Earlier this semester, a group of Loyola Marymount University professors discussed the effects of climate change in a panel discussion organized by the Institute for Business Ethics and Sustainability, as previously covered by Isa Pedersen, first-year international relations major, in a campus news release. Over the past few weeks, the C.S.J. Center for Reconciliation and Justice has carried out a series of follow-up conversations with some of the panelists as part of its efforts to spread awareness of the university’s commitment to the Laudato Si’ Action Platform (LSAP).
With each panelist coming from different academic disciplines, they brought their particular concerns and issues to the conversation, as well as their own varying degrees of optimism. Junghoon Park, assistant professor of strategic management, spoke in particular detail about the fine dust pollution affecting his native South Korea.
“I didn’t see the fine dust at all when I was younger … [but] when you visit Korea during the day, you can see the dust, especially in Seoul and Busan,” Park said. While the health effects of the fine dust, which has emerged as a result of growing industrial air pollution along the border with China, are still being investigated, it seems there has been a rise in respiratory illness and a psychological impact. “Whenever I see the fine dust,” Park said. “I get really depressed … My family will be suffering from that.”
The psychological effects of climate change can create a loop — as we get more depressed, we become less active, which leads to lower physical health, and so on. How do we avoid getting ourselves into that cycle? Park suggests that the vital first step is education. “We need to just have some class to talk about the crystal-clear scientific evidence of how climate change has led to other societal issues and challenges…. If you want to have some sort of common ground, we need to have some sort of shared knowledge.”
One panelist who is familiar with the difficult work of consensus building is Emily Jarvis, professor of chemistry and biochemistry, who spent a number of years working in the U.S. Senate and with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on science policy.
Jarvis said, “I think people in the U.S. are very aware that they can vote…. But the much more
influential part of what we can do in a democratic society is communicate with our representatives.” In her experience, despite how it might feel, outreach from ordinary constituents can have a massive impact on how a congressperson votes, and even on how legislation is drafted.
Jarvis acknowledges that it is a “uniquely difficult time” for science policy, and that’s part of why she believes it’s important to engage on the individual level in small activities to train the brain to conserve resources. “There’s an ebb and a flow to that. There’s a pendulum,” she said “People get angry. They get angry about the economy, they get angry about various things, but the more [sustainability] becomes a pervasive part of their life, the more it hopefully persists even as that pendulum’s swinging.” After everything, Jarvis describes herself as “probably optimistic to a fault — partly because that is truly my worldview, and partly because that is the worldview I want to have.”
On the other hand, Trevor Zink, associate professor of management and sustainability, thinks it is important to distinguish between those individual activities that have concrete benefits and those that only serve to make us feel better about ourselves. His biggest point of concern is the general embrace of recycling, which he sees as an ultimately inefficient and actively harmful practice.
“When you recycle a kilogram of aluminum, you replace about 10% of a kilogram of primary aluminum [produced through mining], which is not enough to make it worthwhile,” Zink said. Although in theory aluminum is the ideal candidate for recycling because it does not degrade as it goes through the process, in practice there are market forces that lead manufacturers to produce primary aluminum as well as producing recycled material. “If recycled aluminum does not prevent primary production,” said Zink, “you just make things worse. You can replace the word aluminum with any recycled product, and you get the same result.”
Zink understands the widespread focus on recycling. “We have been taught from when we were children that recycling makes you a good person,” he said. “When I recycle, I will undo all my sins of consumption … You won’t, but it goes into our psychology.” On the bright side, the effectiveness of the pro-recycling campaign illustrates in his view the potential for similar public opinion shifts on other matters — specifically the issue of beef consumption, which is one of the single largest environmental impact issues in modern America.
“People’s choices are malleable,” he said. “Given the right messaging, it’s possible to use tools like social media to change people’s opinions on cattle consumption.” Ultimately, Zink believes that people need to be more willing to challenge misinformation and miseducation, especially when it disguises itself as opinion. “There’s a real aversion to having disagreements… Some opinions are flat-wrong. Your preferences are yours, and I can’t say anything about those, but your opinions are about things that have a truth value… We should be less afraid of telling people their opinions are wrong.”
While all of panelists agreed on the need for action, they have meaningfully different views on how to approach the looming and present climate crisis. What should our takeaway be, as people learning from the experts? In the view of one of the student moderators, Nicolas Salkin, a senior physics and mathematics major, “We need to start assessing this issue by first internalizing the magnitude of the situation and then responding appropriately.” He adds, “We need to fight against the urge to give into nihilism … something that is all too easy to do given our current leaders.”
LMU has signed on to the Laudato Si’ Action Platform, a global initiative inspired by Pope Francis’ encyclical On Care of Our Common Home (Laudato Si’) that will guide our institutional journey to ecological renewal by 2030. To learn more, visit lmu.edu/lsap.
