Read on Twitter
tonight 8 pm CET, Professor Steinberger on how we got addicted to cars, online and accessible to all! @JKSteinberger https://www.sg.uu.nl/agenda/2021/how-we-got-addicted-cars
Professor Steinberg starts by reviewing the data on climate change, and the risks and dangers involved.
Next: explains how the 'Living well within limits' project - https://lili.leeds.ac.uk/ - does research: by asking different questions than mainstream economics.
Next: explains how the 'Living well within limits' project - https://lili.leeds.ac.uk/ - does research: by asking different questions than mainstream economics.
How? (1) from Utility to needs-based understading of wellbeing; (2) needs statisfiers as context dependent, (3) look at provisioning systems, rather than just suppliers.
Transport: why look at this? (1) transport is hugely unequal, but also energy-intensive
cfr. results from Oswald Owen and Steinberg (2020) Nature Energy - http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/156055/3/Submission%2520manuscript%25202.05%2520Y.O.%2520A.O.%2520J.K.S%5B1%5D.pdf
cfr. results from Oswald Owen and Steinberg (2020) Nature Energy - http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/156055/3/Submission%2520manuscript%25202.05%2520Y.O.%2520A.O.%2520J.K.S%5B1%5D.pdf
Other finding from this reserach field: high-energy intensity of consumption from high income groups is almost entirely related to transport.
Moreover: second largest type of sector where the emissions increase are SUV's.
Moreover: second largest type of sector where the emissions increase are SUV's.
The problem is not just that it is bad, but that it is getting worse. Therefore: we need to heavily tax or ban SUVs and frequent flights.
This brings us to the question: how did we get so addicated to cars?
This brings us to the question: how did we get so addicated to cars?
method to answer this type of questions: systems of provision. Look at who gets why and how. -> a systematic way of to analyse how provising works, hence also include questions of power.
applying this method to the political economy of car-dependency: Mattioli, Roberts, Steinberger and Brown (2020) Energy Research and Social Science. - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629620300633
The team looked from a multidisciplinary perspective at (1) car industry: has a lot of political lobbying power, due to its geographic concentration. These companies can not degrow without going into crisis; so they constantly need to extent their markets.
(2) Road Building: has huge lobby'ing power, first from outside government now from the inside (ministries). They have different [argumentative] strategies to always be the answer - road building is the solution to all problems for all political sides in society.
(3) interconnection between different sectors, e.g. between public transport and car cultures. When there are battles in public spaces, the cars generally win [as our neighbours from @Amelisweerd know!]
(4) car finance bubble: people into debt for their car.
(5) ...
(6) relation to politics, e.g. the relation between Victor Orban and the energy industry.
(5) ...
(6) relation to politics, e.g. the relation between Victor Orban and the energy industry.
[while I was writing and submitting a question...]
conclusions, including:
- we need more students and scholars to analyse cars.
- scholars who know about the climate crisis should support the movements, but also support civil disobedience in this area.
conclusions, including:
- we need more students and scholars to analyse cars.
- scholars who know about the climate crisis should support the movements, but also support civil disobedience in this area.
Q&A!
@JKSteinberger argues that companies like @Shell should be held accountable for what they *knowingly* have been doing, and that we should be crack their mask open the real face of those companies, which they create by sponsoring musea, giving talks at schools, etc.
@JKSteinberger argues that companies like @Shell should be held accountable for what they *knowingly* have been doing, and that we should be crack their mask open the real face of those companies, which they create by sponsoring musea, giving talks at schools, etc.
So it's a good thing that they are being suited in court.
Example in the US: FF companies accept a small carbon tax, but only if they cannot be held liable to larger damages. [So important to be very careful with their tactics.]
Example in the US: FF companies accept a small carbon tax, but only if they cannot be held liable to larger damages. [So important to be very careful with their tactics.]
Are the rich to blame? Yes, not just because their higher emissions, but also because they tend to be more powerful, they could change things for the better, and are more involved in polluting industries.
see https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16941-y
see https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16941-y
[here's an article I wrote that addresses related questions from the perspective of political philosophy. One of my arguments is that many rich would never be so rich if they had paid the 'fair' price for the polluting goods] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19452829.2019.1633734
on Car Culture: that was created, e.g. the associatoin with 'freedom', which disappeared after people got stock in traffic jam - it then moved to ideals of personal space - car as a bubble where you're safe from the world.
My Question! :)
What to think of making public transportation free? There is a reason against it, namely that the negative externality of pollution is not internalised in the price. Is that an overriding reason?
JS: we tend to think that this is a mass subsidy, but car users >
What to think of making public transportation free? There is a reason against it, namely that the negative externality of pollution is not internalised in the price. Is that an overriding reason?
JS: we tend to think that this is a mass subsidy, but car users >
profit massively from the roads, which public transport users profit not/less from. There may be a capacity problem if people start massively using the train systems, but all things considered it might be a good policy.
JS now discussing the nationalising of fosile fuel energy companies; in the US, coal plants would have dissappeared from a competitive market if Trump had not massively supported them. Nationalising FF industries shoudl be considered.
Q: what about suburbia in the USA. Would public transportation there be difficult to realise?
JS: same problem with low-density areas. But you can run a public transportation systems, but you need to guarantee the interconnectiions. Therefore you need a strong regulator.
JS: same problem with low-density areas. But you can run a public transportation systems, but you need to guarantee the interconnectiions. Therefore you need a strong regulator.
I had to laugh out loud, when JS told the audience: In Switserland there was a political party of car-drivers. They ended up as part of the extreme right...
This was part of the answer to the question: how to raise more debate about this issue? No easy answers...
This was part of the answer to the question: how to raise more debate about this issue? No easy answers...
Pubilc transporttion is also very important for activism, it's a great way to connect and make social fabric, but it makes us vulnerable to eachother now under the pandemic.
Who should do things differently? Trying to convince everyone that we all have to see the benefit in doing things this way, that there are people currently profiting from this system.
We shouldn't be overconsuming, but we can aspire to live well, hence have private sufficiency and public luxury, e.g. nice public spaces and high-quality public infrastructure and facilities. This would not require a lot of energy. It is much more efficient to do it this way.
Q: what made you an ecological economists, and an activist?
JS: economics is at the heart of many of our problems, I wanted to understand that. I became more of an activist when Trump was elected, because reality and science didn't matter, and he could get away with lies.
JS: economics is at the heart of many of our problems, I wanted to understand that. I became more of an activist when Trump was elected, because reality and science didn't matter, and he could get away with lies.
So we could take responsibility to stand up for reality. You can't have integrity and stay silent when the world is going in the wrong direction.
Thanks @JKSteinberger, that was awesome!
