A few weeks ago I saw one of the most influential plays ever written: “Waiting for Godot”, by Samuel Beckett – about the two characters, Vladimir and Estragon, who wait and wait and wait for someone named Godot, who never shows up.
Because the play is so elemental it invites all kinds of interpretations, be they social, political or religious. I, myself, couldn’t help thinking of the upcoming climate meeting in Copenhagen, aiming to secure a new global climate change treaty to replace the Kyoto protocol. Interestingly, the version of the Godot-play I saw in Stockholm even included the word “climate villain” and made me think even more of climate deals and real action that never seem to arrive.
Beckett himself once described his play as “nothing happens, twice,” since the two acts are “in several respects repetitions of each other.” In this respect, however, there is a major difference between climate change and Becket’s famous play: climate change is a one-acter – we have to act now to avoid runaway irreversible climate changes. Many leading scientists, climate experts, and progressive national governments now refer to 350 parts per million as the safe upper limit for CO2 in our atmosphere. We are, however, already above the safe zone (or beyond the “planetary boundary” as a group of scientists put it recently) at our current 390 ppm, and unless we are able to rapidly return below 350 ppm this century, we risk reaching tipping points and irreversible impacts, e.g., rapid melting of the Greenland ice sheet and huge methane releases from increased permafrost melt.
So, when delegates now meet in Copenhagen to try to finalize a new global climate change agreement, it is crucial that they are informed by the most recent science on tipping points and planetary boundaries – including how the different boundaries of everything from water resources and ocean acidification to land-use change and biodiversity loss interact.
Copenhagen – not the time for fairy tale politics
One of the most outspoken environmental NGOs recently reminded us about another literary masterpiece we should try to avoid to mirror in Copenhagen: The Emperor’s New Clothes by Danish fairy tale author Hans Christian Andersen: “You know the story. The clever tailors that convince a kingdom that only intelligent people can see the clothes they make. Everyone talks about how fine the emperor’s outfit is, until one audacious voice pipes up to say there’s nothing there, the king is naked. When the reality of climate change politics is stripped of rhetoric, most of the industrialised world’s leaders are seriously underdressed, and Obama isn’t wearing a stitch.”
In conclusion, Copenhagen is not the time for “fairy tale politics” and show-off. It should be the time for real action and a binding climate agreement. Or, really, it should not be only about curing the planet’s fever. What we really need is some kind of a global binding sustainability agreement, which also takes into account how we manage the planet’s ecosystems and the goods and services they generate to our human societies. We must quit discussing one environmental issue at the time. We know that the different issues are intertwined, not only with each other, but also with a wide array of socio-economic aspects like poverty, population growth, democracy, power relationships, financial crises and so forth.
In Waiting for Godot, the characters just continue their irrational waiting. In climate/sustainability negotiations, however, subsiding into the futility of the situation – repeating over and over again, “Nothing to be done” – is not an option.
/Fredrik Moberg, Editor Sustainable Development Update, Albaeco
Oil Field 07/1972 Photo: The U.S. National Archives’ photostream
HappyMess: “Kunde man hitta en gemensam, inre moral, så skulle vi inte behöva några särskilda regler.” // Biskop Clas-Bertil Ytterberg.
