative adaptation is not the easiest solution and many barriers stand in our way. As Fedele et al. describe, it runs the risk of encountering social or political resistance, it can be intimidating because it challenges the status quo, be hindered by rigid funding and institutional frameworks, or be sabotaged by those who benefit from the current systems that transformative change seeks to dismantle (2019, p. 117). As well, it is incredibly complex, ambitious and challenging to implement, requiring cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholder collaboration and requiring shifts at both large-scale institutional levels as well as deeply personal ones, such as worldviews, norms, value systems and lifestyle changes (Fedele et al., 2019). In addition, while transformative adaptation has the potential to uproot inequities and transition us to a fairer state, the destabilizing nature of these major changes could have negative outcomes for the most vulnerable in the short-term (Pelling, O’Brien, & Matyas, 2015, p.124).

All of these challenges and complexities do not, however, erase the fact that transformative change is more effective and desirable; they simply acknowledge how challenging it will be. We know that incrementalism will only get us halfway there, but we are daunted by the scale and magnitude of the changes that are truly necessary. Ultimately, what I think is holding most of us back from choosing transformative adaptation as a strategy then, is fear. We are scared that the challenge is too big, that we will fail, that we will do more harm than good or slow the transition by aiming too high instead of focusing on a manageable (but ultimately inadequate) goal.

Possibly the most inspiring piece of research that has informed my thinking over the past few years and that has helped me to overcome that fear is Erica Chenoweth’s work and findings around “the 3.5% rule” (Robson, 2019). Based on an extensive literature review covering 323 civil resistance movements spanning the globe from the past century, she found that once active participation in these movements reached 3.5% of the population, success was virtually guaranteed. “There weren’t any campaigns that had failed after they had achieved 3.5% participation during a peak event,” says Chenoweth (Robson, 2019). While the focus of her research was on civil resistance aimed at overturning repressive political regimes, I interpret her findings as applying to transformational change in general. That the conflicts in her research took place in highly challenging political contexts make her findings that much more inspiring for me. If it takes 3.5 % of the population standing behind an idea to ensure its success (no matter how revolutionary or transformational it may seem), then that gives me enormous hope that we can achieve transformational change within the context of climate change and the multitude of societal and environmental crisis that we face. If the people who participated in the nonviolent protests studied by Chenoweth were brave enough to confront the status quo, I think most of us should reflect on our own political context and privilege, asking ourselves whether the hurdles we face really are so high or so insurmountable.

So, then, to me the question is not if or whether transformational adaptation is the right approach, but how do we go about it. According to climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe, one of the most powerful things we can do is talk about it (2018). In her TED talk, she discusses polarization and explains that most people agree that climate change is real; their resistance to addressing it centres around ideology and identity (Hayhoe, 2018). In his book ‘A Good War’, Seth Klein shares polling data from 2019 revealing that 75% of Canadians are worried about climate change (2020, p.69). Hayhoe explains that talking about the science to someone who is not on board with progressive change could cause them to further entrench themselves in their position, but that speaking from the heart, finding common ground through shared values, interests and priorities and then “connect(ing) the dots between the values they already have and why they would care about a changing climate” is all we really need to do to shift the dial (Hayhoe, 2018). Chenoweth, meanwhile, explains that the success of the campaigns she researched centered around the domino effect and the influence of social and familial networks (n.d.). For one, as more people became noticeably involved in a movement, others were inspired to participate (Chenoweth, n.d.). Secondly, as the number of protestors began to approach the 3.5% threshold, the personal connections and relationships between protestors and politicians, law enforcement and other key influencers began to have an impact (Chenoweth, n.d.). Because we are all connected by family and social relationships, the sheer number of protestors meant that everyone knew someone who was involved, and those personal connections began to play a role in influencing key decision-makers (Chenoweth, n.d.).  

Transformational change is without a doubt an extremely complex and daunting undertaking, that will require unimaginable levels of effort, coordination, perseverance, cooperation, goodwill and expertise. That being said, if we can inspire the people within our society operating at different levels to embark on this change with us, we can succeed.

References

Chenoweth, E. The success of nonviolent civil resistance: Erica Chenoweth at TEDxBoulder. TEDxBoulder. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJSehRlU34w

Fedele, G., Donatti, C. I., Harvey, C. A., Hannah, L., & Hole, D. G. (2019). Transformative adaptation to climate change for sustainable social-ecological systems. Environmental Science and Policy, 101, 116–125.

Hayhoe, K. (2018). The most important thing you can do to fight climate change: talk about it. [recorded talk]. TEDWomen. https://www.ted.com/talks/katharine_hayhoe_the_most_important_thing_you_can_do_to_fight_climate_change_talk_about_it?language=en

IPCC. (2022). Press Release: Climate change: a threat to human wellbeing and health of the planet. IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/resources/press/press-release/

Klein, S. (2020). A Good War – Mobilizing Canada for the Climate Emergency. ECW Press.

Pelling, M., O’Brien, K., & Matyas, D.  (2015).  Adaptation and transformation.  Climatic Change, 133.  113- 127.

Robson, D. (2019). The ‘3.5% rule’: How a small minority can change the world. BBC.  https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world