Respecting our environment: Dignity through Caring for the Earth

Matthew Bach leads work on justice, equity and democracy in the European region at ICLEI – a global network of more than 2500 local and regional governments committed to sustainability. Over the past decades, he has developed extensive knowledge of climate, energy and sustainability and a track record of designing innovative international programs, including multi-stakeholder and multi-level processes. He supports cities in integrating justice into their environmental policies and plans, and has served as EU Climate Pact Ambassador. He holds degrees from the Universities of Freiburg and Cambridge.

This is a fascinating Series because it challenges us to view the environment through the lens of human dignity and the human experience, rather than solely through the lens of hard science. Although the term ‘dignity’ isn't widely used in this area, there is a realisation that our environment is inextricably linked to human dignity and harming it exacerbates social and Global North / South disparities.

For a long time the environmental movement was on the periphery; but this has changed, fast. We now have the political will to legislate strict net zero policies at scale; to protect tropical forests and other natural resources; to explore human rights-based solutions to climate change. But at the heart of the issue is the potential to deepen inequality, create new patterns of exclusion, and harm people and the planet if we are not mindful.

New economic thinking is a potential solution to balance planetary boundaries (what the Earth can cope with) and the social minimum (what humanity needs to survive and thrive). Articulated in Kate Raworth’s Donut Economics, it’s the sweet spot (pun intended) that balances the dignity of people and all living beings within the parameters of our planet’s ecosystem. While the message that we can’t all consume more without serious consequences is unpopular, I’m encouraged by our direction of travel.

Cross pollinating ideas

The subtlety lies in localising this thinking to ensure civic participation and agency. It requires tending to ideas so they take root in their own special environments and acquire a local flavour. To not only help farmers transport their crops, but to make sure the crops are suited to local soil conditions. This is where we come in through our work at ICLEI, network weaving in and between cities and levels of government through a type of knowledge brokerage. Getting different people to talk, listen and understand one another and translating this between physical, technical and emotional languages to reach common ground will ultimately help cities become more sustainable and define policies and action plans to keep climate commitments.

We also focus on changing framework conditions because cities are not autonomous entities; each operates within the confines of national and international regulation. So perhaps we’re a translation agency of thought. With so many moving parts, building connections with a clear environmental strategy is a large undertaking. Power asymmetries can lead to poor planning and subpar implementation, so our goal is also to make the links between urban and rural work as productive as possible.

There’s a tendency from political actors to be into words like ‘replication’ and ‘upscaling’ - the idea that one size idea fits all. It doesn’t. Hitting copy / paste almost always fails. The good news is there is great value in peer learning, and we’ve seen many cases where surprising peer learning has taken place. City managers from Lisbon and Bologna, cities with extensive sustainability expertise, visited Turin in Italy and were inspired by its network of neighbourhood houses serving not only as a civic spaces but also providing social services . Here’s the key: thinking about how different applications can be adapted to local contexts. It’s great to go out and explore what others are doing, what works, what doesn't, identify similar challenges. There's a lot of innovation at local level.

Grafting is the act of joining two plants together. The upper part becomes the top of the plant, the lower portion the root system or part of the trunk. Although grafting usually refers to joining only two plants, it may be a combination of several. It involves sharing, co-creating, adapting. It’s an appropriate analogy for our Fair Local Green Deals project , a project supported by Porticus, where five cities with very different contexts across Poland, Spain and Belgium are designing a Local Green Deal process in an inclusive, participative way. It has worked so well to share process thinking then implement locally relevant solutions. This has really inspired me.

Consultation is key

The Yellow Jackets (Gilets Jaunes) movement was a seminal moment. On the face of it, an environmentally positive measure aimed at reducing diesel consumption had adverse effects on rural and sub-urban communities. Another example is the vandalism of London’s recently installed ultra-low emission zone cameras. A potentially great idea has not taken seed because people have not been involved in its germination. This is why balancing interests is so important. Centralised planning and rapid, technocratic implementation can ultimately do more harm than good.

Meaningful local engagement to address people’s frustrations, fears, and aspirations takes time and the challenge is to juggle these elements. At the moment, most balls are being dropped and we risk brandishing Europe as an example for the world to behold. It's much easier to say, ‘we in Berlin, Paris or London are going to make a grand scheme and not consult anyone… right, everyone else, get on with it!’ Interventions developed with those who deal with their consequences are much more effective and enduring.

I also wonder whether it’s just and fair to invest astronomical sums to make Europe (marginally) greener, when money could be spent more effectively elsewhere. I was in Nairobi earlier this year speaking to local authorities across Kenya. They face so many basic level environmental challenges that could be overcome with relative ease and make a huge impact, for example, waste management. And here’s my concern:

Are we creating a green oasis in Europe in a broader planet that's not particularly green?

Is it appropriate, from a postcolonial perspective, to say, ‘we're going to make Europe an example’ when we could channel more resources to support actions in the Global South? ICLEI has Global South and North offices to ensure equitable and people-centred development across both. I would venture to say that it should not be an either / or. We need to make sure we are not simply exporting smokestacks elsewhere.

A virtuous cycle of small changes

There are many great organisations trying to level the divide and look at urban environmental policy and the circular economy to change how we consume and produce materials and energy; to make local government and community-led climate and sustainability initiatives around the world more visible. Many cities are working on adaptive reuse of cultural heritage. Instead of tearing down old factories, for example, they repurpose them to reduce environmental impact. Bigger cities can learn so much from smaller ones that are not on everyone's map. Cluj Napoca, Romania’s second most populous city, has come up with inspiring ideas on fostering creative industries at a city level that also focus on sustainability.

Through a virtuous cycle of small changes and by pulling localisation out of the rubble and using it as the foundation for building policies, we’ll be better able to respect human dignity and the dignity of our natural environment. This is our only planet so the stakes are high.