Where New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Stakeholders Could Take Their Climate Change Efforts: 30 Suggestions for Continual State Leadership
The State of New Jersey and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) have come a very long way on climate change from the late 1980’s when a colleague and I, eventually the Sustainability Team Leader inside the Department, had to instigate to create any interest at all in it, as hard to believe as that might sound. And then stoke the embers to keep things moving forward after fallbacks of government interest.
The response we got to our earliest effort, from an Assistant Commissioner, was “Not our issue.” NJDEP was not the only non-interested State Agency. Counting on pressure from the outside, which internal change-makers sometimes do, was also, perhaps surprisingly, almost non-existent, as even environmental groups weren’t interested at that time.
But things have changed with the current Administration pursuing progressive goals and policies, including prioritizing this issue. They “get” the threat but are still hampered by a somewhat similar lack of reflection about “What do we not know about what we don’t know?” And “What assumptions are holding us back?”
Now the Department is asking for input about their August, 2023 Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Work Plan to guide their climate change efforts going forward. This seems like a good opportunity to tell them, and their stakeholders, about some possibilities, even if what is offered goes beyond the objectives for public input that NJDEP seeks at this time on the Work Plan.
We’re going to have to increase our tool kit, level of ambition, and creativity, even more if the carbon reduction goals need to be sped up, which I suspect is likely.
The decades-long back-&-forth provides perspective for future efforts, from a Governor Kean-era Executive Order for state agencies — only, to look at their carbon emissions; a Governor Florio-era receipt of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency grant to inventory the State’s carbon emissions; Governor Whitman-era Internal and External Work Groups to develop sector-based voluntary agreements to reduce carbon emissions by the then-revolutionary goal of 3½% below 1990 levels, and move the State towards sustainability, including a pioneering Office of Sustainable Business, later killed by Governor DiFrancesco; the Governor Corzine-era Global Warming Response Act, which for the first time brought vision to the State’s thinking on carbon reduction (i.e. 80% by 2050); and a forgetting of the latter during the Governor Christie Administration, which removed New Jersey from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).
There are numerous positive things in the Work Plan, including some of which I wasn’t aware. Still, there are a large range of ideas I would like to offer.
At times, I take the long view, not just in the sense of looking backwards, including missed yet possibly still-available opportunities; but also looking forward, sometimes a long way, to what will likely be necessary, even if currently some ideas may be considered wildly impractical. For the latter, the best that probably can be done are baby steps, but connected to a vision of where something needs to go.
Some of my ideas are informed by earlier efforts within the Department, including what the obstacles were, at the time and later; and since then, from my continuing to following different fields, and ways of looking at the issue.
There is some overlap in the 30 wide-ranging suggestions.
At times sources are provided. Where not, it is possible they could be suggested.
Here some suggestions, both for NJDEP or anyone else interested in this perspective.
1. Communications, Stakeholder Input, and Responsiveness. The first two are about the best I’ve seen from NJDEP, especially the idea of “Deeper Engagement.” This is far from the typical two-three-minute limit imposed on those giving comments at Public Hearings, usually with no feedback from the government staff at the front of the room. Such a protocol limits real communications, making it at times close to token.
To utilize deep engagement effectively, though, NJDEP needs to respond do people whose input is not taken so that they don’t think they have wasted their time, and were not heard. That includes both specific ideas mentioned during these sessions, and reports/articles/letters sent to NJDEP.
NJDEP and the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) sometimes do the latter, but inconsistently. NJDEP staff have given me generous time to speak with them about product labeling, carbon sequestration, and cost: benefit analysis. But sometimes they have not. Still, that is better than The Office of Climate Action & Green Economy (OCAGE), The Governor’s Office, and the New Jersey Economic Development Authority (NJEDA) that literally never have. That is bad government practice, inconsiderate, and, to the degree some ideas might be valuable, bad policy-making. And unnecessarily so. Providers of input probably are not expecting total agreement with their ideas. See “Not Meeting New Jersey State Government’s Basic Responsibility to Respond to Constituents’ Suggestions: Frustrating and a Barrier to Innovation.” Whereas, this later one was better. “Can a Public Meeting Catalyze a Tipping Point for Both Accelerated Conventional and Creative Efforts to Address Climate Change?“
2. All-of-Government Approach. This is fine and appropriate, but a method to do this was in a 2002 Report based on what an Interagency Sustainability Working Group found. See Governing With The Future in Mind. Beyond this, relevant non-NJDEP agencies should acknowledge their connection. At recent forums I’ve attended, neither the NJBPU or The Highlands Council even mentioned NJDEP. Even while focused on things closer to their mission, other agencies should mention this, at least in passing
3. Keep a further eye on California (which NJDEP is probably already doing). This includes California’s global work, having large companies report on their carbon emissions, and incentives for those with low income.
But certainly not just California when other states do innovative things, too. The Work Plan does hint this
4. Be careful with Metrics. As the one-time lead on NJDEP’s and State Government’s Indicators efforts, I suspected some problems with them at the time, which later led to writing 22 articles exploring these and how to overcome them. See “Putting the Cart Before the Horse: Five Anecdotes About Sustainable Business Metrics,“ the most relevant of the 22 to NJDEP
5. Product Labeling. This initiative isn’t mentioned in the Work Plan. I gave comments to NJDEP staff on product labeling based on a Policy Paper I did over 30 years ago. (It may be available at the NJDEP or State Library.) Among other things, labeling can go beyond just ensuring accuracy of a claim. It can promote better-performing products and thereby be an element supporting a green economy
6. Cost: Benefit Analysis/Social Cost of Capital. This isn’t mentioned in the Work Plan, either. I also gave comments about this to NJDEP staff based on a Work Group Guidebook written during the Whitman Administration
7. Sequestration. This is mentioned in the Work Plan. I was impressed earlier with the scope of ideas during a conversation with NJDEP staff. To critics who argue that it is a diversion from the emphasis on reducing carbon emissions, NJDEP might respond: (a) it might (and probably will be) necessary, (b) it is possible to do both mitigation and sequestration, and (c)if I remember right, they’re focusing on natural solutions. This is not to say investing in some research and development (R&D) or following others’ work on other ways to sequester carbon shouldn’t be done (such as putting it in concrete). It depends on the relative risks, whether those risks can be managed, and, in the end, how desperate we may one day be.
However, regarding natural sequestration, as I learned during Senator Bob Smith’s Forests Task Force earlier this year, there isn’t a full consensus on what “Healthy Forests” means. The best that NJDEP can do is catch up on this work (if it hasn’t already), follow the recommendations that achieved consensus, and see if anyone can help bridge the gaps between stakeholders when they don’t agree on such difficult issues as when, if ever, trees should be cut, the deer management issue, and apparent conflicts between the goals of addressing climate change and biodiversity.
Some key areas did not receive enough attention by the Task Force, such as whether “Sustainability” has been misused but doesn’t have to be, why there seems to be a binary choice between protecting old growth and planting new trees, whether there are at least some green jobs prospects in this area, and whether there’s ever a place for non-native species.
However, I also found the consensus-attempting process that the Task Force leaders used was excellent, even apart from the results, including bringing in leading outside scientists to inform us on some of the above. It would be a good model for trying to address other tough issues
8. Keep the biodiversity connection in mind. See “10 Ways the Climate Crisis and Nature Loss are Linked.” This regards both joint opportunities, as more of the one not focused on might be possible; and when there might be trade-offs, meaning that helping with one hurts the other. How can these trade-offs be avoided or at least minimized? In comparison to concern about climate change which is now at least partially mainstreamed, our society has not yet woken up to how serious the biodiversity crisis is. See “Number of Species at Risk of Extinction Doubles to 2 Million, Says Study“
9. Consider the potential upsides of the Biomass/Bioenergy Economy, as the downsides are already known. While the ethanol experience, one form of bioenergy, might at best be considered a learning experience, we’re likely to need bioenergy to transform sectors that cannot easily convert to green electricity. Plus, by working with the New Jersey Department of Agriculture and NJEDA, there may be the opportunity to displace oil-based products with much more benign farm products. I’m aware of only one report in this area, written by the Rutgers Eco-Complex, which I believe was ignored. Sustainability, not just a technical approach, needs to guide this, too
10.Sustainability. Don’t just use “Sustainability” as a throw-away adjective placed before a noun, like “Architecture,” “Buildings,” or “Business.” That adds little meaning to them. Instead, take the tenets, insights, and ideas of the field seriously, including the stretching of current thinking.
I once facilitated a rare story directly on sustainability in the New York Times by a columnist but first had to explain to him, in a conversation, that sustainability is not synonymous with climate change, yet adds value to understanding it. See “It’s the End of California as We Know It: The Fires and The Blackouts are Connected to a Larger Problem in this State: A Failure to Live Sustainably.”
If we start to see conflicts between environmental justice and other goals, go deeper into sustainability to try to resolve them. Or if businesses claim they are sustainable, because they are doing a few good things. But, while they won’t say this, they’re doing nothing to conserve biodiversity. So point them to specific businesses that are. See this organization, The Wildlife Habitat Council that works with businesses on biodiversity projects, including those that simultaneously help with climate change. Or see this book by their Executive Director, a former New Jersey environmentalist: Strategic Corporate Conservation Planning: A Guide to Meaningful Engagement
11.Carbon Tax. While probably the most politically infeasible strategy NJDEP or the New Jersey Department of Treasury could do, one day we may need a major one to reach our current goals, and even more so if we have to accelerate those goals. Which is quite likely. Imagine if we had one now. It could be very helpful with multiple issues like funding New Jersey Transit or environmental equity projects. If the day comes when we’re prepared to consider a carbon tax, and if a rebate feature is a part of it to restore equity, try to keep a portion of the revenues for such purposes as R&D, careful subsidization of high potential green technologies, or adaptation.
However, the wider the geographic scope of a carbon tax, the better. That is, multi-state is better than just New Jersey implementing it. The national scale is even better. See “New Jersey Now ‘Gets’ Climate Change. What We Are Still Missing: Focus State Support for a Carbon Tax at the Federal Level: Part 5”
12.Research & Development. Contrary to the message sometimes sent that “We know how to (fully) address climate change,” we’re going to need new technologies. During the Kean Administration, New Jersey had a focus on funding advanced and even speculative technologies. Return to this and carefully pick and seed high potential, but less-than-certain technologies. If successful, these technologies could be passed to the marketplace and make a big difference, with taxpayers getting a fair return. However, don’t overlook less technical, more socially-oriented ideas, or quality public input to and acceptance of choices. Try to avoid unintended consequences. Again, use a deep sustainability perspective
13.Don’t just focus on Rutgers University as the State’s exclusive higher education partner. Rutgers nearly always is the only university mentioned, as there seems to be a mistaken assumption that it is the only place to go for help. I have taught and/or been a Fellow at five other New Jersey colleges, attended conferences at many other colleges, and was a long-time member of the New Jersey Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability (NJHEPS). Other colleges, professors, and students at them can help, too.
This is not to take anything from Rutgers, as it too has come a long way, with their climate change work prominent in the field. But even they could do more. See “COMMENTARY: Rutgers’ Climate Task Force Has Work To Do.”
14.Social Science. We don’t usually think about climate change this way, as usually technology or policy frame our thinking, but we’re facing a massive challenge to change human (and organizational) behavior. Focusing just on science and technology is not going to be enough. There’s increasing thought, coming from multiple fields, that we need to reach people in other ways besides presenting facts and data. We’re going to have to better understand how to do that. We also need to do better at anticipating the negative consequences of technical choices we’re considering, before they’re introduced and lead to unpleasant surprises. If we did, we may be better able to ameliorate them, with more public acceptance. We can’t just leave out the human element, both through social science and the humanities
15.Problems with how we sometimes think, the assumptions we make, and our mindsets, including by those actively trying to address climate change. This has been my focus in recent years. See this talk I gave, in part on my NJDEP experience, entitled “What’s Holding Us Back on Climate Change.” Or this article, “New Jersey Now ‘Gets’ Climate Change. What We Are Still Missing: Why We’re Not Talking About What We’re Not Talking About: Part 4.” Some of the other suggestions reflect this
16.NJDEP needs to realize that it has a culture. It’s not only because it’s a government agency as, likely, all other sectors have cultures, too. It’s also not necessarily a bad thing. But cultures can be limiting, by narrowing what they see, how they think and communicate, and — what they don’t see. NJDEP should try to be sensitive to this, including occasionally asking internally: “What are missing?” And not take the first quick “Nothing” as the answer. See “New Jersey Now ‘Gets’ Climate Change. What We Are Still Missing: Starting with Organizational Culture: Part 2”
17.Innovation Ecosystem. This is a term used in the Work Plan. Go beyond the mindset that innovation is only seen with advanced technologies. There is also social innovation/entrepreneurship (related to the green economy), policy innovation, and organizational innovation.
Another mindset blockage is that innovation can only look like what people are expecting. Something very different might not even make it in the door. That’s the opposite of innovation
18.The Governor’s Environmental Excellence Awards. The criteria for this are heavily numbers-oriented, focusing on, for example, how many pounds of pollution are reduced by the applicant’s initiative/project. While this certainly has its place, for example, the whole area of ideas, catalyzing initiatives, and getting people to raise their sense of what’s possible is ruled out. Again, not innovative. The criteria for this Award need to be re-thought to better reflect the State’s direction and what it will take to achieve its (possibly speeded up) goals
19.Education. The State is rightly proud of being the first, and maybe still the only, State to have a K-12 climate change curriculum. But New Jersey shouldn’t rest on its laurels. Future iterations could get into various themes: emphasizing that there are still unknowns in how to address aspects of climate change, thereby alerting and maybe motivating students to be the ones to figure things out; adding some of the themes of these comments; preparing the facilitators we’re going to need with the skills and resources to try to bring people together to resolve difficult issues, both those that are here and may be coming; and how to merge science-based facts and process with stories/narratives, spiritual beliefs, and other ways of knowing. I suspect that education may eventually be seen as even more necessary to address climate change, and not just in the conventional sense, and not just for K-12 or even college students.
See “Non-conventional Learning on Sustainable Development: Achieving the SDGs,” “It’s OK, We Disagree’: as Campuses Boil Over With Rage, Some Seek Elusive Path to Dialogue,” or “From 45 Years as a Sustainability Change-Agent: 40 Ideas and Lessons to Pass on to Students and Perpetual Students: The Biggies: Part 1“
20.Green Economy/Green Jobs. Current thinking about this topic properly considers now-conventional ideas like jobs in the solar and wind sectors, other renewables, sometimes efficiency, sometimes buildings. But it overlooks many other possibilities. This includes both other sectors and ideas.
Regarding other sectors, why not think of the possibilities of almost any sector greening, including, but way beyond, renewables and the jobs associated with them? That type of greening is associated with the sustainable business revolution, with which the NJDEP has historically dabbled, but has not taken even close to full advantage.
For instance, some companies have accepted the need to address climate change, have announced ambitious net carbon zero goals, and supported climate change public policy. Some are even working, on the environmental side, to enhance biodiversity, and, on the social side, to support democracy, Black Lives Matter, and LGBTQ issues. See “On 40 Years Watching the Sustainable Business Field: Part II of Using Sustainability to Recharge America’s Problem-Solving” for some of the possibilities.
There also are interrelated ideas that facilitate a green economy like green design (see “America’s Broken Systems: A Case for Sustainable Design?: Part I of Using Sustainability to Recharge America’s Problem-Solving”), biomimicry, life cycle assessment, industrial ecology, the circular economy, “B Corps,” green industrial policy, and impact investment.
These ideas are not new, but have been underutilized. Why not consider a goal to be the leading state in expanding the now almost conventional idea of a green economy, and bring in potentially all of these ideas? There could be gains in most areas of sustainability, including the economy, environment, and even social areas.
A report, co-written by my students at Ramapo College in 2018, has many ideas on this, but has been ignored by this Administration. See “A Green Economy for New Jersey: A Proposal to the New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy,’ & ‘Postscript: Going Wider and Deeper with the Green Economy.” It includes several Appendices, including a summary of most of the earlier State reports on a green economy, and ideas on how to take further advantage of agriculture.
It would prove useful if the State, and particularly the OCAGE, decide to go deeper into, and even aim to mainstream, the green economy.
(If this article is ever reviewed at the federal level, here’s a version for them by another Ramapo College class, “Defending the Green New Deal: Recommendations To Build On What’s Actually In It While Reaching Out To Others”.)
21.Efficiency. The following are comments I sent to the NJBPU in September, 2023, after a webinar it sponsored on energy efficiency.
It reinforces some of the same concepts mentioned above, and a few others. It: highlights the vital importance of efficiency (which often gets overlooked in discussions about energy supply options) and keeping the public posted on how the State is doing on it, the overlooked importance of implementation, keeping up with the state of the art, use of terms in communication, and the value of social science.
“(I) Read/browsed the PPT and listened to most of the Presentation. Many good points (e.g. the link with solar and now water, suggestions on how to go beyond the Audit findings, the enthusiasm of the speakers), but didn’t see some things, or other issues:
· At times, too jargony. If you don’t know the field, you’ll miss some of the terms. I didn’t see the customer’s perspective, particularly the very new customer unfamiliar with the lay of the land and knowing who’s who (including the differences between the roles of BPU, TRC, and the utility). Suggest take the view of a new applicant. Follow them through the process, seeing where they might get stuck
· What I call “People” issues continue to be missed. These include (a) why does the LGEA application my Synagogue submitted several months ago just sit, without period notifications of status? I heard it takes an average of 7 months once everything is complete. I’m pretty sure my synagogue’s complete application has taken longer. It makes it difficult to maintain committee interest from the customer end (which can be hard enough); (b) No social science on how to influence peoples’ behavior to be interested/receptive to energy efficiency. Do we know what percentage of people show initial interest and then don’t go further; and why? What is social science discovering about this field?
· No big picture on the importance of the State’s energy efficiency goal and how we’re doing in achieving it
· No showing of technical innovations and thought on how to ramp up energy efficiency to potentially new stretch goals. For instance, see this article in yesterday’s Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/19/realestate/sustainable-home-renovation-brooklyn.html. Does BPU follow this field?
· No link to DEP’s Product Labeling and Sustainable Business Initiatives, the very new Social Cost of Carbon announcement for all State Agencies (https://www.njspotlightnews.org/2023/09/nj-murphy-administration-wont-back-down-clean-energy-goals/), or Sustainable Jersey
· Did the State ever see my last formal comments to the BPU from 2019? http://greeneconomynj.org/2019/09/17/comments-to-the-new-jersey-board-of-public-utilities-njbpu-on-their-2019-draft-energy-master-plan-emp/. I stopped doing these, after three or four iterations over the years, because I saw no evidence that they ever went anywhere”
22.Speaking to Conservatives. In some circles, conservatives are presumed to be unreachable on climate change. This is unfortunate, as I can’t see how the State can achieve its ambitious goals without them.
We’ve already seen problems with the constructed controversy of windfarms at the shore (though not all opponents are conservative), parts of the state (yes, even New Jersey) where you can’t say “climate change” (or you can advocate for it, but can’t call it by its name).
Yet, there have been some successes. See either “Seven Projects with Potential to Talk to the Trump Voter: Part 4,“ for ideas, or “Climate Change, A Divided America, and The Need For Sustainability Policy.”
23.Transformation. New Jersey is way behind Europe in the field of Sustainable Transformation or large societal changes. This field tries to understand how to make big changes in society, including what is blocking them, and how to overcome obstacles, such as through the use of pilots or demos of cutting edge ideas which can be difficult to imagine. Some of the thinking in this field has changed from these things should be kept away from government, as government, by its nature, is too bureaucratic and resistant to change. To now, that is not necessarily true, and that government must be part of it. There are people in government who are comfortable with more rapid change, but, as in the earlier comment on culture, assumptions have to be identified and no-longer relevant ones changed.
Transformation is in at least implicit contrast to a common theory of how to make societal change: “One building block at a time.” This assumption about slow change can be effective, and certainly much easier, including politically and what it is asking from the government and the public. But may not be sufficient if, again, the goals have to be accelerated
See “Sustainability Transformations” and “New Jersey Now ‘Gets’ Climate Change. What We Are Still Missing: “From Government and Really Helping: Part 3.”
For more on speeding up change, as well as unappreciated mindset barriers that make it harder, see “Leverage Points Meets Sustainable Transformation: Speeding Up Sustainability Progress and 101 Mindset Barriers to It”
24.Phase Out Fossil Fuels. This has been a hard step for the State to take although, it can be argued, this is the trend line. Still, it’s not clear to everyone what the writing on the wall says. Not all pipeline projects have been killed, and there is political opposition to some clean energy measures, like encouraging electric stoves.
Yet, while, as above, providing some support to and keeping an eye on sequestration, there is no way to protect our planet without phasing them out. Perhaps international climate change negotiators at the U.N. Conference of The Parties 28 (COP28), resuming their work today, will get there some day.
New Jersey could beat them to it by announcing a phase-out schedule for fossil fuels, giving these sectors and their customers plenty of notice of what’s coming, and time to prepare. It would not be the first time the state led global action.
New Jersey has to bite this bullet
25. Much more and better biking. The occasional calls for more biking, while important, are framed by a limited sense of what’s possible. Check out some European cities; e.g., Copenhagen, Munster, Rotterdam, Amsterdam; and see things at an entirely different scale. This could be our long-term vision, even if we can only work on specific projects on a more limited basis. “See Transport Matters: Strengthening the Human Infrastructure of Cycling”
26.County and Municipal Scales. The Plan is vague about what these are. Existing ones, other than Sustainable Jersey, may not be well known. Initiatives at these scales have their own possibilities.
See “12 Ideas for Sustainable Jersey’s ‘Next 10 Years” for the local scale, and “New Jersey Now ‘Gets’ Climate Change. What We Are Still Missing: A Climate Vision for Montgomery County, Maryland: Should We Be Doing This in New Jersey?: Part 6“ for the county scale
27.Speaking of scales, expand the international presence. This includes both learning from other parts of the world, and showing what we are doing in New Jersey. See “The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s Non-Traditional Role in Promoting Sustainable Development Internationally,” or “A Personal Learning Bridge: How New Jersey and the World, Including Europe and Germany, Might Learn From Each Other”
28.Pick up on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs). These 17 Goals represent the urgent direction that must be pursued to achieve a sustainable planet. Unfortunately, few in the U.S. are even aware of them though they are not new. While climate change is only one of them, all 17 are interrelated. And while they are not intended for the state level, there is no reason New Jersey cannot pick up on them, adjusted as appropriate, and do its share towards meeting them. That would send quite a message, about direction, the understanding of urgency, the interrelatedness of policies and actions (and not just in government), and that New Jersey “gets” the big picture that we really are “All in this together.” It could even spur non-New Jerseyans to pick up the pace in their pieces of the planet, helping them and, in an interconnected world, indirectly, us too
29.Not Just NJDEP. Having worked with or within other sectors in New Jersey (see below) over the decades, in the years ahead it is not just NJDEP that needs to consider transformational possibilities, and what they might be missing. NJDEP does not operate in a vacuum. It’s also (a) other state agencies; (b) the Legislature; (c) as above, other levels of government; (d) business (as above, all sectors); (d) higher education; (e) environmental groups; and (f) journalism (see “Where is Sustainability in The New York Times”). Even social welfare groups must consider their climate change connections and how they can help
30.Recruit Ex-NJDEPers. Take advantage of interested NJDEP alumni to see if they can lend, in some cases, hard-earned advice to help current staffers think about how to implement some of these ideas and actions.
Conclusion
I want to return to four themes involving interrelationships that don’t usually come up: the time dimension, the limits of what NJDEP can do, the need for creativity, and between geographic scales.
I hope some of these ideas will be considered, both in the short run and in the years ahead. The short- and long-runs are related. The latter should inform and guide the former. And the latter shows climate change is one of the greatest threats we in New Jersey face. As the surprises show up, and limits of current policies become apparent, we and those who come after us are likely to need to strongly consider currently unimagined responses. That’s worth keeping in mind when an idea for a strategy is written off as “infeasible,” particularly politically, or because the specific behavioral change seems too much, too soon.
These comments ask a lot from NJDEP, but they can’t do this alone. They will need a significant amount of help from others interested in this issue, as well as, through each’s efforts and influence, those who do not yet appreciate the urgency of the situation; working directly with the Agency, or in parallel with their separate efforts.
Both within and outside NJDEP, this help can come in a variety of forms, such as by showing creativity, which includes pulling together ideas from multiple places and fields, perhaps in ways that have never been done. This includes fields where creativity is understood as essential, such as fashion, but even those where it is not necessarily associated, such as engineering. Certainly, the inertia from a business-as-usual mindset cannot be our guide.
The photo at the beginning of these Comments shows a mediocre global response to the threats from climate change. While I don’t think the specific grades The Economist assigns are directly applicable to New Jersey, since this Administration has done much better, still, it is relevant in at least two ways.
The tagline, “Some Progress, Must Try Harder” still applies.
And while we focus on New Jersey, the global dimension still applies. One of the main messages, apparently forgotten, from the late 1960’s Environmental Revolution is: “We’re all connected” (or “interconnected”).
What happens in New Jersey both effects the rest of the world and is affected by it, in many usually hidden ways, both negatively and positively. Two positive ways the State and its citizens can affect the world are by staying aware of global developments and by setting examples of what is possible.
In some cases, we’re already doing this but not realizing it. See “The Local-Global Connection: Forging Inter-scale Sustainability Action.”
That’s worth remembering as COP28 begins today, with so much at stake. Hopefully it will be surprisingly successful. But, if not, we’re all going to have to step up even more.
