RE: [gep-ed] RE: Opinion: We Don't Need More Life-Crushing Steel and Concrete

Rafael Friedmann Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:32:19 -0700

I heard a talk by the head of sustainability at Autocad about 2 years ago at a HAAS/UC Berkeley event on the future of work. She showed the daunting amounts of materials that would be used to further urbanize our growing human population by 2050. Without rethinking very deeply what Earth can provide sustainably, we will not be able to build a future that offers wellbeing to most of humanity. Your point of the need to align the lovely calls of Biden’s summit (and others) with how our economic systems are set up and the infrastructure we continue to build (vested interests means we always have too much inertia!), is right on the ball.

I suspect that the reality check will need to partly come from Academia – with quick analyses (we don’t have another 20 years to spare, actually, can’t even spare one more!), coupled with social movements and the threat of product boycotts as well as financial pressure—to get the actions needed by both public and private sectors (as well as our own).

Rafael

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Debra Javeline
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 10:15 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [gep-ed] RE: Opinion: We Don't Need More Life-Crushing Steel and Concrete

Dear colleagues,

Biden announced new commitments on climate action today, and it reminded me that I received not a single response to my query below about the Biden infrastructure plan. I wonder why. If the climate plans and the infrastructure plans are not integrated, how can the climate plans succeed? Is no one conducting research on the ideal infrastructure for a climate-altered planet?

All the best,

Debra

From: Debra Javeline <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2021 10:36 AM
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>
Subject: Opinion: We Don’t Need More Life-Crushing Steel and Concrete

Dear colleagues,

Paul Greenberg and Carl Safina have a compelling op-ed in the NYT, “We Don’t Need More Life-Crushing Steel and Concrete: The long-term needs of ecosystems should come before our knee-jerk expectations about infrastructure.”

Is there any scholarship related to this topic? Presumably, those focused on climate change even within Biden’s own government understand the potential harms of an infrastructure program that ignores climate issues, but is there a holistic approach, with the infrastructure people talking to the climate-concerned? And is the conversation informed by good research on what infrastructure should be rebuilt to maximize mitigation and adaptation efforts? Does such research exist? Suggestions for specific publications would be most welcome.

All the best,

Debra

*****

Debra Javeline

Fellow, Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, Kellogg Institute for International Studies, Nanovic Institute for European Studies

Core faculty, Russian and East European Studies Program

Affiliated faculty, Notre Dame Environmental Change Initiative

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gep-ed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/8b77e9b1c5fed4acdfcc5d8923e55a1e%40mail.gmail.com.

RE: [gep-ed] RE: Opinion: We Don't Need More Life-Crushing Steel and Concrete

Reply via email to