Since the early 2000’s, the United Nations Environment Program has published a yearly writing presenting current prominent issues in our global environment. Originally used to inform the public of excess nitrogen causing dead zones in coastal waters, the publication soon became a "yearbook" of various environmental threats. In looking at the 2014, 2016, and 2017 editions, I was able to identify a trend in which issues are becoming less specific, but rather over-arching consequences that a greater population is going to be affected by. There has also been a step taken by UNEP in 2017, in identifying solutions to larger issues, such as advancements in renewable and solar energy, and how to reverse environmental displacement. In first looking at the 2014 report, I was overwhelmed by the number of current environmental issues in crisis that we face across the world. From the emergence of infectious diseases, to illegal trade in wildlife (which was an emerging issue that had presumably found temporary solace, only to rise back on the list of hot topics due to current political turmoil), to plastic debris in the ocean. While stated to simply be global concerns, it seems as though these issues need to be observed and confronted by global resolution and execution, in order to find solutions across all ecosystems. 

    "Loss and Damage: The unavoidable impacts of climate change on ecosystems"

      This category in the 2016 issue continues to stick with me as I conclude my  exploration of the Anthropocene and move into other research. As the commonality of an unpredictably volatile climate is occurring at exponential rates, more and more ecosystems are becoming uninhabitable and/or wiped out by (un)natural disasters. In tossing around concepts of Darwin's theories of 'survival of the fittest,' those who are best equipped to survive in a given environment will survive and continue to evolve to meet the needs of that environment. However, if the climate continues to change at an exponential rate, and in such a volatile and unpredictable fashion, many, if not all, species will not have the time to evolve or adapt to the 'new' environment. While I can't help but wander into ideas of a period of mass extinction, I refrain from doing so as I acknowledge the lack of research and knowledge I currently have in my skill set to prove this notion, let alone form such a hypothesis.

      While the list of emerging issues has lessened, presumably conveying that less issues are being faced world-wide, that has unfortunately not been the case. Rather, each emerging issue is a multi-faceted concern encompassing a broader range of issues. With these growing concerns comes an ever-growing urgency to solve them. The current -cene as we know it, confronted with so many urgent issues, seems to face an ultimatum between people and all else. In order to approach this, Anthropogenic advancements should weigh additional value in environmental conservation and biodiversity in order to prevent further detriments. New environmental action must to be taken to shrink our carbon footprint before current climate issues prove irreversible. 

 

UNEP. UNEP Year Book 2014: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme, 2014.

​

UNEP. UNEP Frontiers 2016: Emerging Issues of Environment Concern. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme, 2016.

​

UNEP. UNEP Frontiers 2017: Emerging Issues of Environmental Concern. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme, 2017.

    During an Environmental Analysis course I currently participate in, I was recently presented the opportunity to engage with a panel held by professor Jim Proctor. This panel consisted of five individuals who have special knowledge of the Lewis and Clark College campus, Riverview Natural Area, and/or the Collins View neighborhood (the areas studied in Labs One-Five). For 90 minutes, the panelists interacted with one another, as well as those in attendance, engaging in an active discussion on the observed land cover (physical) changes, specifically regarding natural growth, in these areas.

     In the previous five weeks of research, conducted through labs, I compared measurements and data gathered regarding temporal, humidity, and land cover changes in these areas of Southwest Portland. However, despite the controlled, current data from twelve sites and satellite photos of the areas (dating back as far as 79 years prior), there is a lack of primary information in regards to how shifts in urbanization and growth occurred, especially so rapidly from the 1980’s. 

      During this session, our panelists were able to share historical pieces that explain Southwest Portland’s development, both supporting and disproving many theories that spawned from the previous research I conducted. The Riverview Natural Area, for example, used to be owned by the nearby cemetery, until the city of Portland bought it in 2011, as shared by Marshall Johnson, a Portland Parks and Recreation Ecologist who specializes in habitat restoration in Riverview and Forest Park. While this ownership allowed for preservation of the area in the sense of no urban development, the area has, nonetheless, had large shifts in growth. According to Bob Fischer, a Lewis and Clark alumni and Collins View resident, the area has been forested “historically. What originally was a douglas fir forest, with some hemlock and cedar incorporated is no longer. Logging in the 50’s took out all the pines and firs, while leaving cedar and hemlock, leading to the now fresh growth and the flourishing of those species.” It is amazing how much human interaction has influenced and altered almost every pattern of growth. From introducing new species, such as bringing holly onto the Lewis and Clark campus, imported by the Franks family (which now grows rampant in the area), to altering the patterns of previous natural growth, the very diversity in landscape through the area that I believed to be the lasting essence of Portland proper, is actually just the gentrification of growth. Being a resident of a neighborhood just off campus, I am able to recognize and benefit from the diversity and history that thrives here, but that does not mean I have witnessed the undertaking and detriment that the area has undergone to get there. The panel was enlightening, highlighting the externalities caused by increased demand for urbanization in the area as population grows and referencing how it continues to threaten what few 'natural' areas we have left.

 

*A special thank you to Bob Fischer (L&C alumni, lives in Collins View), Brendan (ecology expert, lives in Collins View), Denise King (L&C campus development and planning), Marshall Johnson (Portland Parks and Recreation Ecologist), and John Miller (Collins View resident, worked at L&C from 1972-1997) for coming in to share their wealth of knowledge and entertain our forming ideas and questions of how our home came to be as we know it. Also, thank you to Jim Proctor for organizing this panel and further exploration.

​

"How can you hate me if you don't even know me?" -Darryl Davis

       Each year, the Lewis and Clark College Environmental Studies department hosts an engaging event to confront and relate relationship boundaries and connections by exploring those topics within a global issue or point of interest. For the 21st annual Symposium, titled “Klan We Talk? Race, Environment, Engagement, and Empowerment,” a well-respected musician, activist, and author was invited to speak on his own experiences of crossing communication and historical boundaries globally. Darryl Davis grew up in Illinois, where being born as a black man in the late 50’s, racial controversy was apparent. After his first personal experience as a young boy with racism and personal attack, simply due to his race, he was struck with the question that he has proceeded to focus his life and work on finding the answer to: "how can you hate me, if you don't even know me?”

After being approached and befriended due to his musical talent by a white man, a man who happened to be a well-known member of the Klu Klux Klan, Mr. Davis found the simplicity of pushing boundaries that seemed to be based on ignorance and unknowing. He used this experience to befriend more members, attending K.K.K. events and spending time in one another's homes. Through meeting, listening, and relating to people with such diverse views, Mr. Davis was able to slip in to and transform the lives of over 200 now former (thanks to Mr. Davis) members of the K.K.K. For over fifty years, he has now continued to inspire and build on the concept of communicating with those with have such different beliefs.

       In understanding how to communicate with those of different beliefs and values, we can translate this into many current conversations. While the Klu Klux Klan and active, promotional racism are not as apparent today as they have been in previous centuries, it still lies interwoven in today’s society, and hate crimes continue to occur (and are, in fact, on the rise again in recent years). Additionally, political and environmental issues can be hot spots for strong opinions and diverse voices, creating a myriad of barriers that can often seem unfeasible to address, let alone overcome.

      After presenting at the symposium, Mr. Davis came in the following day to speak in a more intimate class setting on current applications. He brought up a quote from writer Martin Niemöller, that he had mentioned the previous night, on divides and ‘optional blindness,’ referencing our need for creating false boundaries we have created through our beliefs.

​

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

– Martin Niemöller

​

     On addressing current issues, I found solace in his words of patience and progress over time, but also found an urgency and passion to employ immediate actions. In trying to learn about others beliefs and make them feel heard, especially ones that I so passionately disagree with, it is necessary to find understanding in their own reasoning, to understand what methodologies are grounds for passion on the other side of the barrier. Once I can find their passion (or misunderstanding for passion) in relation to my own, I can begin to connect to a wider range of ideas, and hopefully influence them. Darryl Davis was an amazing speaker who struck a chord of passion and desire for action in his entire audience.

     Over the last few weeks, I have been researching the Capitalocene, a theory describing the era that we are in today; an era in which capitalism is the prominent controlling factor in environmental health and/or degradation. With growth in technology, urbanization, and rapid individual growth through trade, trends in the prosperity and sustainability of the environment have arisen in correlation with various regional attributes relating to capitalism and wealth. Through the use of data on income, wealth, race, and access, a correlation has continued to appear in which minority groups, and groups of lower income statuses, tend to exist in regions that also suffer from increased levels of pollution and overall environmental degradation. Obviously, an inequitable valuation has occurred in considering the equal right/accessibility to healthy environments and living for all. So how do we achieve this? These Capitalocentric ideologies are the same that I am beginning to reflect on in my concentration, and hone in my further studies on.

        According to the Environmental Protection Agency, “Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (EPA, 2018) (also referenced to in Lab Nine). In order to achieve a sound form of controlling environmental health, and overall EPI scores, we need to find a way to employ guidelines that encompass the ideals of Environmental Justice, into global actions and solutions. Environmental Justice as a concept, however, is much easier said that accomplished, especially under faced political constraints. Current forms of capitalism do not  support this notion, despite a ‘free market.’ Through the implementation of Environmental Justice in regulating environmental issues fairly and equally around the globe, hot spots would be more easily avoided, if not eliminated entirely.  As could the non-uniformity of outsourced pollution sources due to trade and exporting. The Paris Agreement for example, created a basis of minimal standards for 196 countries involved, that promoted a global effort to fight climate change and prevent detriment, specifically combatting greenhouse gas emissions. However, as seen over the past year in the United States’ withdrawal from the agreement, global efforts involve government cooperation. Perhaps if there was more equitability between government powers across all nations, this could shift. Until then, the strive for absolute growth in capitalism needs not necessarily to be placed on the back burner, but environmental health, biodiversity, and long-term sustainability should, from the given observations, be prioritized. 

​

        Through the progression of my work in Environmental Analysis as a course this semester, my research has, thus far, encompassed testing the validity of one of two topics: the Anthropocene and the Capitalocene. In reflecting on the two, I realize that in studying the current era from the lens of two different methodologies, there is a seemingly inexorable theme of unnatural manipulation of natural patterns due to our species’ actions.

         In exploring the era that we are currently impacting, called the Anthropocene, significant changes in land cover, and in turn overall environments, shifted due to man-made, or anthropogenic, developments. In studying Southwest Portland, the transfer of non-native species, sprawling growth of urbanization, and clearing of forests and other ecosystems has impacted temperature and humidity levels, creating an uninhabitable environment for many native species (see Labs One-Five for more information). This disruption of natural patterns in the studied area proved more than an unfortunate shift, but planted the seed for continued research on this notion that we have altered the natural processes of this planet.

         In shifting my focus to the concept of the Capitalocene, I found that I was building on my studies of the Anthropocene. After finding validity through my own research, I continued by exploring how exactly we are able to manipulate natural processes and alter so many ecosystems, without in turn inflicting harm on our own. Hence, the Capitalocene (see Labs Six-Nine for more information). While I may not feel the effects here in Oregon, United States of America, that does not ring true for large percentages of the population, specifically those belonging to lower groups of wealth and/or income. In comparing the locations of various populations of income, wealth, and race to the EPI (Environmental Performance Index) scores of their locations, I found hot spots that portrayed not only that we are obviously polluting, trashing the planet, but are doing it unfairly (if that’s even possible). Countries of higher wealth proved to pollute more, and yet feel the impacts less, while countries of lower wealth and income groups seem to be the most negatively impacted by the detrimental effects of pollution and climate change. And here is where I realized, in manipulating so many natural processes, we have harmed our own, just not necessarily the countries of higher income brackets, such as the United States. Those that bear the costs and are harmed by our own manipulations are the groups often unable to overcome, hence why I say, we have not only polluted our planet, but we have done so in a way that proves inequitable.

         In continuing to build on the two previous theories of Anthropogenic influence in the current era, I find myself at a point in my studies where I must hypothesize another frame of influence in the form of a third era. Now that I have studied our influence as a species as a whole, followed by our influence in the form of capitalism, I find it time to research how a specific industry can have long lasting effects on environmental health and biodiversity. I can’t help but reflect that with the amount of influence and wealth that the United States encompasses, that a single industry sourcing from such could in itself create global effects. However, in relaying this to situate current affairs, I found myself drawn to studying a topic I had yet to see explored as a global chain, but seemed to be having powerful environmental impacts across the world. And here I find myself in the final leg of this semester’s research: The Anthropocene, The Capitalocene, and The Narcocene.

        As we (myself and two co-researchers) begin to finalize the construction of our situated research of ‘The Narcocene’ and present it to the Environmental Studies Program at Lewis and Clark College in a couple weeks, I find myself excited, and yet not ready to stop digging. With the immense amount of data I have found on Mexican government databases, Forest Service Watch, and numerous others, I feel the urge to analyze more, and follow through with further research. Yet, without proper qualitative data by going to Mexico to collect information from primary, personally involved sources, I realize that I can only theorize this work (see our Methodologies for all posed forms of data collection). In revisiting the focus question that is guiding my research in Mexico specifically, “How do the impacts of deforestation fluctuate between areas more or less influenced by the illicit drug trade?”, I have yet to collect data on the effects of LUCC (learn more about Land Use Cover Change via Lab One) and biodiversity hot spots on locals and the environment of Mexico at large. Using Literature Research to collect secondary data analysis that informed research site location, ArcGIS-compiled global and country based data, local surveys to determine personal impacts and level of concern, and content analysis/inferential statistics to compare areas differing in degrees of drug activity related environmental impacts, I feel that the full hourglass of research, from idea to enlightenment, could be substantial in finding possible solutions to the problem and our original frame of questioning: “Could a reduction in illicit drug trade reduce the impacts of deforestation?”

       While it is hard to find fulfillment in stopping my current research here, I do so with the idea that perhaps I can, at some point in my studies, go and carry out my full plan of research in hot spots revealed on my correlation maps in Mexico. Thus, only placing a bookmark as I cross my focus of research towards understanding the current environmental issues being created by an industrial complex just a few miles from the Lewis and Clark Campus, and the political economy that allows for this to occur (see Metal Mischievience for more information).