ambiente, issue 2

/ a m • b e n • t i /~

cultivated reflections on sustainable development

volume 2, 08/13[exploring culture]

ambientezine.com.au

z i n e

Featuresraphael [gall] WEIRD people think differently: Insights from Psychology and Implications for Sustainable Development Communication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

hedda [ransan-cooper] ‘Trying my luck’: A Cultural Perspective on Managing Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . 16

Opinioncarla [alexandra] Multiple Sustainable Developments–The Role of Culture? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

ben [mcgowan] with eliott [child] The Neoliberal Forest: Marketing Sustainability and Certification Culture in Papua New Guinea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

sophia [christoe] What’s on the Menu Matters: The Food System, Sustainable Development and Food Cultures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Regulars

home economics for sustainable development[the dreaded twins] Lessons in Culture (Jamming) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

the law-abiding citizen: commentary luke [kemp] Questioning Culture, Questioning Consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

brainsquadringleader - karina [bontes forward]

overlord - luke [kemp]shamanic advisor - sophia [christoe]

editboss - elliott [child]designboss - guy [leech]

master of the intertubes - glen [wright]

Front cover photo - Julie Garran, Vietnam

ambientezine.com.au

Special thanks to: In partnership with:

volume 2, 06/13 [exploring culture] 1

Culture is a fundamental driver of civili-sation and any form of human society. It is not merely Mona Lisa paintings or skinny leg jeans, but a social force that directs our ways of producing, consuming, thinking and living. As historian Roland Wright com-mented, “the big changes since we left the cave have all been cultural, not physical”1. Culture has allowed us to grow beyond sim-ple physical evolution and enact collective change and has manifested itself in many different ways through our relationships with the natural environment. In many ways it is the genesis of our environmental problems, but also a possible solution. In this edition of Ambiente we have a selection of postgraduate and undergrad-uate students who dissect culture and its role in sustainable development. First Carla Alexandra draws upon neo-colonialist the-ory to examine how culture can be adapted to allow us to live within our ecological limits, or not. Raphael Gall takes a multidisciplinary approach drawing from neurology and psy-chology to analyse how culture doesn’t just shape our customs and traditions, but our very perspectives. Ben McGowan then high-lights how the neoliberal approach of certi-fication for forestry products has created a worrisome and ineffective ‘culture of concern’. Hedda Ransan-Cooper continues to draw

upon themes of migration and the experi-ences of the less fortunate by examining how emotion intersects with environmental stress and culture within a case study of the rural Philippines. Sophia Christoe finishes this edition by taking a critical view of the current Western food culture in order to argue that it may be more than just calories that are being eaten. Along with our regular contributors (Home Economics, The Conference Cupid and The Law Abiding Citizen), these articles seek to place culture and sustainable develop-ment under the microscope. It is not uncommon to hear talk of cultural sensitivity and making policies ‘cul-turally appropriate’. This can be heard all the way from international negotiations to the anthropologist’s office. However, when we are developing policy and thinking of society we need to bear in mind that design and evo-lution of culture is a tool and it can be both used and abused in the context of sustainable development. Exploring culture is tracing the blade of a double-edged sword. We hope that this edition guides you safely around the sharp edges of this topic. Over and out, Luke, Karina and Sophia.

1. Roland Wright (2004). A Short History of Progress. Edinburgh: Canongate Books

telegram from the brainsquad


this marginalise and disempower alternative worldviews and cultures? What implications does this have on its ability to increase social and environment justice? To ensure sustainable development doesn’t follow the homogenising path ‘devel-opment’ has, I’d argue that the diversity of cultures must be drawn upon to ‘create’ multiple sustainable developments. The era of top-down, Eurocentric development pol-icy agendas must end. Regions and coun-tries should be allowed to incorporate their own particular society, culture, ecology and historical context into the construction of their sustainable development. In order to do this, permanent spaces and processes to build alternatives to the current mainstream (sustainable) development and economic order need to exist. And need to be allowed to exist, rather than be marginalised by the mainstream development institutions and agendas. Perhaps a more place-based and bottom-up approach to sustainable develop-ment is necessary? Bolivia and Ecuador provide two exciting examples of place-based approaches to development. Both Bolivia and Ecuador have ‘re-defined’ development and by draw-ing on a diversity of cultural worldviews in the construction of their sustainable develop-ment paradigms, beneficial implications for both social and environmental justice have arisen. By constitutionally defining develop-ment not as an economic goal, but as a goal of buen vivir, the ‘collective well-being of the community, the people and the natural world’2 is placed at the forefront. We must be mindful not to roman-ticise these pro-indigenous agendas. For example, the Ecuadorean and Bolivian states are pushing hard to open up their rainforests and highlands to a period of state-led ‘new extraction’3. However, their new understand-ing of development as buen vivir is arguably also allowing space for diverse paradigms and

worldviews, in this case allowing indigenous worldviews to play a powerful role in policy development and knowledge construction for sustainable development. This is evident in the fact that Ecuador is the first country in the world to legally respect the rights of nature4. By legitimising an indigenous rela-tional worldview of human-environment systems, Ecuador has constitutionally moved beyond the binary way of thinking about humans and nature that no doubt underlies much environmental degradation. Whilst more place-based approaches to sustainable development can evidently be beneficial, that isn’t to say that all local or indigenous cultures are sustainable. Nor is it to say that all indigenous cultures have the all answers to create a sustainable development path for today’s world. Rather, it is to suggest that if we are to find truly sustainable paths, we cannot maintain a dominant (sustainable) development agenda that marginalises alter-native worldviews and cultures. Worldviews that do not fit into our capitalist modernity perhaps have much to teach us. Indeed, ‘other worlds are possible.’5

Carla is a student of the world who enjoys ranting about the environment in her free time.

1. Esteva, G. (1992) Development. In W. Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowl-edge as Power. p8. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

2. Escobar, A. Regionalism. Inter-view with LF Morrissey.

3. See: Bebbington, A. (2009). The New Extrac-tion: Rewriting the Political Ecology of the Andes? In: NACLA Report on the Americas, September/October: 12-20; Hogenboom, B. (2012). Depoliticized and Repoliticized Min-erals in Latin America. Journal of Develop-ing Societies, Vol 28, No 2, pp. 133-158.

4. Escobar, A. Regionalism. Inter-view with LF Morrissey.

5. Escobar, A. (2004) ‘Beyond the Third World: imperial globality, global coloniality and anti-globalisation social movements’, Third World Quarterly, Vol 25, No 1, pp. 220.

opinion

carla [alexandra]

Honours student, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU

“Development occupies the centre of an incred-ibly powerful semantic constellation. There is nothing in modern mentality comparable to it as a force guiding thought and behaviour. At the same time, very few words are as feeble, as fragile and as incapable of giving substance and meaning to thought and behaviour as this one.” 1

If, from sustainable development, we seek the foundations for equitable and ecologi-cally sustainable social, political and eco-nomic change, diverse worldviews should be at the forefront in helping to build these foundations. ‘Sustainable development’ as a dis-course and agenda has brought about a greater awareness of the environmental and social challenges currently faced. Yet, we must also be critically aware that, as a dominant dis-course, ‘sustainable development’ has worked to delineate a very narrow definition of social, economic and political change. Accordingly, to not question the dominant sustainable development agenda and the discourse in which it is embedded, risks embarking on the same ecologically and culturally disastrous path we’re already on. If we look to the failings of sustain-able development’s namesake – develop-ment – it becomes apparent the having one dominant sustainable development discourse would perhaps lead to similar hegemonic and

homogenising failings. Indeed, for over 50 years Western imposed development agendas have failed to deliver on many of the promises of modernity, poverty alleviation or equality. The failure of the majority of the Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs) implemented (or imposed?) by the IMF and World Bank in many developing countries during the last few decades is a case in point. Whilst the SAPs’ design structures have recently transitioned to promote more country-based ownership of the policies (at least superficially), critics highlight that the SAPs’ overarching neo-liberal development agendas continue to threaten the economic sovereignty of nations. Furthermore, such policies continue to lead to extensive com-moditisation of essential public goods and services in many countries and their deep-ened incorporation into a global regime of limitless corporate trade and financial accumulation. This raises the question as to what extent countries really do have influ-ence over their own development paths? Historically, such development agendas have largely denied countries’ ownership over their development policies, let alone allowed space for diverse and alternative development paradigms to be followed. We must ask ourselves: to what extent is the dominant sustainable develop-ment paradigm embedded in a neo-liberal capitalist discourse? To what extent does

Multiple Sustainable Developments–The Role of Culture?


Call for Submissions: Australia 2013 Election Special

The Australian national election is looming in the not so distant future. So, what better time to launch the new Ambiente? Henceforth submissions to Ambiente will be published online before the best of the best will make it into our quarterly printed special editions. The very best will get a chance to be published in the internationally renowned “Solutions” Journal (thesolutionsjournal.com). We are on the lookout for any articles on sustainable development, partic-ularly in relation to the upcoming election. Sample questions for discussion could include: should Australia’s mining exports be part of the debate? What are the impacts of slicing the Department of Climate Change in the lead up to the elec-tion? What does this election mean for the sustainable development of Australia? Can a Liberal government ever be sustainable (or a Labor one for that matter)?

Submission Guidelines » [Primary] Research Articles (1000-1500 words): This should be preferably

based upon your own research written with academic rigour, but in a style that can be read by a lay audience.

» [Informed] Opinion Pieces (800 words or less): A first person opinion piece on a topic that you are knowledgeable about.

» Response Pieces (800 words or less): A response, constructive critique or dis-cussion around a previous piece in Ambiente or from the general media.

» Creative Pieces: Drawings, poems, photographs- whatever you like really! Format and length may vary.

» References must be in Endnote form. » All submission should be accompanied by a brief statement showing how they

are connected to this edition’s theme.

Submissions open until October 1st! Please send all submissions and questions to [email protected]


feature

raphael [gall]

Neuroscience B.Sc, Maastriche University, Germany.

WEIRD people think differently: Insights from Psychology and Implications for Sustainable Development Communication

What is the role of culture in developing a sustainable way of life? Every cul-ture has its own mix of beliefs, ideas, conventions, social codes and morals, which together shape how people think about the world and the natural environment. It is unquestionable that the way a human thinks and reasons about the world is fun-damental to how that person acts and interacts with others and their environment. This article contends that in order to order to convince someone from a different culture about sustainability issues it is essential to use an argument that matches with the other person’s cultural background of reasoning about the environment. Grounded in empirical research from cross-cultural psychology, this argument has practical implications for interacting with people from other cultures in general as well as particular implications for advocating sustainability. For two main reasons this is an approach particularly useful for interna-tional negotiators, politicians and environmental activists. First, understanding the reasoning culture of other negotiators and politicians allows one to take their vantage point into account for framing one’s argument in terms that effectively convince them of your point. This is critical, as international conferences and gatherings are still suffering from basic misunderstandings and mistrust. Second, educating people about the processes and consequences of climate change is easier once one takes people’s reasoning culture into account.

WEIRD people clouded the observation that culture & human cognition are interrelated

The reality that cultures differ on a superficial level is obvious, but it is now well understood that perception and cognition are not universal across cultures but actu-ally shaped by culture. In behavioural sciences, for example, the sheer diversity of human cognition remained unnoticed for a long time, due to the simple problem of sampling bias. A 2008 survey analysis of publications in top journals of psychology found that about 68% of subjects were from the United States and that 96% of all subjects are from other ‘WEIRD’ countries (Western, Educated, Industrialised,

Rich and Democratic), such as Europe, North America and Australia. However, WEIRD countries house only 12% of the world population1. Studies such as this indicate that much behavioural science may too readily draw broad conclusions from studies focused entirely on who may be.

Analytic vs. holistic thinking: Westerners & Asians illustrate diversity of cognition

Cross-cultural research reveals that Westerners and Asians differ in their default kinds of reasoning2,3,4. Western traditions of thought are highly influenced by Greek philosophy and forms of reasoning that follow logical rules and highlight consistency. Conversely, many Asian philosophies are inspired by the Taoist con-cepts of yin and yang5. The radical difference between those traditions of thought are reflected in the law of the excluded middle, which states that a proposition is either true or that it is false, but that it cannot be both at the same time6. Many Western philosophies follow the law of the excluded middle, but Taoist philoso-phies regard this as too extreme and prefer to take relativist and multiple view-points into account7. Hence, the Western tradition uses analytic thought as a default way of reasoning whereas the Asian tradition uses holistic thought as a default way of reasoning. In analytic thought, the object of interest is detached from its context and it receives primary attention so that attributes and features are in focus. Based on those characteristics, the object applies to certain rules which explain and predict events. Holistic thought is different, as the object is seen in context of the ‘bigger picture’, so that attention is paid to the relationships between the object and its context8. Explanations about events are mainly based upon relationships and less on features of the object itself. Both kinds of reasoning are in principle equally available for every normal adult, but different life experiences and cultural envi-ronments influence which kind of reasoning is fostered9. The differences between analytic and holistic thought are illustrated by asking the intriguing question: is the pope a bachelor? According to ana-lytic thought, a man is a bachelor if he fulfills the formal rule which states that bachelors are adult and unmarried males. Accordingly, the pope is a bachelor. However, if we apply holistic thought, then we know that the position of the pope requires celibacy, which contradicts the intuitive understanding about bachelors. The pope cannot live up to his own standards of celibacy if he engages in any kind of sexual and romantic relationship or marries a woman. Those character-istics are all implied by the word bachelor. Thus, analytic thinking provides the answer that the pope is a bachelor, but holistic thinking shows that he is not. This example illustrates that analytic and holistic thinking can come to con-tradicting results, which means that a person cannot use both kinds of thought at the same time, as this would lead to confusion in most daily activities10.


One crucial aspect for answering the question of why, is that Asians and Americans differ in the ways they perceive their environment and how they dis-tribute their cognitive resources. Chinese and American children from rural areas were presented illustrations of three objects: a man, a woman and a child11. Based on these three categories, children were asked to take two objects and group them into one novel category. In general, American children grouped the man and the woman together, as they are both members of the category ‘adults’, which high-lights the importance of analytic and object-related features. In contrast, Asian children based their judgment on holistic reasoning, as relationship and context were more relevant, so that the woman and the child were part of one group, and the reason provided is that women give birth to children. These findings are not limited to children, as the results were replicated with Asian and American college students12. Another study highlights that Westerners tend to follow rules, whereas Chinese people rely on the contextual relationship in reasoning and categoriza-tion13. Both groups were asked to take individual objects (e.g. a pencil) and to group them together according to one’s own standards. Chinese subjects grouped objects together which were linked through a functional (e.g. pencil-notebook) or contextual relationship (e.g. sky-sunshine)14. Westerners are found to group objects according to simple rules (e.g. notebook-magazine). Therefore, Asians and Americans differ in the way how they organize categories on the conceptual level. Altogether, those studies point to the fact that Asian and American people differ in the way how they categorize basic objects in their environment.

Cognition & culture are interrelated: Implications for sustainability

Asians, Africans, Arabs, South Americans and Caucasians differ in their cognition compared to Western people15,16. A bulk of comparative projects reveals that even more fundamental cognitive processes, such as attention, perception, deductive reasoning and social inference, are highly influenced by culture. Studies on social motivations (fairness), folk-biological cognition (ordinary persons understanding about plants and animals), and spatial cognition all show that WEIRD people are not the norm, but outliers. It is essential to use an argument that matches the other person’s cultural background of reasoning about the environment in order to convince that person about sustainability issues. This implies that negotiators, politicians and activists should incorporate this insight in their work on the international level. The relevance of cultural reasoning backgrounds will increase, as BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries are becoming more and more important powers. The take home message for you is this: As you are most likely to come from a WEIRD country, next time when you negotiate with WEIRD people, try to use analytical argu-ments, when the other party is non-WEIRD bring forward holistic arguments, and when there are people from WEIRD and non-WEIRD countries, integrate both analytic and holistic elements in your sustainable development communication.

Raph is a joyful and dashing German who holds a Bachelor of Science from Maastricht University, majoring in Cognitive Neuroscience. This article presents some findings from his bachelor’s thesis.

References1. Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs

to become less American. American Psychologist, 63(7), 602.2. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010b). The weirdest peo-

ple in the world? Behavioral and brain sciences, 33(2-3), 61-83.3. Nisbett, R., & Norenzayan, A. (2002). Culture and cognition. Ste-

vens’ handbook of experimental psychology.4. Nisbett, R. E., & Miyamoto, Y. (2005). The influence of culture: holistic ver-

sus analytic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 467-473.5. Buchtel, E. E., & Norenzayan, A. (2009). Thinking across cultures: Implications

for dual processes. In two minds: Dual processes and beyond, 217-238.6. Annas, J. (1988). Aristotle’s Metaphysics: books M and N: Oxford University Press, USA.7. Buchtel, E. E., & Norenzayan, A. op. cit.8. Nisbett, R. E., & Miyamoto, Y. op. cit.9. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. op. cit.10. Norenzayan, A., Smith, E. E., Kim, B. J., & Nisbett, R. E. (2002). Cultural preferenc-

es for formal versus intuitive reasoning. Cognitive Science, 26(5), 653- ‐684. 11. Chiu, L. H. (1972). A cross-cultural comparison of cognitive styles in Chinese

and American children. International Journal of Psychology, 7(4), 235-242.12. Ji, L. J., Zhang, Z., & Nisbett, R. E. (2004). Is it culture or is it language? Ex-

amination of language effects in cross-cultural research on categori-zation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 87(1), 57.

13. Ji, L. J., Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (2000). Culture, control, and perception of relation-ships in the environment. Journal of personality and social psychology, 78(5), 943.

14. Ji, L., & Nisbett, R. (2001). Culture, language and relation-ships vs. categories as a basis of perceived association.

15. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010a). Most peo-ple are not WEIRD. Nature, 466(7302), 29-29.

16. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. op. cit.


opinion

ben [mcgowan] with elliott [child]

PhD Candidate (CDU & ANU); M. Env (Melb.)

The Neoliberal Forest: Marketing Sustainability and Certification Culture in Papua New Guinea

Last year I travelled to Cloudy Bay, 400 kilometres south-east of Port Moresby, to work on a forestry company’s attempt to attain the Forest Stewardship Council’s (FSC) Sustainable Forestry Management Certification. The FSC is an established global not-for-profit that aims to achieve more sustainable forestry around the world through setting standards and organising stringent certification programs with efforts focussed particularly on areas of intense tropical defor-estation. The certification scheme is part of a growing culture of win-win certification towards voluntarist and market-based mecha-nisms for improving environmental standards in globally-traded commodity production. In Papua New Guinea, it is hoped that FSC certification can kick start a new period of sustainable export-led forestry for development in a country wracked by illegal logging and forestry industry with an appall-ing environmental record. The scheme looks to update accepted wisdom around corporate social responsibility in the industry and uti-lises “win-wins” as a key conceptual driving force. Consumers, global companies, and local producers and citizens are all consid-ered potential beneficiaries of more consider-ate forest commodity production. If reckless consumption in industrialised markets caused

tropical deforestation, perhaps more sensitive markets can repair the damage? In my experience, however, the pro-cess of certification seemed to be prohibitively arduous. I became exasperated by the com-plexities of adapting strict universal criteria to the diverse practice of forestry in Papua New Guinea. After all, this is a place where forestry often occurs on land where tenure is disputed and terrain is inaccessible. As well, importing outside forest management prin-ciples is complicated by the absence of back-ground scientific data and financial and tech-nical human capital. In this context, formal “environmental management programs” that would be recognisable in forestry industries in the West are hard to find. Why was a tiny forestry company in Cloudy Bay striving to meet the standards set by NGOs and private industry in the highly industrialised world? Part of the answer to this question can be found in studying the unfolding patterns of “green” consumption and associated mar-ket-based mechanisms for regulating environ-mental management. These market pressures flow on to operations in places such as Cloudy Bay. The last decade has seen an explosion in the number of systems designed to certify the environmental and ethical standards of com-modity production around the world. These

arrangements represent one way of drawing together established quality assurance tech-niques with more recently conceived methods of environmental auditing. By tracking and assessing the socio-ecological impacts of pro-duction, it is hoped that some of the harsh-est effects of massive and open global trade production can be internalised. Third-party certification bodies, such as FSC, offer their accreditation services to companies who wish to market products as ethically or sustain-ably sourced and add value to their product. In my experience, however, win-wins are often easier to find in theory than in practice. Rather than facilitating sustainable forestry in developing countries, certification may actually be working to close uncerti-fied producers out of conscientious markets. Many operations in developing countries must now certify at great cost or, more likely, sell to less scrupulous buyers. Certification schemes are certainly changing global mar-kets by responding to the needs of a minority of “green” consumers in highly industrialised countries. However, overall, the possibility remains that the global market may simply be moving towards a two-tiered system.

Certifying forests: win-wins or two-tiers?

It is very difficult to tell whether the FSC’s certification program is having a significant effect on tropical deforestation. Evidence of improved forestry management is sparse and, in particular, there is little indication that the FSC has managed to influence forestry indus-tries in the developing world. For instance: » 82% of the world’s certified forests are

in Europe and North America1. This is a high figure considering that address-ing tropical deforestation was FSC’s

original objective. » Many countries with significant defor-

estation rates have no certified for-ests. This includes Sudan, Angola, Zambia, Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Mali, Madagascar, Botswana, Chad, Cambodia, Myanmar and Mongolia2.

» As tropical forestry operations become increasingly locked out of environmen-tally conscientious markets in the global North, trading relations are chang-ing3,4. Forestry operations in PNG are increasingly looking to trade with mar-kets in Southeast and East Asia where environmental protection is looked on with greater indifference. More tropi-cal round logs are exported from Papua New Guinea than from almost any other country on earth, with China the major consumer5.

The neoliberal forest: FSC and the roll out of market

governanceWhile supporters of certification schemes might suggest that the problem of tiering is a technical bump that can be smoothed out, it is important to recognise that the culture of certification is part of a much broader mar-ket-based approach to conservation and sus-tainable development. Certification schemes, and the problems they encounter, are not merely benign technical solutions, but effects of a broad sweep of contemporary neoliberal re-regulation. In Cloudy Bay, certification entails a whole raft of deep alterations that go far beyond superficial changes to environ-mental management. They embed the notion of market-based “management” of the forest


South: lessons from global forest politics. Third World Quarterly 27, no. 4 (2006): 579-593.

4. Auld, Graeme, Lars H. Gulbrandsen, and Constance L. McDermott. “Certification Schemes and the Impacts on Forests and Forestry.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 22 (2008): 187-211.

5. Babon, A., and G.Y. Gowae. 2013. The con-text of REDD+ in Papua New Guinea: driv-ers, agents and institutions. Occasional Paper 89. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

6. For an introduction see: Castree, N. (2007). Neoliberal environments: a framework for analysis. Manchester Papers in Political Economy. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Neoliber-al+environments:+a+framework+for+analysis#0

7. McCarthy, J., & Prudham, S. (2004). Ne-oliberal nature and the nature of neo-

liberalism. Geoforum, 35(3), 275–283. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2003.07.003

8. Peck, J., & Tickell, A. (2002). Neoliberal-izing Space. Antipode, 34(3), 380–404. doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00247

9. Klooster, Dan. 2005. “Environmental certifi-cation of forests: The evolution of environ-mental governance in a commodity network”. Journal of Rural Studies 21(4): 403-417.

10. Pattberg, Philipp. What Role for Private Rule-Making in Global Environmental Gov-ernance? Analysing the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). International Environmen-tal Agreements 5 (2005): 175-189.

11. Pattberg, Phillipp H. The Forest Steward-ship Council: Risk and Potential of Private Forest Governance. The Journal of Environ-ment & Development 14 (2005): 356-374.

itself in a way that promotes particular val-ues, material practices, and wider political and economic structures. Certification cul-ture, including the FSC, could well be seen as prominent components in efforts to “roll out” an updated form of ethical neoliberalism. Roll out governance represents the latest instalments in ongoing processes of neoliberalisation6,7,8.In short, three major aspects of this process have been observed unevenly yet consistently around the world. First is a “rolling back” of regulation through the freeing of markets; second is the encoun-tering of political resistance and ecological damage; and third is the subsequent “roll out” of new free-market regulations as salves to these shortcomings and concerns. Forest Stewardship Council certifica-tion can be seen as a prime example of roll-out neoliberalism. The Council was formed in a political climate that celebrated small government - its formation was precipitated by ostensible failure of intergovernmental dialogue at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, which offered only a very weak statement on forest principles9. Whilst gov-ernments were purportedly failing, growing demand for sustainable wood products saw another solution brought forward that did not offend market ideals. The FSC then, was born of two moti-vators: first, the growth of a “green” market defined by demand for traceable, sustainable forest products, and a transparent and cred-ible global forestry industry; and second, the failure of state governance at an international level and an ascendant neoliberal paradigm that favoured private and voluntary approaches to environmental managements10,11. Forest Stewardship Council certification stands as a part of “roll out” neoliberal governance as trade for sustainable timber products that was

initially globalised and liberalised is now seen becoming regulated by voluntary corporatist partnerships between civil society groups and private operators. The maxim “let the markets decide” captures one of the core principles of neolib-eral doctrine. Much more than a suite of tech-nical solutions to problems of development, neoliberalism can be thought of as a social, political, and economic project that began to re-organise the globe from the 1980s. It reflects a deep trust in globalised markets, private enterprise, and a diminished role for the state in many domains. Today it continues to powerfully guide not just policy around the world, but the way humans should relate to one another and their environments. In the forestry world, FSC certification could open the door to more sustainable trade through the pursuit of win-wins, or present a splin-tering of the market into two – a sustainable niche, and an unsustainable mainstream. What we do know is that certification cul-ture keeps government small and the market in charge as roll out neoliberalism seeks to regulate environmental management with a minimum of fuss.

Ben and Elliott think that song about going to paradise, but never going to ‘me’ is really profound (I think it’s by Charlene right?).

References1. Forestry Stewardship Council. Global FSC certif-

icates: type and distribution. Factsheet, Forestry Stewardship Council, Bonn: FSC, A.C., 2012

2. Max, Axel, and Dieter Cuypers. “Forest certi-fication as a global environmental govern-ance tool: what macro-effectiveneness of the Forest Stewardship Council?” Regula-tion and Governance 4 (2010): 408-434.

3. Pattberg, Phillip H. Private Governance and the

volume 2, 06/13 [exploring culture] volume 2, 06/13 [exploring culture]14 15

feature

hedda [ransan-cooper]

PhD candidate, School of Sociology, ANU

‘Trying my luck’: A Cultural Perspective on Managing Uncertainty

People working in the fields of environmental management and sustainable devel-opment often face frustrating scenarios in which people do not behave in ‘rational’ or expected ways. For example, “why can’t my colleagues recycle their tuna cans (the recycling bin is right there)?”. Interdisciplinary efforts to understand human-en-vironment dynamics have made us increasingly appreciative of the role of social norms and relationships in answering these kinds of questions. We’re now more attuned to how motivation and everyday behaviour emerge out of habit as well as in response to what people around us are doing. But one aspect that still often seems missing from analyses of sustainability issues is the cultural dimension. Culture is one of those terms that academics have spent lots of time defin-ing because it is not easy to pin down. I find it most useful to think of it as ideas and objects that give meaning to what we do. One related and overlapping concept that aids in delving into cultural understanding is the role of emotions. Examining how emotions play out in everyday life can provide fascinating insights into our cultural norms and possibilities for social change. Rage, fear, hope, anxiety, guilt, joy, delight – these emotions reflect cultural norms, but paradoxically can also be experienced in very personal ways. The study of emotions is an emerging area in the social sciences and in sus-tainability issues. Cleland, for example, mused on the role of hope as an emotion in challenging resource management contexts1. Interesting insights are already emerging. Sometimes feelings seem to arise out of nowhere and we struggle to understand and cope with how we’re feeling. In other situations, they are expressed much more deliberately (as in when you guilt your friend into going out to dinner with you). Wetherell has noticed that emotions can be patterned chronologically2. Some experience the giddy possibility and excitement of the New Year, only to fall back into old habits and passivity a few months later and thus repeated a year later! Patterns of emotional expression can be held by groups of people across a scene, a site or an institution and vary across space in complex ways. They can also be mobilised for political ends as well as reinforcing or creating unequal relations between social groups or individuals.

One of my areas of interest is the nexus between environmental change and migration patterns. In a rural province of the Philippines, Albay, where I did my PhD fieldwork, people are highly mobile, negotiating uncertain livelihoods and shuttling between urban/peri-urban and rural spaces. What is fascinating is that while a considerable amount has been written about emotions and international (or ‘transnational’) migration, in-country movement (far more important numerically) has received far less attention. Elmhirst argues this oversight is linked to research-ers’ own emotional lives; most Western researchers tend to be drawn to topics and research participants they can easily relate to3. In this case, internationally mobile people who are negotiating issues such as homesickness and at-distance parenting, are generally closer to the experience of many academics. Migrants with interna-tional experience are also likely to articulate their feelings in ways researchers can more easily comprehend and interpret. I certainly found conversations in the field emotionally challenging. The cultural gap between me and my research partici-pants often felt cavernous. I would often find myself longing to have a conversation in which I felt comfortable and understood and because of my values and ethics, I also felt guilty about these feelings; I was a ‘privileged’ westerner intruding into people’s lives which they expressed as extremely challenging and often distressing. Who was I then, to worry about feeling uncomfortable and disconnected? Rural to urban or rural to rural in-country mobility has significant sus-tainability implications, including in the areas of urban planning and ecology, changing consumption patterns, and the impacts of deagrarianisation on rural bio-diversity and food security. It’s important we understand what working elsewhere means to people and how this shapes their future relationships with their home villages. Emotions are only one element to understanding mobility decisions, yet in themselves they do provide insight into the dynamics and forces at play. Moving to the city might seem, on the surface, to be a surprising decision given that job security for migrants in the Philippines is an elusive dream. People usually only find jobs in sectors that are short-term (construction) and subject to potential exploitation and unexpected contract termination (household domestic work). Migrants are also far away from friends and family. Filipinos text a lot more than most nationalities, but this is not always enough for people to feel connected and have peace of mind about what’s happening at home. As one villager said, in reference to the phenomenon of extra-marital relationships, “it’s really difficult when a member of the family is away and the only communication is by cellphone. You’ll never know whether or not they’re lying.” People, both single and married, do move to metro Manila and surrounding peri-urban areas, frequently and in large numbers. Part of this are feelings of boredom and hopelessness associated with staying at home in the village, particularly for young people. If an opportu-nity emerges, and particularly if they have friends or relatives to help them settle in, they’ll move to Manila at the drop of a hat. Young people often referred to this as ‘trying my luck’.


Albay is right in the path of typhoons (as well as being in proximity to an active volcano), and farmers say weather patterns are changing with longer dry spells and unseasonal rainfall leading to flooding. With uncertainty surrounding farming outcomes, and a political economy in which the poor are mostly voice-less in policy processes, there is a sense that Manila, with all its possibilities and resources, might somehow bring in a decent source of income. While people are well aware that this is unlikely, even a small chance is enough to provide a measure of hope that you may very well become “lucky”. While young people are in Manila, it’s quite common that they find life difficult, disappointing and lonely. Because they’re far away from their family, they’ll often turn to romantic relationships to ease the loneliness of the experience (a phenomenon much rarer in the case of international migration as the expecta-tions to focus exclusively on working and earning money for the family back home is much higher). Parents are often disappointed when this happens since young married couples have less disposable income to send back home to their families. In many cases these young couples will come back home so their parents can help out with their kids, and increasingly grandparents are looking after not only their own children, but young grandchildren as well. It is interesting to note how emo-tions such as boredom and loneliness may eventually lead to so many ripple effects; sometimes young people feel too homesick and this prompts a return home, or they’ll just be unable to find work and prefer being at home where there is basic food security and the comfort of familiar faces. In other situations, locals who bring spouses they’ve met in Manila might find it difficult to persuade their spouse that Albay is a safe place to live, particularly after a traumatic typhoon event. For example, a lot of younger couples left the area after super typhoon Reming in 2006, out of fear something like this would reoccur. For older villagers – parents – there is more pressure to bear their emotions stoically. Working in Manila provides much needed cash income to send their children to school and, if they are really ‘lucky’, to the tertiary sector. Parents who are away are often anxious about what is happening back home. However, they force themselves to manage their emotions quite deliberately, saying there is nothing they can do about the situation and a pragmatic approach is more helpful than wallowing in anxiety and loneliness. Other times, they do form new families, and this can have serious livelihood consequences for the family left behind, since money sent back is often be the sole source of income. These few examples show that emotions are not only an important element of understanding ‘in the moment’ decisions, but can also reveal taken-for-granted assumptions surrounding cultural values, such as in the above cases, the impor-tance of intimate relationships and contributing to your family’s welfare. In the field I struggled to cope with my own emotions – feelings of being out of my depth and anxiety to be accepted by my research participants. This experience humbled me. I lost a bit of confidence in my own interpersonal skills, something I used to

be quite proud of. Over time and with perspective I began to see participants were trying hard to make me see their life stories. Just because it was communicated in a different way from what I was used to, didn’t mean they weren’t expressing their views and emotions. Emotions permeate all sustainability issues – think of the disgust some people feel at the idea of not showering every day or of composting, or of the fear people feel about control burning close to their homes. We need to try and under-stand emotions and what they tell us about our cultural values and personal histo-ries, rather than relegating them to the edges of our analysis and understanding.

Hedda is a passionate sociologist who wishes she knew David Sedaris in person and is generally happiest when eating buttery pastry with friends.

References1. Cleland, D., 2011, ‘If wishes were fishes’, Griffith Review, vol. 32.2. Wetherell, M., 2012, Affect and Emotion: A New Social Science Understanding, Sage. 3. Elmhirst, R., 2012, ‘Methodological dilemmas in migration research in Asia: re-

search design, omissions and strategic erasures’, Area, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 274-281.


natural resources aplenty, to have access to the markets of cashed up, hungry citizens of ‘developed’ nations. But it isn’t all full bellies and pockets of cash. For example, trade liberalisa-tion and loans from the World Bank have enabled Peruvian asparagus to be exported to Western markets. This is a common occur-rence in international aid and development policy: encourage communities to shift from growing for local consumption to producing commodity crops for export. Asparagus pro-duction brought thousands of jobs to the Ica region of Peru, one of the poorest areas of the country. However, inadequate risk assess-ments by lenders, insurers and investors, and the absence of any resource and devel-opment planning has led to Ica’s groundwa-ter aquifers being unsustainably exploited2.

The consequential social conflict between agro-exporters and small scale farmers, increased economic inequality, and enhanced vulnerability to climate change for the local community seems an illogical price to pay for ‘development’. It is hard to understand how this model of food production and dis-tribution is producing an overall positive for some of the most disadvantaged people in an already impoverished nation. A similar story can be told for hor-ticultural exports out of (often drought stricken) Africa, destined for Europe: farm-ers can export goods, with the majority of economic benefits flowing to the state, while their regional neighbours are relying on international food aid to survive3 and eco-nomic improvement does not translate into poverty reduction4.

opinion

sophia [christoe]

Fenner School of Environment and Society, ANU

As one of the very few consistent elements in all cultures that have ever existed, food is a common vehicle for expressing traditions, customs and values over time. ‘Western food culture,’ a dominant force in economic, insti-tutional, health and environmental spheres, is embedded within the modern industrial food system. Instigated and upheld by the West, the contemporary food system has helped feed millions of hungry in develop-ing nations. However, it is at odds with, and potentially counterproductive to, the sustain-able development agenda. The ‘food system’ is all of the activi-ties between the paddock and the plate: from the growing or rearing in the paddock/field/ocean, to the processing and packaging, dis-tribution and retailing, and final consump-tion of food. Because of the nature of the contemporary globalised food system, our food choices have implications for the lives of people across the world, not to mention the environmental systems they are embedded in. Unfortunately for those of us who live in the West, what is known as ‘Western food culture’ doesn’t sound particularly, erm, cultured. Highly processed, energy dense but nutritionally low food, and sugary drinks are the typical hallmarks of the Western diet. Meat and dairy products, processed carbo-hydrates and higher levels of fats and oils

than many traditional diets are common. The fast food stalwart – the chicken nugget -, is a good example: made with reconstituted meat and skin, glued together with polyphos-phate food additives, battered, deep fried and bagged on a production line, snap frozen, boxed, and then sent to a distribution cen-tre before finally arriving in a supermarket or fast food chain a hundreds or thousands of kilometres from their origin. The food system that gave rise to such a dubious foodstuff emerged post WW2, riding the (fossil fuelled) wave of the Green Revolution. Driven by producing surpluses of food ‘commodities’ which could be traded on international markets in the interests of capital accumulation, agricultural outputs were continually increased through the use of chemical sprays, machinery, fossil fuel-based fertilisers, intensive animal rear-ing, and global transport networks. The sys-tem today sees food transported globally to the most cost-efficient site for processing and packaging, before being distributed and con-sumed wherever the market is most willing to pay. Due to this reasoning, prawns caught off the coast of Britain go to China to be shelled, before being shipped back to Britain for fur-ther processing and consumption1. The system is viewed as an ideal vehi-cle for developing ‘emerging economies’, with

What’s on the Menu Matters: The Food System, Sustainable Development and Food Cultures


Reconstituted animal products tizzed up as ‘meat’ (oh hey there, chicken nuggets). Thirsty asparagus travelling to supermarkets across the globe, while those who farmed it have empty water wells. Developing nations with both over- and under- weight individuals in the same household5. An average 360kgs of food being wasted per capita in Australia6. The erosion of traditional food cultures as a burger and fries becomes the social-status defining meal to consume. Developing nations shifting from being net food exporters to net importers… is all of this what developing nations should be encouraged by the West to strive towards? Is this contemporary industrialised food system, and the projected Western culture of food what we can call ‘developed’? I think not. The contemporary food system has successfully contributed to increasing living standards and decreasing poverty and disease over the past 65 years. Yet the industrialised, commoditised, Western culture of food that spreads with it is coun-terproductive to the intended benefits of the system. The dominant patterns of food production and consumption that we enjoy in Australia are not sustainable, and are not going to equitably improve the lives of those in developing nations. Rather than following a culturally imperialist agenda of food system development, as is the sta-tus quo today, efforts to sustainably improve the quality of life of the world’s most disadvantaged must be guided by culturally informed food practices and customs in each nation. Whether a nation wants its food culture to be commoditised into the next McAloo Tikki burger ought to be determined by those whose lives are sup-posed to be improved by such decisions, not by some introduced and flawed notion of how food should be produced, processed, distributed and ultimately enjoyed.

Sophia is a food thinker, grower, preserver and lover, and advocate for a big ol ’ shake up of our current food system.

References1. British prawns go to China to be shelled, 20th May 2007, The Sunday Times.2. Progressio, 2010. Drop by drop: Understanding the impacts of the

UK’s water footprint through a case study of Peruvian asparagus. Pro-gressio, CEPES and Water Witness International, London.

3. Spence, T., 2012. EU’s food imports pose ‘tricky balance’ for hun-gry Africans, EurActiv Network, Brussels.

4. UN Economic Commission for Africa, 2011. Governing development in Africa – the role of the state in economic transformation, UN Economic Commission for Africa, Addis Ababa.

5. Pingali, P., 2007. Westernization of Asian diets and the transformation of food sys-tems: Implications for research and policy, Food Policy 32(3):281-298.

6. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communi-ties, 2010. National Waste Report 2010, Australian Government, Canberra.

The Conference CupidInternational environmental conferences are an international melting-pot of passionate, intelli-gent and often attractive individuals. A long time ago in 2011 the “Conference Cupid” engaged in informal round-table discussions in order to design Pick-Up Lines (PULs) for targeted, spe-cific use at environmental negotiations. The PULs have been placed into two separate but equally important work streams; The Implementable are able to mitigate the neg-ative impacts of conventional PULs and result in a slight chance of further conversation. The Slappable? Well, not so much… If you ever find yourself at an environ-mental conference, please feel free to try and implement one of these.

Implementable:“Never mind the commitment period, I pledge myself to you… but can we review it tomorrow?” The United States has proposed that the next global agreement, to be decided upon in 2015, should be a pledge and review system where states pledge to do what they can and use international negotiations as simply an arena to talk about and ‘review’ their commitments (no strings or compliance attached!). But, who knows, perhaps such a flimsy framework could be successfully applied to the dating scene?

Slappable:“Let me remove your bra[ckets].” Within international environmental law brackets within a text denote that a particular section of text is still contested or up for deletion. Accordingly, removing the bracketed text in this case makes this line a bit more… interesting.


Lessons in Culture [Jamming]: Communication Guerrillas Alert

regular

home economics for sustainability

the dreaded twins

And how?The choice is yours. Unleash your imagi-

nation! Suggestions: print out mock post-

ers / do cutouts to go on top of lit up signs

/ change signs / have cutouts to put over

certain parts of ads to make them differ-

ent / make whole new ads / propaganda

/ SUBVERTISE. Make sure you have

good resources, don’t get caught and be

professional. Or not. Whatever you want.

Clear the streets of mental junk, occupy

the streetscape and make different voices,

choices available.

Who-do? You-do! Voo-doo?

Are you a member of society? Do you

long to answer to the brain-washing black

magic of the ubiquitous billboard, the

obedience-demanding sign, the propa-

ganda paparazzi? Do you have two hands,

imagination and a bit o’ pep? THIS MAY

BE THE JOB FOR YOU.

Your studio is open, ready, waiting. Be

free. Be free, you little artistic terrorists.

1. Mark Dery, quoting Negativland in Cul-

ture Jamming: Hacking, Slashing and

Sniping in the Empire of Signs (1993)

What the?Culture jamming is a strategy used in anti-consumer social movements, wherein public spaces such those used for corpo-rate advertising or propaganda (or empty ones) are sabotaged or ‘subvertised’ to change their original message to make the populace think twice about the per-petual media vomit rained upon them in everyday life.

Why?Why not? We live in a world of imposed normative culture. The primary vehicle for this is coercive consent through the manipulation of symbols, or branding. “As awareness of how the media envi-ronment we occupy affects and directs our inner life grows, some resist… The skillfully reworked billboard… directs the public viewer to a consideration of the original corporate strategy. The studio for the cultural jammer is the world at large.”1 Culture jamming doesn’t only criticise the dominant media in its pure form, but – hopefully – eclipses the original message in style and punch.


regular

the law abiding citizen

luke [kemp], PhD student, ANU

Questioning Culture, Questioning Consensus

Have international law and institutions shaped the environmental movement towards its own demise? It is commonly thought that culture shapes law and institutions. However, it is misleading not to see this process as a two-way street. Culture is moulded, for better or for worse, by institutional structures. The World Trade Organisation was a product of economic neoliberalism, but was also instru-mental in enforcing neoliberalism ideology and therefore in shaping political and social culture internationally. The concept of diffusion posits that an idea or practice can spread from one culture to another, primarily through social channels such as people and mass media1. Looking at diffusion within much of the environmental movement2 we can see that NGOs working on the national and local level, as well as grass-roots movements, have been shaped by the international processes that they crit-icise. It is an interesting form of ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ where civil society has married itself to many of the same processes happen-ing within international conferences. Some unfortunate examples of this are the insis-tence upon consensus decision-making and horizontal, non-hierarchical management. The most famous international

environmental conventions – the ‘Rio’ con-ventions on biodiversity, climate and desert-ification – all work on the principal of con-sensus (which has no international legal definition but is usually interpreted as the absence of direct objection by a member party). While it is often not codified as law in these conventions (both climate and biodi-versity conventions have no formally adopted rules of procedure due to disputes over major-ity voting)3 this adopted practice of consen-sus has trickled down to the culture of many environmental groups. Consensus is now seen as a fun-damental part of a culture of altruism and legitimacy amongst many environmental groups at different scales. This can also be linked to a strong opposition to hierarchy and preference for horizontal decision-mak-ing. However, horizontal decision-making simply refers to a greater decentralisation of power and greater autonomy between dif-ferent organisational elements. Horizontal management does not necessitate consensus or complete equality regardless of expertise. In fact, resorting to voting when consensus cannot be achieved could be seen as a more horizontal form of decision-making since it involves ceding some personal sovereignty to the greater good of the group.

Institutional cultures adopted from other structures should be closely interro-gated, because often they do not reflect best practice. Opposition to hierarchy and major-ity voting within the realm of international environmental policy have often been the bane of progress. Environmental conventions with consensus decision-making have been the slowest to progress. In contrast, major-ity voting was used in the Montreal Protocol (the most successful environmental treaty in history which addressed the ozone hole) under Article 2.9(c)4, because it was seen as a pressing concern that required the prioritisa-tion of outcomes. Funnily enough, majority voting was never used in the protocol. This is because voting tends to be better at building and achieving consensus then consensus is. The threat of going to a vote makes blockers show more compromise in negotiations. Granted, this is a relatively sim-plistic analysis. Culture and law are both based upon history and the socio-political context. The environmental movement was partly born from an opposition to the mili-tary-industrial complex (hence the emphasis on non-hierarchical structures and inclusiv-ity) and moulded by other civil movements, including the recent “Occupy” movement. However, we need to remember that the cur-rent power of corporations and the military is a result of their successes – successes that have been partially built upon some good management practices and institutional structures. Moreover, the culture of horizon-tal management and consensus didn’t exactly work out well for “Occupy” which fizzled out over time due to a lack of leadership and an inability to develop and communicate clear goals or an over-arching strategy. This is not to say that consensus and horizontal management can never be

valuable approaches. For some local level organisations these attributes can provide accessibility and strength. But for others working at the international level or across a range of controversial topics these institu-tional characteristics can lead to extremely ineffective procedures and fragmentation. A diplomat in the climate change negotiations once remarked that “in this process, process is substance”5. This has become the unfortu-nate reality for many groups working within the wider environmental movement. Culture, like law, should be seen as adaptable. So, perhaps the environmental movement needs to review its own culture and institutions – if they are not achieving the desired outcomes then they should be reformed. We need to adopt a culture that is more outcome-focused and which does not prioritise notions of participation and con-sensus over effectiveness. Churchill once famously remarked that “We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us.” If we cannot learn to change our institutions to suit the problems we are fac-ing, then they may collapse upon us.

1. Strang, David. 1998. “Diffusion in Organ-isations and Social Movements: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills” in Annual Re-view of Sociology, Vol 24, pp265-290.

2. Environmental movement in this article refers to the operation of many, but not all, sub-na-tional and supra-national environmental groups. To a degree this excludes some or-ganisations such as WWF which have taken on more corporatist structures internationally.

3. Legal Response Initiative. 2011. “Issues on Consensus in the UNFCCC Process”.

4. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2000. “The Montreal Protocol on Substanc-es That Deplete the Ozone Layer,” Nairobi.

5. Antto. Vihma and Kati, Kulovesi. 2012. “Strengthening Global Climate Change Ne-gotiations: Improving the Efficiency of the UNFCCC Process,” in Nordic Working Papers, Nordic Council of Ministers.


UsOnce upon a time, a dedicated group of students from different disciplines went on a journey far, far away (Brazil) to hear lots of people (the UN) talk about the future we want and try to solve the world’s problems, in the form of a conference (Rio+20).

WhatAmbiente is the lovechild of this affair, a pro-fessionally wayward whim in paper (and soon cyber) form.

WhoAmbiente is a publication for the abundance of students working on the cutting edge of sustainable development research, whose efforts and ideas often go unheard of outside of academic circles. Although a student-driven publication, Ambiente invites readership of a wider audience, and is designed to be a space for sharing and learning.

YouWe welcome contributions from all walks of life, primarily students, but really, we’re all continually learning, right? Research-based, opinion, and not least, creative, show us your colours so they can be shared.

To contribute to Ambiente, please email us at [email protected]

noun (Portuguese, Spanish)

environment, climate, surroundings

Brazil, land of the Amazon and the samba, has a relationship with landmark moments in environmental history. Both the 1992 Earth Summit and its recent 20-year anniversary, Rio+20, were held in Rio de Janeiro. As with the infamous ‘sustainable development’ term, the Brazilian Portuguese word ‘ambiente’ denotes not just the natural environment, but deals with a wider conception of a holistic (social, economic and ecological) environment within which we must all live.

/ a m • b e n • t i /

~

Date post:	13-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ambiente-zine
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times

ambiente, issue 2

Documents