Before this class, my worldview of environmental issues was limited to what I would call a “heal the world-touchy-feely” paradigm. I thought of the issues in terms of making the world a clean and healthy place that creates a good environment for humans and animals to live and continue to live in the future. Some of the conclusions within this worldview are: air pollution is bad because it’s unhealthy to breath; water pollution is bad because it kills fish and is unhealthy to drink; and deforestation is bad because it kills plants and animals. The list goes on.
These types of issues are certainly important, but they don’t necessarily represent the full circle. Further, this worldview made it difficult to believe or understand that groups like politicians and businesses, which are often thought of as non-human (as in The Story of Stuff), would have an interest in the environment.
Being in this class combined with being in the policymaker group has widened my worldview to complete a fuller circle. Our group was challenged to link policymakers’ needs to the environment, which meant going outside the feel-good message of my worldview and exploring other aspects and benefits of the issues.
I believe my group was successful at meeting our challenges and developing relevant messaging for CEP and their policymaking audience. I am very happy with the way my group worked together and the outcomes we will deliver tomorrow in class. On another note, I thought the project assignment was designed very well in terms of the deliverables expected and the built in individual and group accountability.
4 Comments so far
Leave a comment