Over the past eight years here in the United States, we have experienced turmoil from political unrest, violence in our streets, and the aftermath of a pandemic, all of which have left this country divided and on edge for the next disruptive event.
An undercurrent of divisiveness continues to manifest albeit below the radar per se. That dividing line separates those who are committed to sustainability and those who resist or deny its legitimacy as a serious societal problem. Not to mention what our lack of awareness and action toward reducing sustainability risk is doing to our planet’s health. This divisiveness has its roots in psychology as well as finance and threatens to be the most serious and consequential of our individual choices for a harmonious future.
The reasons for this divisiveness are many and varied and have as much to do with our current living standards and our unwillingness to let go of what’s comfortable for the ‘new’ normal. If the pandemic taught us anything, it is that we must be more adaptable and understand that threats to our well-being and that of our environment can come from anywhere at anytime. To finger-point or use politics as a fallback only exacerbates the problem.
What we resist, persists.
As humans, we naturally resist what we either don’t understand, don’t like (for reasons such as taste, color preference, etc…), or what takes us out of our comfort zone. We may, for religious reasons, also resist because the issue in question runs counter to our faith and beliefs. The divisive issues discussed in the opening paragraph allow us to create this divisiveness without a pushback to our resistance.
Sustainability is different. Very different in part because of what we treasure as part of our comfort zone: control. Climate risk, food security, water resources, infrastructure, and other key drivers of our economy and our well-being for the most part lie outside of our ability to manage successfully on our terms. The more we extract and consume, the greater the risk. You can say the same thing about resistance. The risk gets magnified the more we push back against transforming to a more sustainable lifestyle.
Is Money the Great Equalizer?
Hardly. The divide between those who have and those who don’t and are struggling only gets wider by the year. The cost of transitioning to and maintaining a sustainable world economy will be in the trillions of dollars if you believe the UN’s latest COP 27 projections (A Core Question at COP27: Who will pay for Climate Change?)
And if you require further proof, look no further than Mckinsey’s latest recommendations for CEOs who need to create a pathway to net zero and the cost of implementing a net zero initiative. Individually, each one of us will pay a price for ignoring or pushing back on sustainable measures because the arbiter of our actions will be no less than our planet and our environment. We are already seeing the devastation up close and the price in dollars and cents to try and recover, let alone get out in front of future events.
Behavior modification – the true risk/reward elixir?
Bringing together groups of individuals or firms that reside on one side of an issue or another is both tricky and complicated. Firms can be regulated and forced to comply with mandates that insist upon measuring and contributing to a sustainable society. For individuals, however, a more balanced approach using behavior modification may provide a more realistic way of adopting sustainability as an alternative to current lifestyle choices.
Studies have shown that monetary rewards for a behavior alteration are short-lived at best. This has to do with the difference between a reward that is intrinsic versus external (Wharton) To incentivize individuals to embrace sustainability will require a reward system that is less about external ‘gifts’ and more about the internal or evidence one can see and point to as a direct consequence of his/her transition to sustainability. Here are some real-world examples of what this might look like:
1. Idling cars in parking lots, and driveways or just about anywhere except on the road. Provide certification for GHG emissions saved by turning off the car through onboard technology that gives direct feedback to the driver. Certification can be used to get a lower rate on car insurance.
2. Turning down air conditioning or heat during summer and winter months reduces more GHG emissions (again a certification can be issued) and utilizing smart home technology to alert the homeowner/renter of the amount of GHG emissions reduced and the effect on our planet.
3. Decrease the amount of water used for washing cars, watering lawns or country club courses, and everyday showers or dishwasher use. Utilize a smart home system tied to the water meter to alert the homeowner/renter of the water saved each month and how that contributes to our overall water resources management.
These are just a handful of suggested options for adopting sustainability and crossing the divide. I welcome your input and further suggestions and feedback. Drop me a note via email.