 |
| Press conference with the laureates of the memorial prize in economic sciences 2009 at the KVA: Elinor Ostrom (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
Note from YES! Magazine Publisher Fran Korten: On June 12 the world lost a powerful voice for value of collective action. Elinor Ostrom, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2009, passed away after months of struggle with pancreatic cancer.
Her groundbreaking research documented the conditions under which local people the world over will manage natural resources in an equitable and sustainable manner. Lin was my friend and colleague, and I deeply mourn her loss.
Her perspective is sorely needed now, as delegates gather for the Rio+20 conference in Brazil to negotiate agreements on the best ways to reach a sustainable world. Lin was wary of formulaic solutions that ignore and constrain the capability of local people to act in their own long-term best interest. Government's role, she felt, was to support local capability, not undermine it, as is so often the case.
In the interview that I conducted shortly after she had received the Nobel Prize, I asked her what would be her advice to people in power. "No panaceas!" was her instant response. Large institutions - whether governments or corporations - err in looking for standardized approaches, while local people can tailor their solutions to the unique characteristics of their place. The negotiators at Rio would do well to heed her words.
Elinor Ostrom shared her advice for Rio + 20 with Project Syndicate shortly before her death:
Much is riding on the United Nations Rio+20 summit. Many are billing it as Plan A for Planet Earth and want leaders bound to a single international agreement to protect our life-support system and prevent a global humanitarian crisis. Inaction in Rio would be disastrous, but a single international agreement would be a grave mistake.
We cannot rely on singular global policies to solve the problem of managing our common resources: the oceans, atmosphere, forests, waterways, and rich diversity of life that combine to create the right conditions for life, including seven billion humans, to thrive.
We have never had to deal with problems of the scale facing today’s globally interconnected society. No one knows for sure what will work, so it is important to build a system that can evolve and adapt rapidly.
Decades of research demonstrate that a variety of overlapping policies at city, subnational, national, and international levels is more likely to succeed than are single, overarching binding agreements. Such an evolutionary approach to policy provides essential safety nets should one or more policies fail.
The good news is that evolutionary policymaking is already happening organically. In the absence of effective national and international legislation to curb greenhouse gases, a growing number of city leaders are acting to protect their citizens and economies.
This is hardly surprising - indeed, it should be encouraged.
Most major cities sit on coasts, straddle rivers, or lie on vulnerable deltas, putting them on the front line of rising sea levels and flooding in the coming decades. Adaptation is a necessity. But, with cities responsible for 70 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions, mitigation is better.
When it comes to tackling climate change, the United States has produced no federal mandate explicitly requiring or even promoting emissions-reductions targets. But, by May last year, some 30 US states had developed their own climate action plans, and more than 900 US cities have signed up to the US climate-protection agreement.
To read further, go to: http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/ostrom-rio-20?utm_source=wkly20120622&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=titleOstrom
No comments:
Post a Comment