Introduction
Hathaway & Boff’s (2009) work, “Seeking Wisdom in a Time of Crisis,” gives a glimpse of the nature of the current ecological crisis. The situation is dire. Hathaway & Boff say, “In fact, for many, life actually grows more difficult with each passing year,” (2006, p.1). The contemporary ecological crisis provides a multifaceted and pressing global issue characterized by the deterioration of the Earth’s natural surroundings, widespread pollutants, and the amplification of poverty and inequality. This paper will explore the intricate reasons underlying this disaster, with every category interacting to exacerbate environmental degradation and impede the development of meaningful solutions (MacDonald, 2015, p.4). This paper will look into one technological purpose: the impact of business agriculture. On the economic and political front, this paper examines modern corporations’ influence and political power. Finally, from a psychological and moral viewpoint, this paper will discuss the persisting outcomes of colonization on society’s relationship with the environment. Each of those causes is interconnected, contributing to the ongoing ecological disaster, and understanding their interactions is critical for formulating effective solutions.
Technological Causes
industrial agriculture represents a pivotal technological innovation that reshaped the global food manufacturing landscape. It shifted from traditional farming practices to highly mechanized, massive-scale operations. Industrial agriculture introduced monoculture farming, heavy pesticide and fertilizer use, and mechanization as its defining features. The adoption of business agriculture can be attributed to several compelling motives. Firstly, it promised better crop yields, which were visible as vital for feeding a burgeoning world populace. Moreover, it provided expanded profitability for agribusinesses through economies of scale and green manufacturing methods. However, commercial agriculture’s widespread environmental effects cannot be left out. It has systematically undermined sustainability by depleting the soil of critical nutrients through monoculture farming, leading to soil degradation and erosion (Ehrlich & Ehrlich, 2013, p.142). The excessive use of chemical pesticides and artificial fertilizers has polluted waterways, harmed non-target species, and contributed to biodiversity loss. These practices have disrupted herbal ecosystems and led to extensive ecological imbalances. Moreover, the heavy reliance on fossil fuels in mechanized agriculture has contributed to carbon emissions and weather exchange.
The extent of the harm resulting from industrial agriculture is profound and wide-reaching. Soil degradation has caused the lack of arable land and decreased agricultural productivity over time. Water pollutants from agricultural runoff have affected aquatic ecosystems and threatened the provision of clean water. Additionally, the carbon footprint related to business agriculture contributes appreciably to greenhouse fuel emissions, exacerbating climate change (MacDonald, 2015, p. 14).
Commercial agriculture’s effect is further compounded by its interaction with economic, political, psychological, and moral elements. On an economic level, global financial institutions have played a function in selling business agriculture in growing nations, regularly pressuring these countries to adopt this version to increase their GDP. Politically, regulatory regulations have favored industrial agriculture, perpetuating environmentally destructive practices (Brown, 2009, p.9). From a psychological and moral perspective, the disconnect between consumers and the resources in their food has allowed commercial agriculture to persist, as customers are regularly unaware of the environmental outcomes of their choices. This detachment from the meal production manner reinforces the commercial agriculture version, making it more difficult to shift towards sustainable options.
III. Economic and Political Causes
The influence of current corporations and their political power is a dominant force in shaping economic and environmental regulations. These groups, often transnational in scope, wield great political clout through financial contributions, lobbying efforts, and their ability to persuade political discourse. Their influence extends beyond national borders, letting them form global financial and environmental agendas (Rockström, 2009). Modern agencies regularly prioritize short-term economic profits over long-term ecological sustainability. This prioritization is pushed by the pursuit of income and shareholder value, which frequently involves maximizing quarterly revenue and immediate financial returns. As a result, decisions within those agencies tend to want cost-reducing measures that could compromise environmental obligation, such as minimizing ecological compliance, exploiting natural resources, and avoiding sustainable practices that could incur higher initial expenses (Hathaway & Boff, 2009, p.9).
The results of corporate influence on environmental policies and rules are far-reaching. Often, regulatory frameworks are shaped to accommodate corporate interests, resulting in lax environmental requirements and inadequate oversight. Environmental guidelines may be weakened or poorly enforced, permitting businesses to continue environmentally damaging practices with impunity. This will result in ecological harm, pollutants, habitat destruction, and resource depletion, contributing extensively to the ongoing environmental crisis. Furthermore, corporate influence can restrict the implementation of sustainable regulations and discourage funding for cleaner technologies, making it more difficult to cope with our ecological challenges.
The influence of modern corporations is intertwined with technological, psychological, and value-related elements. Technologically, improvements in lobbying and campaign contributions technologies have made it simpler for corporations to exert their political effect. They can strategically target lawmakers, finance political campaigns, and form a public belief more efficiently (“The environment as a policy problem,” n.d., p.183). Psychologically and ethically, within the corporate culture, there is usually a prevailing cognizance of profit maximization. This culture fosters an environment where environmental issues may be sidelined in favor of quick-term economic gains. The pursuit of income can create moral dilemmas, leading to moves that prioritize financial achievement over ecological responsibility.
Psychological and Ethical Causes
The historical legacy of colonization is a critical psychological and ethical reason underlying the current ecological crisis. Colonial powers during the Age of Exploration and the next periods embarked on worldwide conquest and resource extraction, profoundly impacting human attitudes toward the environment. This historical context formed the relationship between humanity and nature, laying the foundation for a mindset of conquest and exploitation. Colonization contributed considerably to a perspective that regarded nature as a resource to be exploited for financial advantage (Itawan, 2023, p.195). To secure a sustainable future, it is essential to emphasize the importance of holistic solutions that embody all elements of the ecological disaster and prioritize the well-being of the planet and its inhabitants.
References
Brown, L. R. (2009). Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization (Substantially Revised). W. W. Norton & Company.
Ehrlich, P. R., & Ehrlich, A. H. (2013). “Chapter 5: Technology Matters” One with Nineveh (pp. 138–180.). Island Press.
Ehrlich, P. R., & Ehrlich, A. H. (2013). Can a collapse of global civilization be avoided? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280(1754), 20122845. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.2845
Hathaway, M., & Boff, L. (2009). The Tao of liberation: exploring the ecology of transformation. Orbis Books.
Itawan, D. (2023). Colonialism and Climate Crisis: The Root of Environmental Changes and the Rise of Environmental Awareness in Indonesia. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies), 6(2), 192–205. https://doi.org/10.14710/ihis.v6i2.16037
MacDonald, D. (2015). Human capacity, self-interest, and moral restraint: Attempting to understand the ecological crisis. The paper was delivered at the 2015 annual Environmental Studies Association of Canada conference on June 2, 2015, University of Ottawa.
Markowitz, E. M., & Shariff, A. F. (2012). Climate change and moral judgment. Nature Climate Change, 2(4), 243–247. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1378
Rockström, J. (2009). Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Ecology and Society, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-03180-140232
The environment as a policy problem. (n.d.). In ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY (pp. 174–205).
Wallman, D., Wells, E. C., & Rivera-Collazo, I. C. (2017). The Environmental Legacies of Colonialism in the Northern Neotropics: Introduction to the Special Issue. Environmental Archaeology, 23(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/14614103.2017.1370857
write