June 29, 2024 • 47 mins
In this episode of "Talking Environment," host Gevorg Ghazaryan is joined by Professor Simon Richter, the Class of 1965 Endowed Term Professor of German and Dutch literature and culture at the University of Pennsylvania. Professor Richter, a pioneer in linking literature, culture, and the environment, shares his insights on the cultural aspects of adaptation, resilience, and migration in the face of the climate emergency.
The conversation explores how cultural narratives influence our responses to climate change, shaping societal perceptions and informing adaptation strategies. Professor Richter discusses the importance of storytelling in envisioning future climate scenarios and how different cultures draw on their unique traditions to cope with climate impacts.
Tune in to "Talking Environment" to learn about the intersection of culture and climate change and discover how interdisciplinary approaches can enhance our understanding and response to this global challenge.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Hello everyone and welcome back to Talking Environment. I'm your host,
(00:04):
Gevorg Ghazaryan, and today we are honored to have Professor Simon Richter joining us.
Professor Richter is the class of 1965 in the term professor of German and
Dutch literature and culture at the University of Pennsylvania with an
interest in the intersection of literature, culture, and the environment.
Professor Richter also initiated the Penn 1.5 minute climate lectures and
(00:30):
co-founded the climate week at Penn. So welcome to the show, Professor Richter.
Thank you very much, Gebor. Awesome. So before we start, could you please give us
an introduction of what do you do, how did you come to Penn, and your journey?
Okay, so the journey is long and winding. I started as a scholar of the 18th
(00:56):
century, so the Enlightenment, mostly German but European and I guess more
widely, and now I mostly focus on cultural aspects of the climate emergency.
So how did I get from point A to point B? That was, as I said, a long and winding
road, but I think there are a few moments in that journey that I would very quickly
(01:22):
identify. One is being the academic director of Penn's exchange program in
Berlin in the academic year 2011 and 2012. I taught a course then for our
Penn students and other Ivy League members of the consortium on the cultural
(01:47):
history of the environmental movement in Germany. Basically what I wanted to
understand, it was the first for me too, I wanted to understand why was it that
Germany had a viable Green Party that was actually in government and making a
difference? Why was it at that time that Germany was successful or seemed to be
(02:07):
successful, at least was making lots of headway on the energy transition to
renewables? You know, why was it that the German population overwhelmingly was
ready to pay a premium in order to advance that energy transition? It seemed
to me those were cultural questions and so I thought, okay, we got to figure this
one out. And so we looked deeply and I discovered that it had a lot to do with
(02:31):
the literature that really concerned me. So for one thing we discovered was
that the German word for sustainability, which is Nachhaltigkeit, was used
already in a textbook on forestry in 1713. So Germans are already thinking
about sustainable yield forestry and not just thinking about it but
(02:52):
actually introducing it as a practice in their university system,
in the courses that they taught on forestry. So that was one thing.
Another, I guess, was becoming a father, which I did a little bit earlier than
that but it really, you know, after I taught this course it really dawned on me,
oh my gosh, I got two boys. And you know, right now they're about your age and so
(03:17):
as they were growing up and I became more and more aware of, you know, how
urgent and how momentous and how enormous the climate emergency was, I
realized I have to do something. In fact, I have to do everything I can. And
so that, and in my mind that always means, and this could get sloppy I guess,
(03:37):
but that always means, you know, not separating between my life and my
research and my teaching and so on. And so basically what I did is I made the
climate emergency the premise for everything that I do at the university.
So my research, my teaching, and my service, they all start from an
(03:58):
awareness of the climate emergency. And then I go on to ask myself, what can I do?
Awesome, that's great. That's a great story. And as you already like gave us an
intro to your work at Penn, could you also give us a short introduction of the
couple of initiatives, the climate week at Penn and the climate lectures and how
(04:19):
they have worked? Yeah, okay. We start with the climate lectures because that came first.
They're called the Penn 1.5 minute climate lectures. The 1.5 is of
course a conceit. It refers to the 1.5 degrees Celsius that under the best
circumstances, ideally we would not go past. 1.5 degrees of warming since the
(04:45):
Industrial Revolution is already problematic in terms of how our climate
system or Earth's climate system changes. But going beyond 1.5 is really
serious. I mean it begins to get become catastrophic at a scale that is really
difficult to deal with and will cause lots of suffering. Alright, so the idea
(05:06):
was to invite professors and other academics at the University of
Pennsylvania to speak to the climate emergency briefly from the perspective
of their discipline but also personally. You know, to the degree that they
were comfortable doing so. So I took this idea to Paul Snigowski who was, still is,
(05:31):
the college Dean, the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences because he was
sort of the host of the 62nd lectures and this was clearly an attempt to
hijack the 62nd lectures and to give them a climate focus by turning them into
1.5 with the instruction to the people who were preparing these lectures that
(05:52):
they could and should go beyond 1.5 in order to show 1.5 minutes, in order to
show how difficult it is to stay below 1.5. The first set of climate lectures
occurred in September, maybe six years ago, I'm not quite sure, and that
amounted to 20 lectures in all, five every Wednesday for four weeks running.
(06:17):
Fabulous lectures also across the disciplines, right? So from English, from
philosophy, from the design school, etc. In order to show that, you know, it
doesn't matter what discipline you're working in or studying, climate change,
intersects with what you're doing and there are people who are asking
(06:40):
questions and finding answers that would concern you, no matter where you come
from. And so that's the climate lectures. Briefly on climate week, that was an
idea that Billy Fleming from the design school and I came up with. Billy said,
you know, Simon, we're celebrating, I think it was the 25th anniversary of
(07:02):
Earth Week and Earth Week was a really, really big deal at Penn. I mean, it was
enormous, you have no idea how big it was. It brought tens of thousands of
people to Penn. There were, you know, the cast of Hare came to Philadelphia in
order to sing one of the songs from it. You know, people from the Beatniks
(07:23):
generation, like Gary Snyder, I think, but for sure, is it Ginsburg?
Ginsburg, Alan Ginsburg was here. There were, you know, really, really notable
people. Why Penn? Because of Larry McCargh and, but it was a student driven
thing. So Penn students got this thing rolling and it was huge. And so we
(07:44):
wanted to celebrate that or take note of it because there are also some problems
with it. We wanted to take note of it and use that as a sort of jumping off
point for, you know, Penn rising to that occasion again, this time not some, well,
sure, in connection with Earth Day themes, but in the context of climate
(08:07):
change. And so Billy and I took that idea to the provost. The provost approved
it. We went to the deans. They also thought it was a really important and
good idea. It was scheduled to happen during the Earth Week that year, but
COVID intervened. And so we kicked it into the fall and did the first two
online. But since then, you know, it has become sort of institutionalized, but
(08:33):
it's still very much driven not by administrators, but rather by the faculty
and the students who are involved. Awesome. That's great. And I've also, when
I first came to Penn, I've also, it was interesting to go to the lectures about
the climate. And it's also a great way to kind of know about a lot of things in a
short kind of time. So it's great. It's actually, and we also have a
(08:56):
guest, Joan Hawking. If you are familiar with him, he is also involved with the
climate week. That's correct. He is now a member of the core planning team. Yeah.
So yeah, he's from Earth and Environmental Science. I should also mention, since
we're in Kelly Reiter's house, that Kelly Reiter's house was a very early
(09:17):
participant in climate week. So, you know, that matters for two reasons. One,
we thought of Kelly Reiter's house and asked. And two, Kelly Reiter's house said,
yes, climate emergency matters. And we have a way from our perspective to
contribute to climate week. Awesome. Yeah. And I think it's really
important that all the institutions in the house get together and support. And
(09:41):
this year is going to be in the fall, right? In October or? Yes, in October.
Awesome. Yeah. So we will look out for that. And so moving forward, could you
give us a brief intro of how culture and climate change intersect? I mean,
(10:03):
we probably kind of have an idea of how they can intersect, the impact of
storytelling, of how the cinema, the art, the movies affect on us. But could you
give us like an intro of how it works, the intersection between them? Yeah,
sure. Brief is hard, but I'm going to try very, I'm going to try. Okay, so you
(10:24):
got climate scientists on one side. You've got engineers and others who are
sort of solution driven as well. And then across a Gulf, you have policymakers,
opinion makers, the public, educational institutions, et cetera. And the space
(10:48):
in between them, I'm going to identify for the purposes of this conversation as
culture. There's a disconnect, continues, but there was a really, really strong
disconnect between what the scientists were doing, what the engineers were
doing, and the, let's say the lack of their ability to communicate to a
(11:11):
broader public so that you get the kind of critical mass, the kind of momentum,
you know, the public opinion, policymakers prioritizing climate change related
things, et cetera. There is a gap there. And that's the opportunity for people
who are concerned with communication. And that can be, you know, journalism for
(11:32):
sure, other forms of communication that aren't necessarily, let's say in the in
the realm of the creative arts, though it's really difficult for me to separate
these things out. I mean, some of the people I read with great admiration and
profit are climate journalists. They are masters of their craft, right? But at
(11:54):
any rate, so it's in that space. And there's a whole lot that happens there,
right? And it can be in terms of film, it's social media, et cetera, things that
go viral that catch lots and lots of people's attention and so on. But to my
thinking, and this concerns my own work, let's say, going viral isn't necessarily
(12:19):
the goal. Having the products of our creative efforts, you know, seen by
millions of people isn't necessarily what we're aiming for. What we're aiming for
is impact, right? And not impact in a way that just diffuses over the world, but
(12:40):
very targeted kinds of impact. So to bring this really to the work that I'm
doing with my partner, Joshua Mosley, and the students that I work with, and all
of the partners that I have in the Netherlands and Germany and Indonesia
and so on, we look to influence policymakers. So we make animated videos
(13:02):
about cultural aspects of climate adaptation, mostly in the Netherlands, but
insofar as the Netherlands is a sort of a signal country because of its precarious,
below sea level situation, it's relevant for many low-lying countries, regions,
cities, et cetera. So we recognize in ways that I think are really important that
(13:29):
climate adaptation is complicated. And to sort of to reduce and simplify is to
falsify the situation, and it doesn't really get you further. But it's important
to call attention. It's important to tell the story about the complexity in a way
that is clear and that gets you further, further along. And that helps sway
(13:57):
policymakers as well as the public, as well as folks operating in the sector,
the climate sector, the adaptation sector, the water sector, et cetera, so that they
get a better understanding of what they're doing. It might be a sort of meta
understanding that gives them some perspective and helps them realize, oh,
(14:18):
actually, what we're doing right now is a form of maladaptation. It might seem to
make sense in the moment, but in a bigger picture, it doesn't make sense, and
therefore, we need to reassess, et cetera. So anyway, I think there are cultural
reasons why things aren't, let's say, moving as fast as they should. There are
(14:41):
cultural reasons why people prefer one kind of solution over another, and it
might be the case that the solution they prefer is the one that just is
convenient, easy, the way we always did things, et cetera. And that needs to be
called into question. And animated video and other sort of cultural modes are
(15:06):
really effective ways, when targeted, of bringing about change, change in the
minds of policymakers or of others who are involved. And that's what we aim for.
Awesome. Yeah, that's great. And you also mentioned about your work in
Indonesia, the Netherlands, and Germany in the United States, and you have done a
(15:29):
lot of work in these countries and others, too. I also personally come from
Armenia, which is, I think, the problem of climate change is perceived very
differently than here in the United States. And I think it is also a great
aspect of the culture and how the society perceives the problem, I would say.
(15:56):
And so how do you think, what does the cross-cultural perspectives look like
with your experience that you have done in these different countries? And I mean,
for example, in Armenia, there are more urgent questions that need to be solved,
and in many other countries, too, especially in the third world countries.
(16:17):
And how do you think the society, the culture should aim this issue,
considering that it is urgent, but it may not be as urgent as other issues?
Right, yeah. It's a really great question, Gorg, and it requires, let's say,
(16:38):
a differentiated and relatively subtle answer. I'm going to first make a really
big division between mitigation and adaptation, right? In the case of
countries of the global south, developing countries, countries where the carbon
footprint per capita is really small, where historical carbon is practically
(17:02):
non-existent, to sort of impose or require those countries to put their all
into an energy transition to renewables without providing adequate support is
ridiculous, right, on the face of it. And that, I think, goes to the question
(17:22):
about there are more urgent issues, right? So that issue is urgent, and it's
very urgent for them, but the people who need to solve that problem are not the
citizens of that vulnerable country, but rather the United States, China,
the European Union, historical emitters and currently large-scale emitters of
(17:44):
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. So that's the mitigation question.
The climate adaptation question, however, that integrates well with the
urgencies that are felt in these countries. There are opportunities there,
as well as challenges and problems that really need to be addressed. So
(18:10):
employment, poverty, health, all of those are very urgent issues, and I think
that they integrate relatively seamlessly into concerns about global warming,
in the sense of things getting hotter and hotter and hotter, land becoming
less arable, water becoming more scarce, drought as a problem, if it's coastal,
(18:40):
sea level rise, you know, increasing tides, tidal intrusion, saltwater
intrusion. All of these things affect the day-to-day of people who, you know,
may be living on just a sustenance wage. And there, I think, there are
(19:02):
opportunities to intervene that can come from the ground up, can come from the
culture itself. Often in these countries, there are, you know, forms of
traditional ecological knowledge that have been abandoned under the pressure
of corporate or, you know, sort of industrial agriculture or other forms of
(19:27):
kind of global capitalism, you know, intervening there. And those forms of
traditional ecological knowledge often were all about living sustainably with
the resources at hand. In the case of low-lying areas growing with the sea, in
other words, actually, you know, rivers and the sea and the sediment that they
(19:49):
trade and the, let's say, the mangrove forests and other sea grasses and other
sorts of things, all of these things, when managed correctly or allowed to do
their job, actually result in the increase of land. So land rises, more land
grows. Now, the land that we're losing on the Louisiana coast is land that the
(20:12):
Mississippi River created over tens of thousands of years. And now, because we've
cut off the sediment flow, it's disappearing, right? Disappearing really,
really fast, eroding away at a rate that is just shocking. And that's happening
all over the world. And so returning to traditional ecological knowledge, in
(20:34):
many cases, will be very helpful. So that's just one example, but there's so
many more. So I think that funding from these nations, which they owe these
countries because their relationship to these countries have been extractive
and have involved all kinds of forms of injustice, including slavery, for
(20:54):
instance. And therefore, these wealthy countries owe them a debt. They owe them
a debt, and that debt could best be paid. They owe them reparations. That debt
could best be paid in making funding available and collaborating with the
(21:15):
countries, collaborating with in a sort of multilateral or really a dialogical
way and not a monological way with these populations to adapt to the climate
change as it occurs in that country so that employment increases, resources
(21:38):
are secured, you know, the possibility, clean water is secured, and so on. So I
think that that's where there's a real opportunity, and that's where it should
be happening. Awesome, yeah. Great examples. And we have also talked about
(21:59):
that it is the most important thing we have to talk to the policy makers. We
have to work with them, let's say. And how would you say the reaction was with
working with the policy makers in different countries? I mean, I would say,
(22:22):
I will try to give an example, let's say, let's give an example, because we have
also talked about the fundings from different institutions. Let's talk about,
let's say, the United Nations that funds climate activities in different
countries. But as you an example of a country that tries to represent in an
(22:45):
institution in different committees, but they are giving a priority to
represent it in different committees rather than the climate change. And
because of the countries, like the governments, whole priority is in
different issues. How would you say the policy makers still react to the
(23:07):
urgency of the climate change? And if they try to do some meaningful steps
towards it, or they are just trying to do something just for like a
checkmark or something else, do they really try to put a big emphasis on it?
(23:28):
So I went to my first COP, right? So my first climate summit, which was in Dubai
this past December. And I was in Dubai, and I was in the United States, and I
(23:48):
was in the United States, and I was in the United States, and I was in the
United States this past December. And I've had interactions with policy
makers, both abroad, but also at Perry World House here on the Penn campus.
And can't make a blanket statement about policy makers, but by and large,
(24:14):
if they are working in the climate space, let's say if they're at the COP,
or they've sent representatives to the COP, or if they're, let's say,
in Indonesia participating in an initiative that the Dutch government
started, and that brings together experts and policy people from the
(24:41):
Netherlands, from the United States, from Indonesia, or same program,
but then in Bangladesh or in India, etc. By and large, I am going to
assume, and I think it's safe to assume, that policy makers get it.
You can get into the details about exactly what they get, because there is
(25:01):
great, there's a tendency, not just among policy makers, but among people in
general, to lowball the impacts of climate change, not to want to
acknowledge or recognize how scary it is, because it's scary.
(25:25):
All of them, doesn't matter, Global North, Global South, every policy maker
recognizes how serious climate change is, and at the same time, they have
brakes on what they're willing to do, they'll apply the brakes, and they'll
apply the brakes for various reasons. Let's say, if they're in a democracy,
(25:49):
or let's say a country that holds elections, it's tricky, because there's
a trend towards populism, and populists get mileage out of denying climate
change, and saying, it's not there, it's ridiculous to be spending this kind
(26:11):
of money, we could use this money elsewhere, and it would be of more
immediate benefit, etc. There are many voters who are willing to listen to
this. That means that the policy maker, who is operating in a country where
elections are held, needs to be strategic about what they do, and
(26:34):
what they say, what they can do, what they can't do, etc. We could look at
our country as an example, I said our country, but what do I know? We could
look at the United States as an example, I happen to be an American citizen, so
I'll say that. I think, for instance, that Biden has done a great deal, the
(26:56):
Biden government has done an enormous amount of work, most of it is stealth,
so it's happening under the radar, and that's strategic. It's strategic
because if they trumpeted it, there would probably be a huge backlash, so
it's risky, so they're working really, really hard behind the scenes. Some of
(27:16):
it is upfront, like the IRAs, the Inflation Reduction Act, the
infrastructure legislation, and so on, that they got through, they had to do
that, that was important, but I have a feeling they're not touting it as
much as you would maybe expect, because if folks really realized how much they
(27:37):
were doing, there would probably be a backlash. At the same time, they're
approving new natural gas and oil extraction all over the place, and
they've made all kinds of compromises with Manchin, with others, in order to
do what they needed to do. So that's just an example of how a policymaker
(27:58):
can be aware, knows what they need to do, and is working towards it, but at the
same time has to apply the brakes, has to be discreet, can't do, etc. In other
instances where maybe elections aren't such a big deal, and I'm not saying
this isn't the case in this country either, of course, you have to work with
your industry, with your economy, etc., and there too it gets tricky. It's
(28:22):
like, what are the powers behind the power, and how do you get them on board,
etc. So politics is by its nature, you know, a really, what we say, a dynamic
and tricky kind of game, and I think that's how folks are operating in
this space. I think it's really, really important, because you can get kind
(28:46):
of depressed or discouraged by, you know, that situation, but I think that's a
relatively realistic description of the situation. It's really important not to
lose sight of the fact that in the field of technology, there is such an
explosion of research and implementation going on, innovation going on, that
(29:14):
it's become a really exciting thing to watch. I mean, I sometimes think of
where we are right now as being like in a thriller. We're in the midst of an
eco-thriller, where we know who the bad guys are, the fossil fuel folks, and
the dark money, etc., and all those things that are working against us or
(29:36):
working against, you know, what needs to be done, the various transitions that
need to be done, and that's really discouraging, but there are so many good
guys operating in many different areas, and as is appropriate, I think, for an
eco-thriller, in the technology sector, there's a kind of like race against
time, just like we were racing, you know, to get a COVID vaccination in the
(30:02):
shortest imaginable, you know, amount of time. We are also doing that, you know,
for sources of renewable energy, etc., all kinds of other things as well, and
at universities like Penn in the United States, but in universities all over the
world, also in China, etc., things are moving at such an incredibly fast clip.
(30:24):
We have no idea. So while you've got climate change really ratcheting up and
going faster and faster, like accelerating sea level rise, ice sheet
melt in Antarctica and Greenland, slowing down of the ocean, you know,
circulation system, you know, all of these things that you can point to that
are accelerating, it's also accelerating on the other side, and that's why it
(30:47):
seems like a thriller where you just don't know, you know, which one's going
to cross the finish line first.
Yeah, yeah. It was a great example of how, like, they intersect, and they're
great, and they're a great way to also introduce how the policy, policymaking
process goes under the scenes for the climate change initiatives and
everything connected to the climate. So thank you so much for that. And yeah, I
(31:12):
think this will also be helpful for the folks that are also interested in the
policymaking field in the climate change. And yeah, so going back to the culture,
you mentioned about the animation films, animation movies that you make, and you
also encourage people to make that. I also think it has a great impact on
(31:37):
people, on how people perceive the climate change, of how urgent it is, of
what we need to do. I mean, and this example was seen with other problems in
the society that was decided to show through movies, through cultures, through
storytelling, let's say, for example, feminism problems that people try to
(32:01):
show through movies, or try to make people understand it. So how would you
see, but for climate change, as a kid growing up, I wouldn't say I've seen
that much of movies with an emphasis on climate change or trying to teach
people about this issue. And most of the most of the movies and the animation
(32:23):
projects that I came through, it was from the from the students from the
universities, or people who were trying to make it accessible, but I wouldn't
say it was from big, big productions that are trying to make it available for
wider audiences. So how would you say I mean, I think it's important to say
(32:47):
the first question will probably be how you how you do how do you think with
the experience that you already have, how big is the impact on people of
through movies or literature or art? How big is the impact? Do you think the
productions involved in this field actually support those initiatives and
(33:12):
also understand the urgency and try to give more funds to that? Or, yeah, what
do you think about that? Yeah, okay. Okay. So you've got Hollywood turning out
movies. Occasionally, there's a movie there that, you know, addresses
(33:37):
ecological issues. Avatar. Avatar one, the first one.
Slightly problematic movie, especially with regard to, let's say, indigenous,
the representation of indigenous people. But, and the sort of, you know, this
pattern of requiring, you know, a white western white American hero to solve
(34:01):
the problems. But it's a movie that very clearly calls it a movie. It's a
movie that very clearly calls attention to two colliding worlds, extraction,
and an indigenous way of living in harmony with the magical forces of
(34:23):
nature. And by magical, I don't mean magic. I mean, you know, the forces of
nature are just incredible. It's astonishing. All right, so that's pretty
clear. And that was seen by very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very
many people. Did it change many minds? And when you hold that one up against
(34:45):
all of the crap that Hollywood produces, which is watched at rates that exceed,
you know, let's say the rates of viewership for Avatar, and there's so
much more. And all of these, you know, pretend that climate change doesn't
exist. It's not even in the background, right? Because that's one way, one
question you can ask is, is there an awareness of climate change in the
(35:10):
narratives we tell, even if climate change isn't the focus? And in most of
these, they're not, right? It just assumes we're still in the Holocene.
Nothing is changing. It's all stable. Is there? Okay, so there's that.
And that may change yet. And if it does, it will probably change because
(35:33):
climate change insists on it. You know, for many of the changes that lie ahead
in culture and in policy, climate change is going to be the force that pushes
that through. Climate change is in a bizarre way our ally, because it will be
so insistent that you can no longer ignore it, right? Okay. But I look away
(35:58):
from that, from, let's say, the blockbusters and the kind of work that
they can do. Maybe they can, but I'm not sure. I look instead at slightly more
targeted kinds of things. So in the realm of climate fiction, I think there's a
lot of energy, a lot of innovation, a lot of outstanding storytelling going on.
And I think it's cutting across genres. And I think it's engaging new readership.
(36:23):
So I think that there's more exciting stuff happening there. And you can point
to a whole bunch of different examples, but one which I think really had the
kind of impact that I think that we aspire to. And that would be like the
work of Kim Stanley Robinson recently. So Ministry for the Future, New York 2140,
(36:44):
et cetera. These extremely well-researched, very kind of what we say comprehensive
understandings and visions of how various cultural, economic, political
systems operate in relation to nature and the climate. And how a realistic kind
(37:08):
of sense of those, but also through the complexity, the darkness, the
countervailing forces, managing to create a credible story of how we go forward
that doesn't wash over the impacts that we will undoubtedly face, but also
(37:30):
imagines how a society or how world governments or how banks, how all kinds
of players in the field willingly or unwillingly might cooperate.
You know, yeah. So I think that's incredible because Kim Stanley Robinson
with that novel really made a splash. I mean, he crossed over. So many people
(37:54):
who don't read climate fiction read that novel. Obama thought it was like a
picnic for policymakers. He just loved it. You know, it's climate fiction
for wonks. And it was really, really great. And I think you can go down a
list of many different climate fiction writers and say, wow, you know, they are
(38:14):
helping us to imagine not just how, you know, messed up things are going to be,
but how it would be possible for human institutions to respond and respond
effectively. So I think that that's really important. Can I plug Poltergeist?
I mean, we haven't even mentioned it, right? So the animated videos we make
(38:36):
feature a little character who looks somewhat like me, whose name is Dr.
Poltergeist with a D, as in the Dutch polders. And with a kind of gentle humor,
he criticizes and calls into question the way that Dutch climate adaptation is
(38:57):
proceeding and water management is working and also on the basis of research
that is done with climate adaptation experts in the Netherlands. So basically
we're promoting their difficult message, making their difficult message to Dutch
policymakers and the public more accessible and I think also more urgent,
(39:22):
more justifiable, more comprehensible so that these changes can be affected.
So that's sort of where we're working. I think that it, I started with this word,
I think, and I come back to it. I think it's really important to target, you know,
your audience, not just to sort of throw it out there, but to know what kind of
(39:46):
change is it through your cultural intervention that you want to affect.
Awesome, yeah. That's a great notice about it. We will also have the namesake
and everything about animation videos in the introduction too, so feel free to
also go and watch them. Awesome. And yeah, I think we are coming to the end and I
(40:12):
was, I wanted, if you have some kind of, let's say, call to action or some for
the people that are watching, if you would like to make, or some final remarks
about what also we people can do in these terms to also in our individual
(40:32):
efforts to help because of the climate change of what we can do to, as
individuals, to make it, yeah. Yep. Okay, so you use that word individuals and
and, you know, it's, I understand totally why that question comes, but you're an
(40:55):
individual within an institution or within multiple institutions. Premise one,
premise two, we need systemic change. You know, an individual change in their
behavior isn't going to make the difference. So that's often presented as
a sort of either or, and I reject that fundamentally. It's not an either or. You
(41:16):
as an individual have leverage. You as a young individual have less leverage than
you will have when you're 30, 40, 50. But the amount of leverage that you have
when you're 30, 40, 50 depends on how you use the leverage that you have now.
Right. The more you leverage your influence now, the more you will be able
(41:43):
to leverage later. Right. So you need to start now. By leverage, I mean, take a
look around you, see where you have influence. You have influence in your
circle of friends with the institutions you interact with, with your clubs, your
organizations within your classroom. If you're on, let's say, your major
(42:07):
advisory board, your UAB or whatever that's called, you know, you have some
influence there. You have influence, you know, possibly through actions that
could involve things like activism, say demonstrating, camping out, working with
fossil-free pen. That is a way. It's not the only way. It's a way in order to
(42:31):
create leverage. When you do that with some other individuals, you do create
leverage. You force an administration eventually to come to terms with you one
way or the other. But you can do that in other ways as well. You can work within
the institution. You can nudge and push and urge people so that they have to
respond to you. As a student, you already have considerable leverage. But if you
(42:55):
don't use it, you know, your message doesn't get out. People, you don't stand
out. People don't take notice of you. You don't find who new allies are. It's
when you make use of your leverage that people take notice of you and then you
get more opportunities. So that word leverage matters a lot to me. It's the
(43:19):
way that I explain how I, as a professor of 18th century or scholar of 18th
century German literature, you know, became one of the people who got climate
weekend pen off the ground or who gets invited by the Ministry of Infrastructure
and Water to participate in think tanks about how to adapt to sea level rise in
(43:40):
the Netherlands, etc. You know, if I hadn't done these things that I did at
early stages, like go to Paul Snigowski and say, I think we need to hijack the 60
second climate, 60 second lectures, you know, if I hadn't done that, nothing
would have happened. Right. So you have to, you have to leverage what you've got
(44:01):
in order to increase your leverage. Definitely. Yeah, I think it's the is the
right approach to it. And also, also, I think we are now in the, in the century
where we can just even if you want, if you want to get involved in the
environmental field or do something for the climate change, you can just go to
Google, maybe write some organizations I can get involved in or what I can do.
(44:24):
And it will be tons of hundreds of ways so you can get involved. And also, some
it is definitely the right approach of trying to get together with people get
together with the institutions and try to do something together. And that's the
that's the power of unity we can have in solving these problems. And also, and
(44:48):
also just trying to, and I think it doesn't take much to get involved in
something also small. It doesn't it doesn't have for all of the people, it
doesn't have to be just, let's say, dedicating our life to solving the
climate change issues, it can just be, for example, for the students just
(45:10):
joining a small student club or joining a nonprofit small nonprofits or dedicate a
couple of hours a week, which can, yeah, I don't want to diminish this step,
though. I mean, I understand small, you know, that that might be an
encouragement. But I actually want people to be ambitious. Yeah, Penn
students are ambitious. And I don't, you know, and so I'm not sure that
(45:33):
delivering a message about, oh, it's okay if it's a small step, you know,
that's because why would one want to do a small step? Yeah. So and also, I
think it's really important to realize that small step is important, but the
small step allows larger steps, right. So it's on a trajectory. I also think
that is really important to realize, it doesn't matter what discipline you
(45:55):
chose, climate change is going intersects that discipline. And, you
know, ask yourself the question or ask your professor. Definitely. Yeah. How
does it intersect? And what are you all doing? Definitely. And today we were
talking about the intersection of culture and climate change. And
(46:15):
definitely we can have all the fields kind of can intersect with climate
change. So yeah, that's, that's a great remark on that. So we are coming to
the end. Thank you so much, Professor Richter for joining us today. And it was,
it was a great conversation for all your work that you have done in this field
(46:37):
and the work that you are doing right now. It is great. And thank you so much
for sharing your experience and sharing your advice with us today. Yeah. Thank
you so much for this. And yeah, it's been my pleasure. I really enjoyed this
conversation. Thanks for giving me the chance. Thank you so much. And to all our
(46:57):
listeners, thank you so much for joining another episode of Talking Environment.
And let's continue solving the climate change issues with the efforts that we do
together. So thank you so much. Until next time, take care. Thank you.
Hello everyone and welcome back to Talking Environment. I'm your host,
(00:04):
Gevorg Ghazaryan, and today we are honored to have Professor Simon Richter joining us.
Professor Richter is the class of 1965 in the term professor of German and
Dutch literature and culture at the University of Pennsylvania with an
interest in the intersection of literature, culture, and the environment.
Professor Richter also initiated the Penn 1.5 minute climate lectures and
(00:30):
co-founded the climate week at Penn. So welcome to the show, Professor Richter.
Thank you very much, Gebor. Awesome. So before we start, could you please give us
an introduction of what do you do, how did you come to Penn, and your journey?
Okay, so the journey is long and winding. I started as a scholar of the 18th
(00:56):
century, so the Enlightenment, mostly German but European and I guess more
widely, and now I mostly focus on cultural aspects of the climate emergency.
So how did I get from point A to point B? That was, as I said, a long and winding
road, but I think there are a few moments in that journey that I would very quickly
(01:22):
identify. One is being the academic director of Penn's exchange program in
Berlin in the academic year 2011 and 2012. I taught a course then for our
Penn students and other Ivy League members of the consortium on the cultural
(01:47):
history of the environmental movement in Germany. Basically what I wanted to
understand, it was the first for me too, I wanted to understand why was it that
Germany had a viable Green Party that was actually in government and making a
difference? Why was it at that time that Germany was successful or seemed to be
(02:07):
successful, at least was making lots of headway on the energy transition to
renewables? You know, why was it that the German population overwhelmingly was
ready to pay a premium in order to advance that energy transition? It seemed
to me those were cultural questions and so I thought, okay, we got to figure this
one out. And so we looked deeply and I discovered that it had a lot to do with
(02:31):
the literature that really concerned me. So for one thing we discovered was
that the German word for sustainability, which is Nachhaltigkeit, was used
already in a textbook on forestry in 1713. So Germans are already thinking
about sustainable yield forestry and not just thinking about it but
(02:52):
actually introducing it as a practice in their university system,
in the courses that they taught on forestry. So that was one thing.
Another, I guess, was becoming a father, which I did a little bit earlier than
that but it really, you know, after I taught this course it really dawned on me,
oh my gosh, I got two boys. And you know, right now they're about your age and so
(03:17):
as they were growing up and I became more and more aware of, you know, how
urgent and how momentous and how enormous the climate emergency was, I
realized I have to do something. In fact, I have to do everything I can. And
so that, and in my mind that always means, and this could get sloppy I guess,
(03:37):
but that always means, you know, not separating between my life and my
research and my teaching and so on. And so basically what I did is I made the
climate emergency the premise for everything that I do at the university.
So my research, my teaching, and my service, they all start from an
(03:58):
awareness of the climate emergency. And then I go on to ask myself, what can I do?
Awesome, that's great. That's a great story. And as you already like gave us an
intro to your work at Penn, could you also give us a short introduction of the
couple of initiatives, the climate week at Penn and the climate lectures and how
(04:19):
they have worked? Yeah, okay. We start with the climate lectures because that came first.
They're called the Penn 1.5 minute climate lectures. The 1.5 is of
course a conceit. It refers to the 1.5 degrees Celsius that under the best
circumstances, ideally we would not go past. 1.5 degrees of warming since the
(04:45):
Industrial Revolution is already problematic in terms of how our climate
system or Earth's climate system changes. But going beyond 1.5 is really
serious. I mean it begins to get become catastrophic at a scale that is really
difficult to deal with and will cause lots of suffering. Alright, so the idea
(05:06):
was to invite professors and other academics at the University of
Pennsylvania to speak to the climate emergency briefly from the perspective
of their discipline but also personally. You know, to the degree that they
were comfortable doing so. So I took this idea to Paul Snigowski who was, still is,
(05:31):
the college Dean, the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences because he was
sort of the host of the 62nd lectures and this was clearly an attempt to
hijack the 62nd lectures and to give them a climate focus by turning them into
1.5 with the instruction to the people who were preparing these lectures that
(05:52):
they could and should go beyond 1.5 in order to show 1.5 minutes, in order to
show how difficult it is to stay below 1.5. The first set of climate lectures
occurred in September, maybe six years ago, I'm not quite sure, and that
amounted to 20 lectures in all, five every Wednesday for four weeks running.
(06:17):
Fabulous lectures also across the disciplines, right? So from English, from
philosophy, from the design school, etc. In order to show that, you know, it
doesn't matter what discipline you're working in or studying, climate change,
intersects with what you're doing and there are people who are asking
(06:40):
questions and finding answers that would concern you, no matter where you come
from. And so that's the climate lectures. Briefly on climate week, that was an
idea that Billy Fleming from the design school and I came up with. Billy said,
you know, Simon, we're celebrating, I think it was the 25th anniversary of
(07:02):
Earth Week and Earth Week was a really, really big deal at Penn. I mean, it was
enormous, you have no idea how big it was. It brought tens of thousands of
people to Penn. There were, you know, the cast of Hare came to Philadelphia in
order to sing one of the songs from it. You know, people from the Beatniks
(07:23):
generation, like Gary Snyder, I think, but for sure, is it Ginsburg?
Ginsburg, Alan Ginsburg was here. There were, you know, really, really notable
people. Why Penn? Because of Larry McCargh and, but it was a student driven
thing. So Penn students got this thing rolling and it was huge. And so we
(07:44):
wanted to celebrate that or take note of it because there are also some problems
with it. We wanted to take note of it and use that as a sort of jumping off
point for, you know, Penn rising to that occasion again, this time not some, well,
sure, in connection with Earth Day themes, but in the context of climate
(08:07):
change. And so Billy and I took that idea to the provost. The provost approved
it. We went to the deans. They also thought it was a really important and
good idea. It was scheduled to happen during the Earth Week that year, but
COVID intervened. And so we kicked it into the fall and did the first two
online. But since then, you know, it has become sort of institutionalized, but
(08:33):
it's still very much driven not by administrators, but rather by the faculty
and the students who are involved. Awesome. That's great. And I've also, when
I first came to Penn, I've also, it was interesting to go to the lectures about
the climate. And it's also a great way to kind of know about a lot of things in a
short kind of time. So it's great. It's actually, and we also have a
(08:56):
guest, Joan Hawking. If you are familiar with him, he is also involved with the
climate week. That's correct. He is now a member of the core planning team. Yeah.
So yeah, he's from Earth and Environmental Science. I should also mention, since
we're in Kelly Reiter's house, that Kelly Reiter's house was a very early
(09:17):
participant in climate week. So, you know, that matters for two reasons. One,
we thought of Kelly Reiter's house and asked. And two, Kelly Reiter's house said,
yes, climate emergency matters. And we have a way from our perspective to
contribute to climate week. Awesome. Yeah. And I think it's really
important that all the institutions in the house get together and support. And
(09:41):
this year is going to be in the fall, right? In October or? Yes, in October.
Awesome. Yeah. So we will look out for that. And so moving forward, could you
give us a brief intro of how culture and climate change intersect? I mean,
(10:03):
we probably kind of have an idea of how they can intersect, the impact of
storytelling, of how the cinema, the art, the movies affect on us. But could you
give us like an intro of how it works, the intersection between them? Yeah,
sure. Brief is hard, but I'm going to try very, I'm going to try. Okay, so you
(10:24):
got climate scientists on one side. You've got engineers and others who are
sort of solution driven as well. And then across a Gulf, you have policymakers,
opinion makers, the public, educational institutions, et cetera. And the space
(10:48):
in between them, I'm going to identify for the purposes of this conversation as
culture. There's a disconnect, continues, but there was a really, really strong
disconnect between what the scientists were doing, what the engineers were
doing, and the, let's say the lack of their ability to communicate to a
(11:11):
broader public so that you get the kind of critical mass, the kind of momentum,
you know, the public opinion, policymakers prioritizing climate change related
things, et cetera. There is a gap there. And that's the opportunity for people
who are concerned with communication. And that can be, you know, journalism for
(11:32):
sure, other forms of communication that aren't necessarily, let's say in the in
the realm of the creative arts, though it's really difficult for me to separate
these things out. I mean, some of the people I read with great admiration and
profit are climate journalists. They are masters of their craft, right? But at
(11:54):
any rate, so it's in that space. And there's a whole lot that happens there,
right? And it can be in terms of film, it's social media, et cetera, things that
go viral that catch lots and lots of people's attention and so on. But to my
thinking, and this concerns my own work, let's say, going viral isn't necessarily
(12:19):
the goal. Having the products of our creative efforts, you know, seen by
millions of people isn't necessarily what we're aiming for. What we're aiming for
is impact, right? And not impact in a way that just diffuses over the world, but
(12:40):
very targeted kinds of impact. So to bring this really to the work that I'm
doing with my partner, Joshua Mosley, and the students that I work with, and all
of the partners that I have in the Netherlands and Germany and Indonesia
and so on, we look to influence policymakers. So we make animated videos
(13:02):
about cultural aspects of climate adaptation, mostly in the Netherlands, but
insofar as the Netherlands is a sort of a signal country because of its precarious,
below sea level situation, it's relevant for many low-lying countries, regions,
cities, et cetera. So we recognize in ways that I think are really important that
(13:29):
climate adaptation is complicated. And to sort of to reduce and simplify is to
falsify the situation, and it doesn't really get you further. But it's important
to call attention. It's important to tell the story about the complexity in a way
that is clear and that gets you further, further along. And that helps sway
(13:57):
policymakers as well as the public, as well as folks operating in the sector,
the climate sector, the adaptation sector, the water sector, et cetera, so that they
get a better understanding of what they're doing. It might be a sort of meta
understanding that gives them some perspective and helps them realize, oh,
(14:18):
actually, what we're doing right now is a form of maladaptation. It might seem to
make sense in the moment, but in a bigger picture, it doesn't make sense, and
therefore, we need to reassess, et cetera. So anyway, I think there are cultural
reasons why things aren't, let's say, moving as fast as they should. There are
(14:41):
cultural reasons why people prefer one kind of solution over another, and it
might be the case that the solution they prefer is the one that just is
convenient, easy, the way we always did things, et cetera. And that needs to be
called into question. And animated video and other sort of cultural modes are
(15:06):
really effective ways, when targeted, of bringing about change, change in the
minds of policymakers or of others who are involved. And that's what we aim for.
Awesome. Yeah, that's great. And you also mentioned about your work in
Indonesia, the Netherlands, and Germany in the United States, and you have done a
(15:29):
lot of work in these countries and others, too. I also personally come from
Armenia, which is, I think, the problem of climate change is perceived very
differently than here in the United States. And I think it is also a great
aspect of the culture and how the society perceives the problem, I would say.
(15:56):
And so how do you think, what does the cross-cultural perspectives look like
with your experience that you have done in these different countries? And I mean,
for example, in Armenia, there are more urgent questions that need to be solved,
and in many other countries, too, especially in the third world countries.
(16:17):
And how do you think the society, the culture should aim this issue,
considering that it is urgent, but it may not be as urgent as other issues?
Right, yeah. It's a really great question, Gorg, and it requires, let's say,
(16:38):
a differentiated and relatively subtle answer. I'm going to first make a really
big division between mitigation and adaptation, right? In the case of
countries of the global south, developing countries, countries where the carbon
footprint per capita is really small, where historical carbon is practically
(17:02):
non-existent, to sort of impose or require those countries to put their all
into an energy transition to renewables without providing adequate support is
ridiculous, right, on the face of it. And that, I think, goes to the question
(17:22):
about there are more urgent issues, right? So that issue is urgent, and it's
very urgent for them, but the people who need to solve that problem are not the
citizens of that vulnerable country, but rather the United States, China,
the European Union, historical emitters and currently large-scale emitters of
(17:44):
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. So that's the mitigation question.
The climate adaptation question, however, that integrates well with the
urgencies that are felt in these countries. There are opportunities there,
as well as challenges and problems that really need to be addressed. So
(18:10):
employment, poverty, health, all of those are very urgent issues, and I think
that they integrate relatively seamlessly into concerns about global warming,
in the sense of things getting hotter and hotter and hotter, land becoming
less arable, water becoming more scarce, drought as a problem, if it's coastal,
(18:40):
sea level rise, you know, increasing tides, tidal intrusion, saltwater
intrusion. All of these things affect the day-to-day of people who, you know,
may be living on just a sustenance wage. And there, I think, there are
(19:02):
opportunities to intervene that can come from the ground up, can come from the
culture itself. Often in these countries, there are, you know, forms of
traditional ecological knowledge that have been abandoned under the pressure
of corporate or, you know, sort of industrial agriculture or other forms of
(19:27):
kind of global capitalism, you know, intervening there. And those forms of
traditional ecological knowledge often were all about living sustainably with
the resources at hand. In the case of low-lying areas growing with the sea, in
other words, actually, you know, rivers and the sea and the sediment that they
(19:49):
trade and the, let's say, the mangrove forests and other sea grasses and other
sorts of things, all of these things, when managed correctly or allowed to do
their job, actually result in the increase of land. So land rises, more land
grows. Now, the land that we're losing on the Louisiana coast is land that the
(20:12):
Mississippi River created over tens of thousands of years. And now, because we've
cut off the sediment flow, it's disappearing, right? Disappearing really,
really fast, eroding away at a rate that is just shocking. And that's happening
all over the world. And so returning to traditional ecological knowledge, in
(20:34):
many cases, will be very helpful. So that's just one example, but there's so
many more. So I think that funding from these nations, which they owe these
countries because their relationship to these countries have been extractive
and have involved all kinds of forms of injustice, including slavery, for
(20:54):
instance. And therefore, these wealthy countries owe them a debt. They owe them
a debt, and that debt could best be paid. They owe them reparations. That debt
could best be paid in making funding available and collaborating with the
(21:15):
countries, collaborating with in a sort of multilateral or really a dialogical
way and not a monological way with these populations to adapt to the climate
change as it occurs in that country so that employment increases, resources
(21:38):
are secured, you know, the possibility, clean water is secured, and so on. So I
think that that's where there's a real opportunity, and that's where it should
be happening. Awesome, yeah. Great examples. And we have also talked about
(21:59):
that it is the most important thing we have to talk to the policy makers. We
have to work with them, let's say. And how would you say the reaction was with
working with the policy makers in different countries? I mean, I would say,
(22:22):
I will try to give an example, let's say, let's give an example, because we have
also talked about the fundings from different institutions. Let's talk about,
let's say, the United Nations that funds climate activities in different
countries. But as you an example of a country that tries to represent in an
(22:45):
institution in different committees, but they are giving a priority to
represent it in different committees rather than the climate change. And
because of the countries, like the governments, whole priority is in
different issues. How would you say the policy makers still react to the
(23:07):
urgency of the climate change? And if they try to do some meaningful steps
towards it, or they are just trying to do something just for like a
checkmark or something else, do they really try to put a big emphasis on it?
(23:28):
So I went to my first COP, right? So my first climate summit, which was in Dubai
this past December. And I was in Dubai, and I was in the United States, and I
(23:48):
was in the United States, and I was in the United States, and I was in the
United States this past December. And I've had interactions with policy
makers, both abroad, but also at Perry World House here on the Penn campus.
And can't make a blanket statement about policy makers, but by and large,
(24:14):
if they are working in the climate space, let's say if they're at the COP,
or they've sent representatives to the COP, or if they're, let's say,
in Indonesia participating in an initiative that the Dutch government
started, and that brings together experts and policy people from the
(24:41):
Netherlands, from the United States, from Indonesia, or same program,
but then in Bangladesh or in India, etc. By and large, I am going to
assume, and I think it's safe to assume, that policy makers get it.
You can get into the details about exactly what they get, because there is
(25:01):
great, there's a tendency, not just among policy makers, but among people in
general, to lowball the impacts of climate change, not to want to
acknowledge or recognize how scary it is, because it's scary.
(25:25):
All of them, doesn't matter, Global North, Global South, every policy maker
recognizes how serious climate change is, and at the same time, they have
brakes on what they're willing to do, they'll apply the brakes, and they'll
apply the brakes for various reasons. Let's say, if they're in a democracy,
(25:49):
or let's say a country that holds elections, it's tricky, because there's
a trend towards populism, and populists get mileage out of denying climate
change, and saying, it's not there, it's ridiculous to be spending this kind
(26:11):
of money, we could use this money elsewhere, and it would be of more
immediate benefit, etc. There are many voters who are willing to listen to
this. That means that the policy maker, who is operating in a country where
elections are held, needs to be strategic about what they do, and
(26:34):
what they say, what they can do, what they can't do, etc. We could look at
our country as an example, I said our country, but what do I know? We could
look at the United States as an example, I happen to be an American citizen, so
I'll say that. I think, for instance, that Biden has done a great deal, the
(26:56):
Biden government has done an enormous amount of work, most of it is stealth,
so it's happening under the radar, and that's strategic. It's strategic
because if they trumpeted it, there would probably be a huge backlash, so
it's risky, so they're working really, really hard behind the scenes. Some of
(27:16):
it is upfront, like the IRAs, the Inflation Reduction Act, the
infrastructure legislation, and so on, that they got through, they had to do
that, that was important, but I have a feeling they're not touting it as
much as you would maybe expect, because if folks really realized how much they
(27:37):
were doing, there would probably be a backlash. At the same time, they're
approving new natural gas and oil extraction all over the place, and
they've made all kinds of compromises with Manchin, with others, in order to
do what they needed to do. So that's just an example of how a policymaker
(27:58):
can be aware, knows what they need to do, and is working towards it, but at the
same time has to apply the brakes, has to be discreet, can't do, etc. In other
instances where maybe elections aren't such a big deal, and I'm not saying
this isn't the case in this country either, of course, you have to work with
your industry, with your economy, etc., and there too it gets tricky. It's
(28:22):
like, what are the powers behind the power, and how do you get them on board,
etc. So politics is by its nature, you know, a really, what we say, a dynamic
and tricky kind of game, and I think that's how folks are operating in
this space. I think it's really, really important, because you can get kind
(28:46):
of depressed or discouraged by, you know, that situation, but I think that's a
relatively realistic description of the situation. It's really important not to
lose sight of the fact that in the field of technology, there is such an
explosion of research and implementation going on, innovation going on, that
(29:14):
it's become a really exciting thing to watch. I mean, I sometimes think of
where we are right now as being like in a thriller. We're in the midst of an
eco-thriller, where we know who the bad guys are, the fossil fuel folks, and
the dark money, etc., and all those things that are working against us or
(29:36):
working against, you know, what needs to be done, the various transitions that
need to be done, and that's really discouraging, but there are so many good
guys operating in many different areas, and as is appropriate, I think, for an
eco-thriller, in the technology sector, there's a kind of like race against
time, just like we were racing, you know, to get a COVID vaccination in the
(30:02):
shortest imaginable, you know, amount of time. We are also doing that, you know,
for sources of renewable energy, etc., all kinds of other things as well, and
at universities like Penn in the United States, but in universities all over the
world, also in China, etc., things are moving at such an incredibly fast clip.
(30:24):
We have no idea. So while you've got climate change really ratcheting up and
going faster and faster, like accelerating sea level rise, ice sheet
melt in Antarctica and Greenland, slowing down of the ocean, you know,
circulation system, you know, all of these things that you can point to that
are accelerating, it's also accelerating on the other side, and that's why it
(30:47):
seems like a thriller where you just don't know, you know, which one's going
to cross the finish line first.
Yeah, yeah. It was a great example of how, like, they intersect, and they're
great, and they're a great way to also introduce how the policy, policymaking
process goes under the scenes for the climate change initiatives and
everything connected to the climate. So thank you so much for that. And yeah, I
(31:12):
think this will also be helpful for the folks that are also interested in the
policymaking field in the climate change. And yeah, so going back to the culture,
you mentioned about the animation films, animation movies that you make, and you
also encourage people to make that. I also think it has a great impact on
(31:37):
people, on how people perceive the climate change, of how urgent it is, of
what we need to do. I mean, and this example was seen with other problems in
the society that was decided to show through movies, through cultures, through
storytelling, let's say, for example, feminism problems that people try to
(32:01):
show through movies, or try to make people understand it. So how would you
see, but for climate change, as a kid growing up, I wouldn't say I've seen
that much of movies with an emphasis on climate change or trying to teach
people about this issue. And most of the most of the movies and the animation
(32:23):
projects that I came through, it was from the from the students from the
universities, or people who were trying to make it accessible, but I wouldn't
say it was from big, big productions that are trying to make it available for
wider audiences. So how would you say I mean, I think it's important to say
(32:47):
the first question will probably be how you how you do how do you think with
the experience that you already have, how big is the impact on people of
through movies or literature or art? How big is the impact? Do you think the
productions involved in this field actually support those initiatives and
(33:12):
also understand the urgency and try to give more funds to that? Or, yeah, what
do you think about that? Yeah, okay. Okay. So you've got Hollywood turning out
movies. Occasionally, there's a movie there that, you know, addresses
(33:37):
ecological issues. Avatar. Avatar one, the first one.
Slightly problematic movie, especially with regard to, let's say, indigenous,
the representation of indigenous people. But, and the sort of, you know, this
pattern of requiring, you know, a white western white American hero to solve
(34:01):
the problems. But it's a movie that very clearly calls it a movie. It's a
movie that very clearly calls attention to two colliding worlds, extraction,
and an indigenous way of living in harmony with the magical forces of
(34:23):
nature. And by magical, I don't mean magic. I mean, you know, the forces of
nature are just incredible. It's astonishing. All right, so that's pretty
clear. And that was seen by very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very
many people. Did it change many minds? And when you hold that one up against
(34:45):
all of the crap that Hollywood produces, which is watched at rates that exceed,
you know, let's say the rates of viewership for Avatar, and there's so
much more. And all of these, you know, pretend that climate change doesn't
exist. It's not even in the background, right? Because that's one way, one
question you can ask is, is there an awareness of climate change in the
(35:10):
narratives we tell, even if climate change isn't the focus? And in most of
these, they're not, right? It just assumes we're still in the Holocene.
Nothing is changing. It's all stable. Is there? Okay, so there's that.
And that may change yet. And if it does, it will probably change because
(35:33):
climate change insists on it. You know, for many of the changes that lie ahead
in culture and in policy, climate change is going to be the force that pushes
that through. Climate change is in a bizarre way our ally, because it will be
so insistent that you can no longer ignore it, right? Okay. But I look away
(35:58):
from that, from, let's say, the blockbusters and the kind of work that
they can do. Maybe they can, but I'm not sure. I look instead at slightly more
targeted kinds of things. So in the realm of climate fiction, I think there's a
lot of energy, a lot of innovation, a lot of outstanding storytelling going on.
And I think it's cutting across genres. And I think it's engaging new readership.
(36:23):
So I think that there's more exciting stuff happening there. And you can point
to a whole bunch of different examples, but one which I think really had the
kind of impact that I think that we aspire to. And that would be like the
work of Kim Stanley Robinson recently. So Ministry for the Future, New York 2140,
(36:44):
et cetera. These extremely well-researched, very kind of what we say comprehensive
understandings and visions of how various cultural, economic, political
systems operate in relation to nature and the climate. And how a realistic kind
(37:08):
of sense of those, but also through the complexity, the darkness, the
countervailing forces, managing to create a credible story of how we go forward
that doesn't wash over the impacts that we will undoubtedly face, but also
(37:30):
imagines how a society or how world governments or how banks, how all kinds
of players in the field willingly or unwillingly might cooperate.
You know, yeah. So I think that's incredible because Kim Stanley Robinson
with that novel really made a splash. I mean, he crossed over. So many people
(37:54):
who don't read climate fiction read that novel. Obama thought it was like a
picnic for policymakers. He just loved it. You know, it's climate fiction
for wonks. And it was really, really great. And I think you can go down a
list of many different climate fiction writers and say, wow, you know, they are
(38:14):
helping us to imagine not just how, you know, messed up things are going to be,
but how it would be possible for human institutions to respond and respond
effectively. So I think that that's really important. Can I plug Poltergeist?
I mean, we haven't even mentioned it, right? So the animated videos we make
(38:36):
feature a little character who looks somewhat like me, whose name is Dr.
Poltergeist with a D, as in the Dutch polders. And with a kind of gentle humor,
he criticizes and calls into question the way that Dutch climate adaptation is
(38:57):
proceeding and water management is working and also on the basis of research
that is done with climate adaptation experts in the Netherlands. So basically
we're promoting their difficult message, making their difficult message to Dutch
policymakers and the public more accessible and I think also more urgent,
(39:22):
more justifiable, more comprehensible so that these changes can be affected.
So that's sort of where we're working. I think that it, I started with this word,
I think, and I come back to it. I think it's really important to target, you know,
your audience, not just to sort of throw it out there, but to know what kind of
(39:46):
change is it through your cultural intervention that you want to affect.
Awesome, yeah. That's a great notice about it. We will also have the namesake
and everything about animation videos in the introduction too, so feel free to
also go and watch them. Awesome. And yeah, I think we are coming to the end and I
(40:12):
was, I wanted, if you have some kind of, let's say, call to action or some for
the people that are watching, if you would like to make, or some final remarks
about what also we people can do in these terms to also in our individual
(40:32):
efforts to help because of the climate change of what we can do to, as
individuals, to make it, yeah. Yep. Okay, so you use that word individuals and
and, you know, it's, I understand totally why that question comes, but you're an
(40:55):
individual within an institution or within multiple institutions. Premise one,
premise two, we need systemic change. You know, an individual change in their
behavior isn't going to make the difference. So that's often presented as
a sort of either or, and I reject that fundamentally. It's not an either or. You
(41:16):
as an individual have leverage. You as a young individual have less leverage than
you will have when you're 30, 40, 50. But the amount of leverage that you have
when you're 30, 40, 50 depends on how you use the leverage that you have now.
Right. The more you leverage your influence now, the more you will be able
(41:43):
to leverage later. Right. So you need to start now. By leverage, I mean, take a
look around you, see where you have influence. You have influence in your
circle of friends with the institutions you interact with, with your clubs, your
organizations within your classroom. If you're on, let's say, your major
(42:07):
advisory board, your UAB or whatever that's called, you know, you have some
influence there. You have influence, you know, possibly through actions that
could involve things like activism, say demonstrating, camping out, working with
fossil-free pen. That is a way. It's not the only way. It's a way in order to
(42:31):
create leverage. When you do that with some other individuals, you do create
leverage. You force an administration eventually to come to terms with you one
way or the other. But you can do that in other ways as well. You can work within
the institution. You can nudge and push and urge people so that they have to
respond to you. As a student, you already have considerable leverage. But if you
(42:55):
don't use it, you know, your message doesn't get out. People, you don't stand
out. People don't take notice of you. You don't find who new allies are. It's
when you make use of your leverage that people take notice of you and then you
get more opportunities. So that word leverage matters a lot to me. It's the
(43:19):
way that I explain how I, as a professor of 18th century or scholar of 18th
century German literature, you know, became one of the people who got climate
weekend pen off the ground or who gets invited by the Ministry of Infrastructure
and Water to participate in think tanks about how to adapt to sea level rise in
(43:40):
the Netherlands, etc. You know, if I hadn't done these things that I did at
early stages, like go to Paul Snigowski and say, I think we need to hijack the 60
second climate, 60 second lectures, you know, if I hadn't done that, nothing
would have happened. Right. So you have to, you have to leverage what you've got
(44:01):
in order to increase your leverage. Definitely. Yeah, I think it's the is the
right approach to it. And also, also, I think we are now in the, in the century
where we can just even if you want, if you want to get involved in the
environmental field or do something for the climate change, you can just go to
Google, maybe write some organizations I can get involved in or what I can do.
(44:24):
And it will be tons of hundreds of ways so you can get involved. And also, some
it is definitely the right approach of trying to get together with people get
together with the institutions and try to do something together. And that's the
that's the power of unity we can have in solving these problems. And also, and
(44:48):
also just trying to, and I think it doesn't take much to get involved in
something also small. It doesn't it doesn't have for all of the people, it
doesn't have to be just, let's say, dedicating our life to solving the
climate change issues, it can just be, for example, for the students just
(45:10):
joining a small student club or joining a nonprofit small nonprofits or dedicate a
couple of hours a week, which can, yeah, I don't want to diminish this step,
though. I mean, I understand small, you know, that that might be an
encouragement. But I actually want people to be ambitious. Yeah, Penn
students are ambitious. And I don't, you know, and so I'm not sure that
(45:33):
delivering a message about, oh, it's okay if it's a small step, you know,
that's because why would one want to do a small step? Yeah. So and also, I
think it's really important to realize that small step is important, but the
small step allows larger steps, right. So it's on a trajectory. I also think
that is really important to realize, it doesn't matter what discipline you
(45:55):
chose, climate change is going intersects that discipline. And, you
know, ask yourself the question or ask your professor. Definitely. Yeah. How
does it intersect? And what are you all doing? Definitely. And today we were
talking about the intersection of culture and climate change. And
(46:15):
definitely we can have all the fields kind of can intersect with climate
change. So yeah, that's, that's a great remark on that. So we are coming to
the end. Thank you so much, Professor Richter for joining us today. And it was,
it was a great conversation for all your work that you have done in this field
(46:37):
and the work that you are doing right now. It is great. And thank you so much
for sharing your experience and sharing your advice with us today. Yeah. Thank
you so much for this. And yeah, it's been my pleasure. I really enjoyed this
conversation. Thanks for giving me the chance. Thank you so much. And to all our
(46:57):
listeners, thank you so much for joining another episode of Talking Environment.
And let's continue solving the climate change issues with the efforts that we do
together. So thank you so much. Until next time, take care. Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Intentionally Disturbing
Join me on this podcast as I navigate the murky waters of human behavior, current events, and personal anecdotes through in-depth interviews with incredible people—all served with a generous helping of sarcasm and satire. After years as a forensic and clinical psychologist, I offer a unique interview style and a low tolerance for bullshit, quickly steering conversations toward depth and darkness. I honor the seriousness while also appreciating wit. I’m your guide through the twisted labyrinth of the human psyche, armed with dark humor and biting wit.