Of Carrots And Sticks

“The last word in ignorance is the man who says of an animal or plant: ‘What good is it?’” – Aldo Leopold

On Tuesday of this week, news came out that the Trump administration is moving forward with changes to the Endangered Species Act, one of the nation’s key laws governing the protection and preservation of at-risk species. In an apparent attempt to ‘modernize’ the Act, the recent alterations “allow economic costs to be taken into account while determining whether a species warrants protection”, and “will weaken the initial protections given to species deemed to be threatened, one step shy of being endangered.” Overall, as the New York Times notes, these alterations "clear the way for new mining, oil and gas drilling, and development" in areas that encroach on previously protected habitats.

Friends, I’ll be honest – the frustration with this was so instantaneous that I had to take a beat before I started writing about it.

Here is the source of my frustration: it’s not that we’re tinkering with the Endangered Species Act. It’s not the purported intent to make it clearer and more effective. What frustrates me is that these changes make it easier for business to maintain the status quo rather than motivating them to pursue progress.

The chief problem with these changes is that they further protect businesses from recognizing and reckoning with the ‘unseen’ costs of their operations – we call these unseen costs ‘externalities’. For decades, companies have largely been able to escape responsibility for the negative impacts that their operations and products have on communities and the environment (for example, pollution of freshwater sources, or expelling toxic chemicals via factory exhaust). The costs of eliminating these environmental impacts aren't reflected in the final cost for a produced good, and so we’ve become avid consumers who are happy with our cheap cost of living.

The problem is, someone is paying for those externalities: you and me.

We pay for it in environmental degradation, in species and habitat loss, in decreasing biodiversity (and an increasing susceptibility to diseases), in climate change. These externalities are insidious and unquantified – in fact, it’s likely that we don’t yet know the depth of negative repercussions that will result from these impacts.

All available science and logic tell us that we are due for a sea change in every aspect of society – energy, transportation, food, clothing. This change is inevitable; we simply cannot continue to consume at the rate that we do. Eventually businesses will have to convert to more sustainable methods of operating – and as far as the environment is concerned, the sooner, the better. Government plays a crucial role in this transition, by providing legislative and financial incentives to spur businesses toward the desired action.

But currently, the government is not taking up that role, and has instead been gradually removing existing laws. With no impetus to pursue competitive solutions, we’re being set up for an environmental catastrophe at the intersection of 'viable technology' and 'global scale'. And in the short term, by giving companies an escape from owning the full costs of these externalities, the government allows them to avoid responsibility for the damage they inflict.

Here’s what I want you to take away from this: Your consumer choices do not happen in a vacuum.

What happens to the environment, happens to you. While they seem insignificant or far off, legislative changes like these will trickle into business, and into the environment. So pay attention to them. Get upset about them. Demand better from your government, and from the businesses it regulates. Make more informed choices. And refuse to pay the price for someone else’s negligence.

*For more information on the EPA and existing environmental legislation, click here.