by Lucy Kramer<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Really, it is quite difficult to decide where to start, when dealing with COP, and climate change in general. Coming into Dubai, I had just finished reading a book called Ishmael<\/em> by Daniel Quinn about the two people of the world, the \u201ctakers\u201d and the \u201cleavers.\u201d This incited a deep curiosity: how are changing systems being addressed at COP28, and is there a recognition of the structures that caused climate change and unequal emissions? Certainly high emitting and developed countries have contributed the most to climate change, now and historically\u2014as Ishmael would note, \u201cthe takers.\u201d Our ways of life, which includes economic structures, governance, and consumer habits are all part of the cause.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are two U.S. Center events that I want to highlight\u2014one was with the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The H.U.D. representative surprised me\u2014by recognizing the department’s previous philosophy of pushing housing developments farther and farther from the city center and jobs, contributing to harmful urban sprawl, where black and brown communities were pushed into areas with less access and more reliance on cars. The D.O.T. spoke to their project of buying land that has direct access to these transportation centers, and with this being able to keep this value from developers’ hands, so it can remain affordable and dense near public transportation. At COP28, there has been a lot of voice for the energy transition and corporate innovation to lead electric cars and clean energy. At this meeting, I saw cities being addressed as a place for structural change; these departments of the U.S. government needed to work together to create cities that are just\u2014to the extent possible within settler-colonial property. We must keep it in mind\u2014in our personal lives, as well as negotiations at places like COP\u2014how far we are from this justice, and how the fundamental organization of the U.S. is, as well. At this COP, \u201csilos\u201d have been called upon often, referring to solutions isolated in different sectors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The panel immediately following at the U.S. center was led by Jade Begay, a leader of the NDN collective. She and her colleagues talked about a new method of lending, which they are working with and for Indigenous communities in the U.S. The paradigm of this financial model is based on love. Kim Pate, the managing director of the NDN fund, reminded the audience that \u201cthe relationships are inverted in the current structure; we must indigenize all policies and practices.\u201d This is a sentiment echoed by the head of the UN Global Climate Change Innovation Hub, who sees the need for an entire reshaping of our economic systems, in ways that do not function with money, or climate change for that matter, as their sole outcomes. First, they must serve human needs, with profits as one indicator, and planetary thresholds as limits. <\/p>\n\n\n\n by Lucy Kramer Really, it is quite difficult to decide where to start, when dealing with COP, and climate change in general. Coming into Dubai, I had just finished reading a book called Ishmael by Daniel Quinn about the two people of the world, the \u201ctakers\u201d and the \u201cleavers.\u201d This incited a deep curiosity: how … <\/p>\n
What is behind the \u201csilos\u201d is not normally spelled out. Recognizing the failure of compartmentalizing different parts of life\u2014business, transportation, housing, health, and certainly the environment\u2014suggests a recognition of a broader failure. A speaker at the UN Innovation Hub immediately pointed out that historically, government models often follow business models, and they continue to do so. This is the broader failure\u2014which is probably why they worked so far, so well. But to achieve what? They have gotten us to the point we are now\u201428 years of COP\u2019s to try to solve a fading 1.5 degree warming goal. New\u2014and traditional, tested models\u2014are emerging in recognition. In some cases slowly, implicitly, and especially in the case of Indigenous advocates: powerfully.
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"