iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Edward Norton

GET UPDATES FROM Edward Norton
 

Earth Day 2012: This Isn't About Tree-Hugging Anymore, It's About The Way We Live

Posted: 04/21/2012 11:27 am

Most of what I know about environmental conservation I learned from my father, who has been one of the leading minds and strategic architects of the movement for over 30 years.

When Dad was head of public policy for the Wilderness Society in the early '80s, he affixed a "Swat Watt" bumper-sticker to our Volvo... I asked who James Watt was and why we needed to swat him and thus began my education in the interplay between politics and the environment... a discourse that has essentially continued to this day. In litigating the Watt EPA, founding the Grand Canyon Trust, leading the Nature Conservancy's pioneering program in China, and brokering the largest public/private purchase of timber holdings for conservancy in U.S. history or working with private equity titans to audit the environmental impact of their investments to increase both their sustainability and their returns, Dad's essential accomplishment, along with other leading advocates of his generation, has been to infuse hard-nosed professionalism and legal acumen into a movement that had previously been anchored in emotional appeal from the days of John Muir through to David Brower.

Dad's career spans an era that has seen the strategy of fighting for the 'intrinsic spiritual value of nature' give way to making the 'bottom line' argument that we have to accurately account for the value of natural resources in our global economy and confront the economic consequences of destruction of ecosystems and loss of biodiversity. In the face of the needs of 7 billion people, this might now have to be acknowledged as the only argument that stands us a chance of saving the planet anymore. This also happens to be the moment that Dad's generation is passing the baton to mine and it doesn't seem too dramatic to suggest that what we do with it in the next 40 years is going to define the next era of human experience on Earth.

I think that every generation is called in different ways to a higher purpose and is forced to realize that the Great Challenge of an era will identify itself; we don't get to choose it. My grandparent's generation certainly had other plans when they rose and faced the great battles against fascism and totalitarianism; my parents' generation sacrificed care-free youth to carry the torch of civil rights and social equality.

I'm 42 years old. I have little doubt that the legacy of my generation and likely the next will hinge on how we responded to the revelation that we were altering the natural systems of this planet in ways that could not sustain our civilization. The geo-political realities of our moment and all of our domestic social arguments are going to seem like minor squabbles to future generations facing the massive destabilizations that we're queuing up for them with our heedless degradation of the global environment. Whether our great-great grandchildren look at us as wise or as latter-day Nero's, fiddling while the planet burned, is a fate that's going to be decided by what we do in the second Century of the environmental movement.

I feel fairly confident in saying that my generation and even those younger than us have accepted this as our cause and that we are ready to rise to the challenge. And by that I don't mean just the small acts of using CFL's and biodegradable soaps and less plastic. I mean that we understand and are prepared to pay the true long-term costs of overhauling the basic infrastructure of how we live. But we face a daunting reality, which is that all the activism of the last 50 years has not stopped the juggernaut of environmental degradation and climate change and all of the righteous advocacy of the next 50 will still not meet the scale of this challenge unless bold action is taken by political leadership.

Let's say this bluntly: We need a national, bi-partisan commitment to legislation curbing carbon emissions here at home and we need it to have teeth and we need it immediately. And we need to invest in an American technological future that operates sustainably within the natural systems that support our lives.

This isn't about tree-hugging and fish-kissing anymore, it's about the way we live. In the housing sector alone, a federal investment of $5 billion a year over 10 years to 'greening' our housing stock could deliver huge benefits across the board: 25-40 percent energy savings in up to 25 million residential units, up to 50 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions avoided and hundreds of thousands of green jobs created annually when fully implemented.

Such a federal commitment is relatively modest when one considers that HUD currently spends more than $4 billion annually to pay utilities in inefficient government-assisted properties.

The point is that solutions are available but there has been faint political will and now there is no more time for small scale, incremental progress. Policymakers must act with urgency and seriousness of purpose. For starters, Congress simply should not continue to allow taxpayer funds to support building of any kind that does not meet a more demanding minimum standard for energy efficiency and lower carbon emissions.

These are policy decisions that should be easy...they transcend partisan economic philosophies and achieve that rare benchmark of true common sense.

International agreements like the Convention on Biodiversity are important too. Cynics could say these are gestural or bureaucratic or difficult to enforce... but the world community can't get serious about addressing a problem unless that problem is defined, acknowledged and solutions are outlined. How much time have we wasted failing to address climate change just trying to get our leaders to acknowledge the fact that it is happening? Leadership means facing difficult realities and committing to the sacrifices entailed in addressing them. The United States is one of only 3 countries in the United Nations that is not a signatory to the Convention on Biodiversity, having failed to ratify President Clinton's commitment. That's not leadership.

Grassroots action matters too. Earth Day is important because it's about waking up more people to this challenge and committing to engage in it more deeply ourselves. Power in numbers is real, and when we take collective action it matters. We can affect things with daily choices like the products we buy, we can affect things with our votes and we can also affect the pace of change by directly supporting the many terrific organizations working for environmental health.

My partners and I at CrowdRise have set up this fundraising Challenge where you can read all about dozens of the organizations working for the cause of defending the Earth, with all its miraculous life and incredible systems, and a small contribution will help some of them win a total of $50,000 in support from our pals at Groupon.

Martin Luther King spoke famously of 'the urgency of now' but his next words were equally profound. He said:

"We have no time to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism."

It's time to get serious.

Edward Norton is an actor and filmmaker who has starred in over 25 films and been nominated for two Academy Awards. He serves as the UN Ambassador for Biodiversity and is a Board member of Enterprise Community Partners, one of the largest non-profit developers of 'green' affordable housing in America. In 2010 he co-founded CrowdRise, a web platform to empower people and charities to revolutionize activism and fundraising.

 
FOLLOW GREEN
Most of what I know about environmental conservation I learned from my father, who has been one of the leading minds and strategic architects of the movement for over 30 years. When Dad was head of ...
Most of what I know about environmental conservation I learned from my father, who has been one of the leading minds and strategic architects of the movement for over 30 years. When Dad was head of ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 772
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
08:41 PM on 06/10/2012
Im sure we could all write a book about what trees do for us. Their impacts on our health, our happiness and our survival are paramount. We need them more than they need us. What can we do for them? At the very least we can give them a big old hug, climb them, and start our political actions from that point always. We need to plant trees, have our children reclaim the lands and climb the trees we plant everywhere, we don’t need anyone’s permission; we can grow our own corridors just like those women did with far less resources than we have! The answer is simple.
Mr Norton, I think you’re right, environment day 2012 is about the way we live, but it starts with the trees. The forests are the front line, the houses of governments are just people, perhaps we can plant a whole forest around the white house? The trees are what need to be saved and grown, we need to be near them to actually know and care and direct our energy toward them. Hundertwasser said it best in his 1972 manifesto,’ your window right- your tree duty.’ The human race will begin and end around trees.
08:39 PM on 06/10/2012
Amrita Devi inspired the Chipko movement in the 70’s, women organized to protect trees against government logging by choosing a sister tree to hug and protect from the axes and to dress the wounds of the sapping tools incisions. They too succeeded in protecting their forest from government logging and still today have control of the policies that affect their forest. That’s a highly political act that starts with choosing a tree to hug.

Wangari Maathai won the noble peace prize for linking equality, democracy, women and trees in one fantastic revolution of tree planting. Women formed a green belt by planting 30 million trees, all on private property recreating a green corridor, saving their lands from desertification; this would not have been done if they relied on protest exclusively, waiting for the government to plant trees, their environment was saved by just getting together and planting trees. Maathai’s famous closing line for the noble peace prize speech was ‘My life is my message. Also plant a tree.’

Hugging a Tree is political, is dangerous, is appreciative, is caring, is connecting, is the very heart of biodiversity, both for the ecology and for our survival. Just planting trees brought arrests, threats and governmental restrictions against women who gathered to plant. Maathai was hospitalized in the process from government brutality. I believe activism starts with the trees, once their planted and held onto, after all that’s the front line. We know the solution, we don’t need government permission.
08:36 PM on 06/10/2012
Mr Norton you call for a bipartisan agreement and for people to keep organizing protest and pressure through the way they live. But why do you think people care? Why do you think people will be motivated for the environment? I’ve come to the conclusion it is because they have a connection to it, an innate, instinctual and developed relationship that’s essential to their quality of life, spiritually, physically, mentally, emotionally and socially. This connection starts in childhood and often with climbing trees and essentially spending hours, days and years growing up in and around nature.

Tree hugging through climbing is not only a necessary part of growing up, a life affirming act in itself, but it is also the political and moral birth of the environmental movement. And why is that? Because it has been women who have led an awakening, even at the costs of their lives, for the solutions that only biodiversity can offer. Amrita Devi the world’s first recorded tree hugger gave her life hugging a tree. This act of loving might led to her three daughters doing the same and the village following, 363 people died that day. They saved their forest and it became the world’s first dedicated environmental reserve. This wasn’t in a targeted protest at the governing power, this was tree focused activism.
08:34 PM on 06/10/2012
Dear Mr Norton,

Your title was the perfect example of what I discovered to be the greatest delusion that we culturally suffer under. That hugging a tree is an impotent act. That it is not dangerously political, or deeper still, it’s an immature response to the current environmental concerns, the obvious inference that hugging a tree is like nature itself, powerless to change the coming destruction- a docile attempt at child’s play activism.

I am an artist that works with trees and through the research I’ve embarked on over the years, I discovered that tree hugging is not only the birth of the environmental movement but was and still is a front line political act. It is the physical and moral heart of environmentalism spanning beyond your fathers 30 years, right back to 1730 AD. This myth of the hippydippy act of hugging a tree has been propagated to us for hundreds of years. To say that hugging a tree is useless act or that our only focus should be targeting government means that institution is more important than nature itself. It’s the classic schism that institution is where the power is and people are always encouraged to address any ‘mature’ or rational activism towards the government to save our environment. It is the age old gap between culture and nature, that culture is where our energy should be rather than nature.
03:47 PM on 04/24/2012
The original Earth day emphasized the population issue.

It is a fact that having a child double's one's lifetime environmental footprint.

It is also a fact that the child in its life will consume more than the parent in its remaining life.

It is also a fact that none of the trendy feel-good remedies mentioned in this thread would reduce the footprint of either the parent or the child by half let alone reduce both by half.

Therefore, having a child is a non-remediable environmental sin.

Would the breeders in the audience care to prove otherwise with numbers, not emotions?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:41 PM on 04/24/2012
Your WRONG. What we need is a states rights scenario where the blue states become bluer and the red states get redder. The inevitable outcome will be ecotopias in the blue states and wastelands in the reds. Population reduction will occur naturally as we move towards smaller self sustainable societies. Ecologically [and societally] speaking, the healthier system would not be a blanket of declining mediocrity, but a patchwork of diversity. Please Ed; wake up and join us in the fight against the trudge toward a homogenous, future of uniform grey muck. Your right that we need to make a major sacrifice but switching brands of toilet paper aint gonna do it.
05:01 AM on 04/24/2012
You raise some valid points that still need to be refined. Unless the issues you raise are aligned with the overall necessity to improve American Democracy no such solutions can ever be approached.
12:37 AM on 04/24/2012
Dear Ed,
please, please, please make a movie about Masanobu Fukuoka.

Read his books "The One Straw Revolution", "The Road Back to Nature" and "The Natural Way of Farming".

You can download the first 2 from my website.

organicandsustainablegardening.yolasite.com

And thanx for caring.
11:50 PM on 04/23/2012
Thank you Mr. Norton. To the rest:

Please do consider the possibility that its time to:

Stop Your Engines! . . . . as suggested at

http://www.StopYourEngines.com
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lance Manling
03:20 PM on 04/24/2012
Do monster trucks count?
11:20 PM on 04/23/2012
No, Mr. Norton, it is still tree hugging. We are contemplating seriously damaging our economy because of unproved and unprovable theories about global climate change. Your fantasy foray into the world view of your parents' and grandparents' generations, are limited in perspective by your age. I go back further: my parents' generation gave us the Great Depression and W.W.II. My generation grew up during the Great Depression and fought W.W.II. No offense intended but you self-canonized, moral exhibitionists, are not doing the earth any good and could do mankind grievous harm. Please find another passion. You will enjoy life more and will do less harm.
05:03 AM on 04/24/2012
I'm sure you mean well but we cannot exclude entirely some of the issues raised.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
malcolmjackson
11:57 AM on 04/24/2012
Tree hugging is very important. Trees like it, and we like it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
electrosef
Blue-green-purple Reality exposure
09:39 PM on 04/23/2012
The regulation needed to promote a greener America is fought diligently and strenuously by corporate interests seeking to maximize their bottom lines, And, that is exactly what corporations should do... it's called business. Only governance can supply regulation. Our problem is that now, more than ever, corporations decide what our government will do. If we are to have change, we must put human citizens in charge of governance, and keep corporations out of it. Corporations have no place in government, and will do just fine in business without meddling.
05:06 AM on 04/24/2012
Well written however corporations may still provide something of value toward American progress.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
electrosef
Blue-green-purple Reality exposure
04:20 PM on 04/24/2012
Of course, if a given commercial initiative turns out to support human progress, that corporation will be fostering something of value toward American progress, but it's merely coincidence. Human civilization, at its present state of evolvement, could not possibly exist without commercial corporations. There is nothing wrong with corporations. They have a clear, and very worthwhile agenda: to make a profit. The problem that has arisen is that now, after centuries of progress toward increasing the citizen empowerment held within democratic principles, wealthy corporate interests, entities and individuals are regaining a more complete control of governance, and pushing democracy back towards the state it was in 500 or a thousand years ago.

Only in relatively recent times have common citizens had ANY power... much to the chagrin of wealthy interests. Those interests are always working to increase their leverage. It is up to we citizens to protect the gains of democracy, gains which took a bold leap forward right here in the USA, back in 1789, but are now sliding backward, giving the power back to the wealthy few. The legitimate profit motive of all corporate agenda will never be a good way to advance the value of human life for all, and therefore must be kept OUT of governmental process.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lance Manling
03:22 PM on 04/24/2012
So what you are saying is that corporations are the problem?
06:51 PM on 04/23/2012
Nicely done, but the omission of any reference to overpopulation in the context of concern for the environment is like building an airplane while ignoring gravity. For the best single source essays on population, see www.paulchefurka.ca
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Starr
11:06 PM on 04/23/2012
Overpopulation canard is racism! We can support what we have and more.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TruelyFedUp
Ethics is nothing else than reverence for life.
12:24 AM on 04/24/2012
Let's throw in some quality of life for all those starving or displaced before we grow another billion people.
12:11 AM on 04/24/2012
The problem is not over-population. It is mismanagement.
The plow is responsible for the birth of civilisation but will ultimately be responsible for its demise as well. 1.3 billion hectares of land is plowed resulting in the loss of billions of tonnes of topsoil every year and preventing water from penetrating the earth and replenishing the water table.
Equally wars have done massive damage and political instability round the world prevents education and solutions solutions.

We need to adopt sustainable agriculture practices like non-tillage farming methods. Pasture cropping allows for the growing of crops in pasture land without plowing and actually helps to build soil rather than wash it into the rivers and seas.

With good management the deserts can be made to bloom and the world could support many more people than we have today.

Check out my website on sustainable land care - organicandsustainablegardening.yolasite.com
06:38 PM on 04/23/2012
Over 7 billion people for Doctor Lecter to choose among today; what a volume of choices we all have.
03:48 PM on 04/23/2012
Great post, Edward. Thank you for this moment of clarity.

We made a film which shows the complex effects humans have on sea otters and ocean health. After seeing the film people often ask us what they can do to help sea otters. I always struggle with that question...we all want there to be a simple magical solution. But there simply isn't.

The problem is our diffuse impact on both land and sea which affects sea otters and ocean ecosystems in myriad ways. The solution requires large-scale adjustments in the way humans use and abuse our natural resources. It's hard to admit this honestly because it feels like an awfully big request for folks who say they want to "do something". But our generation is now building a movement of people who will do whatever is needed to achieve balance with our natural resources, people who want to see the big picture. Maybe this chance to sign on to a bi-partisan, grassroots, self-preserving call-to-action is really what these folks are ready for. Sea otter are simply providing the spark.

- Katie Pofahl, lead human character in the film "Otter 501"

Learn more about our film project on our facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/otter501).
02:58 PM on 04/23/2012
"This isn't about tree-hugging and fish-kissing anymore...." It never was. It was always about the way we live and the relationship of industry to the environment. When Earth Day began, Lake Erie had been pronounced dead and Ohio's Cuyahoga River was in flames. References to "tree-huggers" was an attempt to mischaracterize the concerns of environmental realists by those who opposed them. Labels like "communists" were used to mischaracterize their motives. The same old, same old propaganda continues in the very same war between sanity and greed. The stakes, however, are greater because for all the efforts that have been made over the last forty odd years, industry has fought regulation tooth and nail and refused to deal with reality. Thus, the planet, or at least our survivability on it, is on life support.