As we race down the streets of accelerating climate change, our lives increasingly seem to have been lifted out of the Game Theory Handbook. From the highest level of decarbonisation commitments right through to lowest levels of what chemicals or plastics are in our processed dinner, the question seems too often to be around how long a decision can be delayed or negotiated for re-election chances, rather than what we need to do to veer off a collision course.
By definition, the problem with playing chicken* is of course that your life is in the hands of the car driver. And that means for each of us, our country, state and local leaders. In Australia, the highest level driver is theoretically our prime minister. But it turns out he might not matter so much.
While the snail speed of change coming out of Canberra is frustrating, Scotty from Marketing might be more redundant than you think. It is important to know that he's not our only driver, and maybe not even the main one. While globally Australia is more out of step with its friends and allies than it has ever been, with all of our closest friends – the US, the UK, the EU, Japan and New Zealand – now committed to reaching net zero emissions by 2050, what's the Federal problem? Politics. Malcolm Turnbull sums up Morrison as being long on tactics and very short on strategy.
"MORRISON IS DETERMINED NOT TO LEAD ON CLIMATE; HE WANTS BUSINESS AND OTHER GOVERNMENTS TO TAKE THE LEAD AND FOR EVENTS TO TAKE THEIR COURSE SO THAT THE TRANSITION TO ZERO EMISSIONS HAPPENS WITHOUT ANY DISCERNIBLE ACTION FROM THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT AT ALL. IN THE MEANTIME HE WILL CONTINUE TO USE SUPPORT FOR COAL AS A TOTEMIC ISSUE TO RALLY WORKING-CLASS VOTERS IN MINING AREAS."
And that is exactly what is happening. Other layers of Australian government have been making change for years and the pace of change is accelerating in line with the Paris Accord.
The states are moving quickly with literally hundreds of announcements over the past few years, stepping up more recently with pledges like the recent NSW commitment to halve emissions by 2030 and many LGAs going earlier. Businesses are moving and forming their own coalitions and citizens are supporting both of them. Still, the game of political brinksmanship comes at the expense of our future selves.
Around the world, it has been local governments who have often led the climate charge, with The Global Covenant of Mayors initiative supporting cities who pledge to reduce local greenhouse gas emissions, enhance resilience to climate change, and track their progress transparently since 2014. (The Compact was started by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his Special Envoy for Cities and Climate Change, Michael R. Bloomberg.)
With over 11,707 cities from 120 countries, representing nearly one billion people and nearly 15% of the total global population, the GCoM is the largest global network of local councils taking action on climate change.
One of the great examples of grassroots change has been our superannuation funds. Superannuation fund's money is ultimately owned by Mum and Pop citizens. Citizens hoping to have both a place to live and something to live on in 30 - 50 years time. That makes funds a crucial litmus test in how investment decisions get made.
Just this week, one of Australia's biggest superannation funds, QSuper, joined many others in announcing that QSuper were divesting fossil fuel investments. Charles Woodhouse from QSuper said
"THE QSUPER STRATEGY MAY MEAN DIVESTMENT OF ASSETS THAT DO NOT MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS, AND IT WILL MEAN INCREASED REPORTING TO MEMBERS OF OUR POLICIES AND PRACTICES RELATING TO CLIMATE CHANGE.
OUR POLICIES RECOGNISE THAT OUR INVESTMENTS, IF UNCHANGED, CAN CONTRIBUTE TO CLIMATE CHANGE, BUT ALSO THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO CLIMATE CHANGE RISK".
A recent study by Michael Bang Petersen, published in Nature, on the way pandemic responses were managed holds a number of clues for the massive social, business and community changes that are coming with climate change adjustment and mitigation. Key among the communications messages is that the public will act in solidarity and make sacrifices to achieve change.
CITIZENS WILL TYPICALLY BEHAVE REASONABLY, INCLUDING HELPING EACH OTHER, WHEN THEY ARE TOLD THE TRUTH. WHEN THEY AREN'T, THINGS CAN GET WIERD VERY QUICKLY.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE PANDEMIC IS THAT THE PUBLIC HAS MORE VISIBILITY TO IMPACTS THROUGH PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND ACCESS TO INACTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY THROUGH THE COURTS.
At the heart of responses are a country's citizens. If being human is your guiding light, there's pretty much always a way out and we'll find it, given the chance.
Image: Netflix / *Playing Chicken according to Collins: 1. to engage in a test of courage in which, typically, two vehicles are driven directly toward one another in order to see which driver will swerve away first 2. to engage in mutual challenges or threats, hoping the opponent will withdraw before actual conflict or collision