"The vast loneliness is awe-inspiring and it makes you realize just what you have back there on Earth." Jim Lovell
And I feel this paradox even more acutely when I focus on my corner of the field: environmental philanthropy. On the one hand, in the time that I’ve been engaged in the work of environmental philanthropy, I’ve been impressed by the strides this community has made. It’s grown more proactive and results-oriented. It’s embraced a more diversified and robust portfolio of approaches. And it’s made real progress in terms of building a movement that is more powerful, diverse and inclusive. At the same time, I can’t help but recall discussions within the environmental philanthropy community that play out like that perpetual loop from the movie Groundhog Day — with scene after scene of funders wringing their hands as they lament the latest environmental loss. With righteous anger, we commit to building a field that is more relevant and less siloed; one that takes a systems approach and unlocks true power to generate impact. But, despite the sincerity with which we make these commitments, the scene seems to recur again and again, as we find ourselves continually revisiting the shortcomings of our collective environmental philanthropy.
Cassandra’s crystal ball
So, on this Earth Day, as we pause to consider the state of the planet 50 years since its star turn in the Earthrise photo, it’s hard not be daunted by the prospect of looking another 50 years into our collective future.
It's a future when this same planet, with all its natural beauty and inherent vulnerability, will be home to over 9 billion of us - and, if we fail to act decisively in the intervening decades, will be subjected to the most serious consequences of habitat loss, species extinctions, mounting pollution, rising temperatures and growing water scarcity.
While it’s a planetary future that we’re all laboring diligently to avert, the underlying forces we will have to address are undeniably daunting. Three big things that will shape the next few decades:
Expansion of the middle class By 2050, the population will have grown by approximately 2 billion. Perhaps more significantly, over 3 billion people are projected to enter the global “middle class.” And while this would represent significant gains in terms of lifting people out of poverty, if their consumption patterns track past trends, the potential impact on our natural resources would be dramatic. If, for example, they adopt “traditional” middle class diets as their incomes rise, as much as 10-20 percent of remaining natural habitat would likely be converted for agricultural use.
Urbanization. The population living in cities is expected to double by 2050, with most of that urbanization occurring in the developing world. This doesn’t have to be a negative. Done well, it can increase both sustainability and quality of life. However, if this next tidal wave of urbanization tracks past patterns of sprawl and resource use, the environmental stress will be severe. The land footprint of cities could nearly double, with accompanying increases in demand for water and energy.
Shift in the geographic nexus of global influence. The demographic shifts described will also result in shifting power toward new centers in Asia and Africa. Keeping the environmental field relevant will mean learning to navigate better in these places, where governance can often be weaker, civil society capacity lacking, and the legacy of colonial history complex.
Room for Pollyanna too
These big trends make the future look bleak. But, there’s cause for optimism too. Three things that bring me hope:
The continued information revolution. The explosion of our capacity to digitize and analyze information has already had a tremendous impact on our ability to create transparency and accountability, and I think we’ve only begun to scratch the surface. Look at what platforms like Global Forest Watch and Global Fishing Watch are already producing. Then imagine the future with projected advances in remote sensing and machine learning. Real-time monitoring and sophisticated resource management look well within reach.
Increased capacity for social networking. We’ve already seen how social media platforms have enabled activists to engage constituencies and mobilize resources at lower cost and on a larger scale than ever before possible. But, I think the field’s experiments are still in their infancy, with much greater benefits still waiting to be unlocked.
Plasticity of newly emerging social norms. Ironically, one of the most hopeful things I’ve heard about our environmental future was in a seminar geared towards those who want to sell more stuff to a rising middle class. They said of these new potential consumers, “tastes and habits are not as firmly established as in other societies.” For me, this means past does not have to be prologue – there is a real opportunity to do things differently as developing world economies evolve in the coming decades.
Things I’ll be tracking
So, what does it look like to carve a path for environmental philanthropy that is “future fit” for these challenges and opportunities? I won’t pretend to think we’ve charted a fool-proof course to navigate these shoals of hope and despair perfectly. But, here are some things I think we, as environmental funders, should be tracking if we want to be proactive, stay relevant and have a chance of finally “bending the curve” on the planet’s trajectory:
Economy and business.The fate of the environment is intertwined with the path that development will take in emerging economies. We are paying attention to opportunities to shape this path at both the micro and macro levels — influencing the practices of key private sector actors, while also seeking levers to change the “rules of the road” in the broader economy.
Behavior change. Business-as-usual behaviors spell doom for the planet, but fortunately, we still have an opportunity to influence how tastes, habits and norms evolve. In recent years, behavioral science has blossomed as a field, with novel experimentation applying that knowledge to the environment.
Emerging technologies. In general, environmentalists have a tricky relationship with technology. Our fear it may be viewed as a panacea can leave us watching from the sidelines, ill-equipped to engage actively in the search for solutions. The magnitude of the challenges confronting humanity in the next decades means that others will be pushing the frontiers of innovation, whether we choose to engage with them or not. I’m betting that environmental funders can engage responsibly, and to good end.
China. Our foundation operates in landscapes as disparate as the Amazon and Arctic, but I’m always struck by how the influence of China looms large over both. And with western powers opting to step back from global leadership, China’s role seems only more likely to rise. China hosts the Convention on Biological Diversity COP in 2020 — how will their leadership shape the path post-Aichi and how can we engage?
Evidence and learning. When we consider how much our field has struggled to “bend the curve” and win our biggest and most important victories, it always strikes me that we’ve been almost criminally negligent in our failure to at least learn from our experiences with real knowledge about what is and isn’t working. Robust evidence about which strategies and tactics have been effective and which haven’t is woefully lacking, and as a result, we have little capacity to engage in meaningful collective learning. So, while it’s far less glamorous that coming up with the next, hot, new philanthropic investment strategy, perhaps tuning up our basic execution on this front would serve us well.
My wish for the next half century of environmental philanthropy
I imagine that if we looked across other environmental funders’ hit lists for the coming decades, we would get a wide diversity of targets. And I think that’s a good thing. The philanthropic community seems to aspire consistently to build a movement that is more relevant, less siloed, and that truly takes a systems approach. But still, my toughest self-critique would be that we tend towards didacticism, insularity and reductionism in some harmful ways. We want more diversity, but more often than not we behave as if we expect people to meet us where we are, instead of finding ways to meet them where they are. We look to build alliances that expand our appeal, but fall prey to fits of ideological purity that alienate the uninitiated. And we’re vulnerable to silver-bullet thinking, embracing new approaches as displacing everything that’s come before, rather than as new lenses that can help enrich our collective approach to the system that we’re wrestling.
Maybe it’s not surprising that environmental philanthropy bears these hallmarks. They are perhaps reflections of a field that feels perpetually behind the curve and under siege. But this almost bunker-like mentality hasn’t served us well in the world as we’ve known it, and that world is poised to keep changing at an ever-accelerating pace. And so, my wish for the next half century of environmental philanthropy is that our community can evolve in ways that will allow us to be more proactive in navigating the future and maintain our relevance in the face of the challenges and opportunities it will present. That we can develop the capacity for the tough self-examination we’ll need to grow stronger, and find new ways of working and learning together collectively. And finally, that we will succeed in changing the trajectory, and forge a path toward a healthy, resilient future for planet Earth.
Aileen Lee is the chief program officer for environmental conservation at the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Aileen also shared a perspective in 2017: In uncertain times, reasons for gratitude remain.
Panoramic Image: Earthrise, courtesy of NASA
Message sent
Thank you for sharing.