Wind energy has been proven to be a reliable and efficient source of renewable energy due to its simplicity of using wind and easy conversion to electricity. With consistent improvements in wind turbine and installation technology, the offshore wind sector has the capacity to expand even greater. Since the beginning of 2022, wind power can generate more energy than coal or nuclear power. Offshore wind farms can be installed in spaces humans aren’t occupying, allowing for bigger turbines to provide consistent and higher energy outputs, with more predictable wind patterns and speeds.

The history of wind energy starts in 1980, with 20 onshore turbines generating 0.6 MegaWatts (MW) of electricity in New Hampshire, powering approximately 150 homes then (powering about one home today) and replacing energy that would have been generated from 5,000 barrels of oil. 11 years later in 1991, the first-ever offshore wind farm with 11 turbines was installed in Denmark generating 5 MW of electricity, which is enough to power 2,200 homes. The largest offshore wind farm today is Hornsea Two, located off the Yorkshire Coast in the United Kingdom, with 165 turbines, generating 1.3 GigaWatts (GW) of electricity to supply 1.4 million homes.

With technology constantly developing, offshore wind could be spinning out of control, but in the best way possible. A recent research article by Hugo Díaz and Carlos Guedes Soares reviews the current status and technology for offshore wind and describes the future trends of what offshore wind could look like.

Offshore wind was originally seen as impractical and hard to achieve, since installing turbines in the ocean would require lots of effort and if it was successful after construction, the maintenance and weather conditions would break them down. But since 1991, there are over 162 offshore wind farms built worldwide in 53 different countries (most are still functioning) and there are plans for more offshore wind turbines to be built, like the Changfang Xidao offshore wind farm off the coast of Changhua, Taiwan. The current offshore wind farms have the capacity to produce 55,585 MW of electricity and the trend is only going upwards. 

Several countries followed the offshore wind farm trend, as they were big fans of this new development. Europe and Asia are major contributors to the current offshore wind production. Currently, the leader of the offshore wind industry is China as they came, spun, and conquered the trendsetter of the industry, Denmark, generating about one-fourth of the total offshore wind energy production.

The installation process for an offshore wind farm involves exploring and surveying the area, complying with environmental regulations of the area, getting the required vessels for installation, prepping the seafloor for construction, installing the base for the turbine, and lastly, installing the wind turbine. There are several different choices for offshore wind turbine bases and depending on the type of seabed the offshore wind turbines are installed in, certain bases will be more beneficial than others. 

Different types of wind turbine foundations, Ocean Engineering June 2022

After these bases have been installed, the main stem of the wind turbine can be installed, then the blades. During the installation process, the energy of the wind turbines needs to be somehow collected and transferred back to land and into the grid. Using thick, underwater wires, the turbines will be connected to a substation which will then connect back to the shore to collect all the energy generated from the turbine.

When the first onshore wind farm was installed in 1980, each turbine was about 18 meters tall. Now, wind turbines have increased in size, ranging from 165 – 200 meters in height and 135 – 170 meters in rotor diameter. Offshore turbines now can be installed at several different distances, depending on the composition of the sea floor. Trends from 2020 predict to see turbine heights to increase by 19% and rotor diameters to increase by 23%  within the next decade.

Currently, offshore wind farms in Asia tend to be closer to shore (averaging around 10 kilometers) while farms in Europe are farther (averaging around 53 kilometers). As the distance from shore increases, the depths in which turbines are installed also increase. Asian farms currently average around 12 meters in depth while European farms average around 31 meters in depth. These values are predicted to increase over time as technology advances to allow us to install farms even farther away from shore.

Evolution of farm distance to shore and depth, Ocean Engineering June 2022

The current largest functioning turbine is located in the Hornsea Two wind farm, 89 kilometers away from the coast of the United Kingdom. It stands a little over 200 meters tall, has a rotor diameter of 122 meters, and has a capacity of 11 MW. With the current improvements in science and technology, future turbines would be able to be larger and generate more energy. Turbine model MySE 16.0-242, is currently in its prototyping stage and plans to be installed in 2024, standing at 264 meters tall, with a 242-meter rotor diameter, and a capacity of 16 MW (enough to power 20,000 homes).

Range of turbine rotor diameter and height with wind farm numbers, Ocean Engineering June 2022

The future of offshore wind, as stated in the article, seems to be spinning in a positive direction and with climate change posing a great danger, the transition to renewable energy is essential. Future trends predict farm sites further from shore, be installed in deeper waters, increase in height and rotor diameters for each turbine, and will include more countries installing offshore wind farms. Offshore wind has shown so many benefits in its energy generation and availability of installation spaces, and more countries are following the transition to offshore wind.

The Pacific Crest Trail and the Continental Divide Trail

Two trails host some of the most popular recreational hiking in America. They’re about to become even more popular – amongst animals.

The Pacific Crest Trail (PCT) and the Continental Divide Trail (CDT) are two of the most famous recreational trails in the US. These long trails run from Mexico to Canada: the PCT along the Cascade and Sierra Nevada Mountains and the CDT along the Rocky Mountains. Along with the Appalachian Trail, these trails make up America’s “Triple Crown of Hiking.”

A recent study by Mel Wilson and Travis Belote (2022) investigated the potential for using the western trails to connect wildlands and protect biodiversity.

As climate change continues to accelerate, animals are struggling to adapt. Wildlife already faces obstacles to migrating, which hinders their ability to breed and find food. Looking at the habitats they have left is like looking at a puzzle with most of its pieces missing. This isolation causes issues for environmental and species health. As climates change, animals must migrate to new places in order to survive. Humans need to build corridors to make this possible.

Creating wildlife corridors is not easy. It means coordinating with different agencies and across different interests. For just one project, the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and many non-governmental organizations need to come together to agree on a plan.

This helps explain why Wilson and Belote’s proposal is so important. Luckily, 90% of the PCT and CDT land is already publicly protected.

The researchers found that the PCT and CDT run along some of the most biodiverse places in the country. That makes them a promising start to wildlife corridors. The study found that lands along the trails are excellent pathways and refuges for animals migrating away from their changing homes. With these attributes, the PCT and CDT are ideal places to focus conservation efforts.

The problem is that these trails were designed for hiking, not wildlife migration. This study shows how that can be remedied, but that is going to require making some significant changes.

Currently, the trails are not wide enough to be wildlife corridors. Animals would rather not risk running into humans, and on a narrow trail that is almost guaranteed. That is why the trails presently aren’t popular amongst large wildlife. The authors recommend that the protected land be expanded to at least two kilometers wide. This would make it wide enough for larger animals to avoid humans comfortably. Hikers might be thankful for it too, avoiding run-ins with bears, bobcats, and cougars.

The study highlights several avenues to advance these corridors. The U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management manage most of the lands around the width of the trail, but those lands are not sufficiently protected. To resolve this, these agencies need to increase the protection status of these lands. Another solution is for Congress to designate the necessary 2-kilometer land widths as a federally protected wildlife corridor. The small percentage of privately owned land around the corridors could then be purchased by conservation NGOs.

Most studies have focused on finding the best corridors based on conservation science. That is an important factor. Corridors should be effective. But these areas will only be effective if they are actually protected. Buying land, getting it protected, and coordinating with government agencies is a complicated process. This study argues that there’s a simpler solution, if we build on the nation’s existing network of western hiking trails. Let’s start there.

Informal Development in Gulshan, Dhaka by Aditya Kabir via Wikimedia Commons

The urban landscape of Bangladesh’s capital Dhaka is transforming. Since the megacity has a population of 22.5 million and the world’s highest population density, each change has a critical effect. 

Between the bustling city of Dhaka and greater Bangladesh’s rural landscapes lie transitional buffer regions. These are called “peri-urban” spaces and are an intermediate between urban and rural environments. Fragmented, disjointed, yet rapid development characterizes these regions. Peri-urban spaces incrementally expand cities’ boundaries as this land is used to house the growing population.

These new residential spaces in Dhaka typically consist of informal housing settlements, streetside vendors, and other infrastructure which fall outside government regulation. That leaves residents highly vulnerable to clean water insecurity, flooding, and resulting climate migration.

Peri-urban spaces are drawing a growing number of Bangladesh’s rural climate change refugees. Dhaka receives 400,000 climate refugees per year – the majority of whom live in informal housing settlements. 

Golam Mortoja and Tan Yigitcanlar, researchers from the Queensland University of Technology, have used spatial analysis techniques to map how Dhaka’s rapidly growing peri-urban spaces are becoming increasingly vulnerable to natural hazards such as flooding. They also examine how peri-urbanisation is contributing to climate change. 

Residents Take to the Hills

 The study found that sub-districts of Dhaka on higher elevations have larger residential populations. People move to high ground to avoid floods during the monsoon season — a significant threat in Dhaka, where a quarter of the city is highly exposed to monsoon flooding.

Gazipur Sadar is a high-elevation district in northern Dhaka facing rapid peri-urbanisation. In the past two decades, Gazipur Sadar’s population has grown faster than any other part of Dhaka. The researchers found that population growth drove a significant transition to a peri-urban environment. 

Map from Mortoja and Yigitcanlar’s “How does Peri-Urbanisation Trigger Climate Change Vulnerabilities?”

The map above shows Dhaka’s changing landscape from 1992 (Chart a) to 2016 (Chart b). Gazipur Sadar, located in the north, became largely peri-urban due to a significant decrease in rural landscapes and a fluctuating urban environment. 

This research reveals a surprising shift. Some urban areas in Gazipur Sadar have transitioned into peri-urban spaces. How did this happen?

The research shows how new zoning policies drew the garment industry to Gazipur Sadar and with it, an influx of workers in need of immediate housing. It also found that 70% of informal housing settlements in Dhaka exist on privately owned land. The need for housing and neglect of privately-owned land in Gazipur Sadar has contributed to the development of informal housing settlements in the sub-district and its shift from urban to peri-urban. 

Normally, peri-urban spaces become urban.  The shift from urban to peri-urban environments reveals a grave failure in governmental residential regulation, affordable housing availability, and urban planning.   

The expanding peri-urban areas make previously ‘flood-safe’ regions of Dhaka more susceptible to natural disasters. Informal development projects typically lack adequate water supply, sanitation, sewerage, drainage, and electricity. The lack of these basic facilities results in pollution from improper waste disposal, fire hazards from outdoor cooking, and other methods to fulfill the functions of these necessities. This pollution can potentially cause landslides, flooding, and natural hazards. 

The Future of Peri-Urbanisation

The researchers caution that peri-urbanisation cannot be allowed to continue in Dhaka. Current peri-urbanisation puts flood-safe regions at risk. Further urban expansion would take place in flood-prone areas. 

The study makes clear that policymakers must closely monitor and regulate peri-urbanization. This development may result in safe and environmentally sustainable urban environments. Policymakers may also encourage the development of rural environments that would offer financial and residential security for Dhaka’s residents. 

The need for action is urgent. Bangladesh will have an estimated 13 million climate migrants in the next 30 years. Today, research shows that 68% of the country’s climate migrants move to Dhaka. Without area-specific management of peri-urban spaces to accommodate vulnerable communities, Dhaka’s landscape and its communities are in grave peril.

Image 1. Photo by Jonathan Bolinger.

Sarah Lloyd knows first hand the challenges Wisconsin’s dairy industry faces. She regularly works on her family’s 400-cow farm, along with being a member of Wisconsin Farmers Union, the Wisconsin Milk Marketing Board, and the Wisconsin Food Hub Cooperative. She feels first-hand what dairy farmers across the state are experiencing: hot temperatures in August and September are slowing down dairy.

“It definitely reduces production,” Lloyd told reporters at Wisconsin Public Radio. “You can see it immediately that day.” High temperatures mean less milk. This is one of the reasons why Wisconsin’s climate historically was good for dairy agriculture. 

Rising temperatures and other extreme weather conditions are already forcing farmers to adapt their production techniques and schedules. The UN Environment Programme defines climate adaptation as any adjustments in processes, practices, and structures that help deal with the impacts of climate change. The problem is that climate adaptation on Wisconsin dairy farms has  decreased growth in productivity by -0.32%. 

In 2020, researchers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the University of Connecticut, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison studied the relationship between dairy agriculture and global climate change. They added to an existing body of literature that shows climate change is having substantial effects on dairy production. 

What was really interesting about this new study is that it showed that dairy production is growing overall. There are a number of different factors helping to grow dairy productivity… climate adaptation just isn’t one of those factors. It has the opposite effect.

Fig 1. Chart by Eric Njuki in “Climatic Trends Dampened Productivity Growth on Wisconsin Dairy Farms,” USDA. 

The study looked at five different factors that help to improve farm productivity: changes in technology, environmental and economic changes, technical efficiency changes, unidentified factors, and climatic effects. Every factor had a minimal effect or helped to increase overall growth… except for climate adaptation. 

The rate that climatic effects decrease productivity is not as substantial as most of the factors that help to increase growth. But even a small decrease can impact farmers already struggling to save their farms.

Challenges for Small Farmers

The problem for most small farms is that they are increasingly competing with larger producers in a more globalized dairy industry.

The percent of small dairy farms dropped from 54% to 20% between 2002 and 2017. 

Larger farms owned by wealthier farmers can afford to purchase more cattle and more efficient technologies, which allow them to improve production more and more to keep up with out-of-state and out-of-country competitors. Smaller farmers with less disposable income struggle to keep up, and often eventually have to sell or close their operations.

Climate change presents small farmers with a whole new realm of challenges and needs. 

Rising Temperatures and Closures

Rising temperatures mean cows produce less milk, as the Lloyd family’s farm has already experienced. Changes in Wisconsin’s year-round temperatures have decreased dairy outputs for the average farm by 20.1 metric tons per year. While the output is dependent on the size of each herd, that is the equivalent of an average loss of 1.6 cows. 

Hotter days also limit available feed, affect the management of pastures, alter reproduction, and heighten cows’ risks of disease. Each of these effects add further costs and risks to farmers. For those with small herds, even small disruptions in production can spell trouble.

Temperature changes lower productivity all year around. Increased precipitation is the other primary climatic effect currently in Wisconsin. In the summer, this also has a significant negative effect on farm productivity. 

Looking forward

The authors of the study offer much-needed solutions to the information they gather on the effects that climate has on farm productivity. 

The authors call for increased funding to research and develop new technologies to help farms continue to adapt to increasing temperatures and precipitation. They also call for identifying farmers with slower rates of production. With that information, education and training for pre-existing technologies can be directed to farmers that are lagging behind in production to try to prevent closures. They also emphasized the need for direct action, education, and training all in the effort of reducing overall greenhouse emissions. Preventing further emissions will prevent even more harmful effects of climate change– those that affect the Wisconsin dairy industries, along with other industries and peoples in different places around the world. 

Wisconsin dairy agriculture still produces 27% of the country’s cheese. In order to help small dairy farmers be a part of that production, tools and knowledge for dealing with climate change’s negative effects must be accessible and widely shared, particularly to help smaller farms remain in operation. 

This new research demonstrates that climate change is amplifying the challenges small dairy farmers are already facing. 

Iran seems like a prime candidate for water conflict. Iran shares water with all fifteen countries it borders, and it lies in the Tigris-Euphrates Basin, a region known for intense drought and water conflict between nations. Almost 90% of Iran’s total area has been experiencing long-term drought and 85% of the Iranian population sees the effects of water scarcity. 

Yet, Iran rarely faces water conflict. In fact, in recent history Iran has only experienced one water related conflict: the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) when Iraq used allegations of an unfair water agreement to start the war. So how has Iran managed to avoid conflict despite so many risk factors?

The reason: Iran actively and successfully engages in water diplomacy to prevent conflict according, as a new study published in World Affairs reveals.

Map of Iran’s main water ways based on a Fanack Water map

Considering Iran’s blatant disregard for women’s rights and human rights, Iranian politics must be scrutinized. A recent article emphasizes the different dimensions of Iranian politics, which offers a positive lesson in water diplomacy. Iran must treat its citizens with the same respect and consideration that it does its neighbors.

Water diplomacy fosters cooperation between water-sharing countries. Water diplomacy can focus on working together to tackle water-related issues including water management, irrigation, water conservation, and wastewater treatment. In their 2022 article, Yeganeh and Bakhshandeh discuss how Iran approaches water diplomacy with their neighbors through treaties and negotiations. 

Water diplomacy is not new for Iran. Hundreds of years ago, farmers agreed to use aqueducts to divide and distribute water. The aqueducts were developed around 1,000 BCE to oversee water use. Despite being an effective way to divide and save water, Iranian aqueducts were not able to withstand the impacts of climate change and have largely dried up. 

 So overtime Iran has grown beyond older diplomatic models of water sharing, where Iran was a Riparian State, where water belongs to the state whose land borders it. The Riparian State can use the water as it sees fit so long as the uses do not interfere with others’ uses. This one-dimensional model fails to account for water’s constant movement and the challenges of sharing water effectively. 

Yeganeh and Bakhshandeh explain three strategies underpin the success of Iran’s water diplomacy down to three principles:

1. Goodwill and cooperation
2. Avoiding harm or non-significant harm 
3. Information and data sharing.

Goodwill and cooperation require that countries act with best interests in mind. This principle provides a basis of trust in negotiations. This principle embodies hydrosolidarity, the idea that countries should manage water resources through participation and coordination between stakeholders, while considering ethics and equity. The Friendship Dam between Iran and Turkmenistan is a manifestation of such goodwill in these negotiations. 

Avoiding harm or non-significant harm has forced Iran and agreeing countries to focus on the environment ahead of agreements and the 50-50 principle. The 50-50 agreement principle splits water usage down the middle and requires countries to prioritize water distribution to protect local ecosystems, whether the needs are baseline higher dependencies on water or climate change impacts. This environmental focus enables leaders to look beyond the narrow-minded allocation systems. Pakistan and Iran agreed in 1960 to protect the environment by polluting their shared rivers. 

 Similar to relying on goodwill and cooperation, information sharing allows all countries to negotiate with full understanding of the water system workings. It also contributes to long-term collaboration to produce shared data. Iran and Iraq demonstrate this principle through their commitment to the Common Bureau of Coordination to exchange transboundary water data and information. 

 Following the Iran-Iraq War and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime, Iran and Iraq needed to find a new way to share water. Previously, each country viewed itself as the sole riparian owner of the water. Iraq never recognized Iran’s sovereignty over a river, which helped precipitate the war. In total, Iran and Iraq share 21 rivers, making them very closely linked. During diplomatic discussions, Iran and Iraq agreed to have a 50-50 share formula. In order to practice active diplomacy, Iran and Iraq did not let talks and cooperation stop. Since these discussions began in the 1990s, they have continued to meet and work together and avoid further conflict.

 The principle of water diplomacy suggests that Iran sees water as a matter of national security. This approach to hydrosolidarity has promoted good relations with neighboring countries and contributed to better cooperation in other relevant diplomatic areas such as trade and culture. 

Diplomacy has a reputation for being a passive form of conflict management because it lacks the confrontation society has deemed strong, but Iran has proven that diplomacy can be effective and a possible tool for other countries. 

Iran’s approach to water diplomacy offers a model for the 144 countries that have transboundary waters. This is an approach that can promote hydrosolidarity globally at a time when water is becoming more unpredictable. 

June 11, 2019. Park visitors using the Chicago 606 Trail. Photo credit: Armando L. Sanchez / Chicago Tribune

Intro

In 2006, the Atlanta BeltLine Inc. was created to build expansive parks and trails in Atlanta, connecting 45 Atlanta neighborhoods by redeveloping abandoned railroad lines. But researchers worry there is a big risk: the Atlanta BeltLine could drive “green gentrification” in historically marginalized communities of color on the westside of Atlanta.

“Green gentrification” is becoming a pressing issue for cities like Atlanta nationwide.

The study

Researchers at the University of Illinois and University of Colorado explored “green gentrification” in 10 different U.S. cities, including New York, NY; Los Angeles, CA; and Chicago, IL. They define green gentrification as the process by which creating parks and open spaces results in increased housing prices and, often, the displacement of low-income residents in urban neighborhoods.

The researchers investigated if new parks built between 2008 and 2016 drove green gentrification within half a mile from census tracts. They examined how park location, size and function affect neighborhood change:

1. Do new parks always foster gentrification in surrounding neighborhoods? 
2. Does the location and size of parks matter? 
3. Are parks with active transportation trails worse for gentrification?

Most importantly, the researchers challenge the “Just Green Enough” claim that small-scale parks drive less green gentrification compared to large parks.

The study found that newer parks do drive green gentrification. The results of the study revealed that while small parks did not necessarily influence less gentrification, park function and location did. Specifically, parks that were large and centrally located/close to downtown, such as in Los Angeles and Seattle, had a bigger gentrifying impact than suburban parks.

Additionally, the study found that new parks with greenways, corridors of vegetation conserved for recreational use, accelerated gentrification when they included active transportation trails, such as walking and bike trails. This was the case in Chicago’s 606 trail, for example, where housing units around the 2.7-mile abandoned rail line-turned-recreational park were valued more because of their close proximity to the park and its amenities.

Recommendations for urban park designers

Few studies have paid attention to how new and centrally located park projects can potentially drive neighborhood change. The results of this study call into question the role of urban park improvements in increasing the quality of life for at-risk communities.

To prevent displacement of low-income communities alongside new parks, the researchers propose that urban planners must learn from injustices created by developed parks, such as Atlanta’s BeltLine and New York’s High Line, when planning the design of parks. They suggest that through investigating how residents from marginalized communities perceive and use new parks in gentrifying neighborhoods, the gentrifying impact of new parks can be better understood.

Most importantly, the researchers advise that urban planners spend more of their efforts on securing affordable housing for existing residents rather than trying to replicate popular public parks. Securing affordable housing will not only ensure current residents are not displaced by new park development, but also center marginalized voices in the design and creation of public parks. Instead of tourist-oriented parks, we need more community-oriented parks.

On May 26th, 2021 ExxonMobil, one of the world’s largest carbon emitters, faced a day of reckoning. Engine No. 1, a small group of investors, successfully replaced three members of Exxon’s 12 member board with climate change conscious directors. They did this by buying Exxon stock, proposing new board members, and lobbying heavy-weight investors, most notably BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, to support their proposal. With the help of these three major investment management companies, Engine No. 1 is steering Exxon Mobil towards new energy targets.

One reason this kind of shareholder activism is gaining momentum across the US is because individual investors are growing concerned with the state of global warming and frustrated with a lack of government action. Shareholder activism is the act of using the financial influence of a group of parties to pressure management within companies to adopt climate friendly measures. In Exxon’s case this meant forcing the company to contend with more board members lobbying for reductions in Exxon’s carbon footprint.

Investors must assess climate-related risks in order to adequately protect their money, like retirement funds or college savings. Fossil fuel investments are notoriously volatile, but transitioning to clean investments ensures security, which better protects people’s savings. Activists, people or groups who own a controlling portion of a company, are trying to make this happen by forcing oil-invested banks, through shareholder activism, to switch their stance.

Though this activism sounds promising, it’s still unclear whether it’s successful. Will shareholder proposed policies just become window-dressing: a symbolic gesture to appease the investors.

A recent paper by Tamas Barko, Martijn Cremers, and Luc Renneboog published in the Journal of Business Ethics explores the effectiveness of shareholder activism. The team looked at how companies are targeted for activism, how tactics are chosen to reach the objective, how many separate groups get involved in the action, and what determines if an engagement will be positive.

Their analysis reveals that successful shifts usually include three things: adapting to or mitigating the effects of climate change; stabilizing, expanding, or protecting people’s investments; and improving the company’s well-being. All three are necessary for productive climate action and the longevity and security of any implemented policies.

Using the ExxonMobil takeover as a case study shows how this  restructuring process plays out. First, investors started to worry about investing in a company wracked by major environmental concerns. Climate instability  affects Exxon’s bottom line so, as a shareholder, the investor had an interest in forcing the company to reduce its exposure to climate change. The investors communicated those wishes, but Exxon responded negatively to the efforts. Shareholders then cooperated to build a large enough coalition to forcibly take over seats on the board and install directors who are more sympathetic to the cause.

This example shows the general process of a successful instance of activism. But, the research reveals such cases often have a lot in common.

First, activists tend to target companies with poor sustainability records. Companies that are vehemently anti-sustainable-action (think Exxon) are targeted more often than companies that are passively not sustainable. The more visible the company, both in the market and in the public eye, the higher its chances are of getting attention. The largest and most well recognized firms are also some of the most polluting, which opens a lot of opportunities to create change.

There are two ways action can be taken: by restructuring the company or by increasing transparency into business practices and sustainability standards. Transparency efforts tend to be easier to achieve, but have questionable results. Restructuring is more difficult, but is also more likely to lead to actual changes. In Exxon’s example shareholder activism successfully changed the board, a milder form of restructuring.

When a company is doing worse, they are more likely to comply with demands, and this could be to draw their consumer base back to them. The researchers did conclude that  successful compliance, a company acquiescing to shareholder demands, is due to participation by the activists, and could not be accomplished purely through external drivers.

Companies benefit from responding to investors with sustainable action. Researchers found that after a firm has complied with the activists’ demands they tend to see a significant uptick in sales and economic growth. This is true for even low-level engagement except if the firm is already performing highly in terms of sustainability. Beyond market gains, the researchers found that participation “could lead to improved governance and reduced agency problems” as faith in the company grows with investors. Any level of engagement is likely to be beneficial to the company regardless of if the engagement leads to real changes.

The overarching finding is that these tactics are not just for optics; they actually improve company performance and benefit the environment. They’re also a valuable tool for shareholders who don’t own a large portion of the company. Just as Engine One showed with Exxon, small investors can make a big difference.

Science is not accessible. 

Large words and complicated concepts make it exceedingly difficult to communicate and understand scientific facts and ideas. Even visual representations like graphs are indecipherable without understandable labels.

With little foundational knowledge, individuals often need to “see it to believe it” or be able to observe something in order to understand it. In the technological age of social media, TikTok stars and climate scientists alike are working to make accessible content about the climate crisis. Nowadays it’s mainstream to talk about eco-consumerism and climate change. As we become increasingly dependent on our technology and engrossed in social media we see more and more of this content. It’s important to understand how visual imagery of the environment shapes societal understanding of climate change. 

In 2010 researchers conducted a study evaluating viewers’ reactions to seeing environmental visual imagery in newspapers. While the paper medium is not often used anymore, the message of climate change remains the same. Their findings can give us insight into how people respond to visual imagery about the climate crisis. 

Their results showed that climate images generally promoted feelings of saliency, but provoked negative emotions. Most reliably negative were images of receding sea ice. Their study then revealed a conundrum: images of climate impacts promoted feelings of saliency but undermined self-efficacy, images of clean energy futures promoted self-efficacy but did not produce a sense of urgency in viewers, and images of politicians and celebrities undermined feelings of saliency. They determined few images would promote feelings of saliency and self-efficacy at the same time.

Young environmental activists need to understand the importance and impact of the content they create. Information and visual imagery on social media platforms can disseminate very quickly regardless of authenticity. Despite drawbacks, visual imagery offers an effective tool at eliciting attention to the climate crisis.

The journal Science believed in the effectiveness of this imagery and went so far as to pair a 2010 letter “Climate Change and the Integrity of Science” with a photoshopped image of a struggling polar bear to underscore the urgency of their message

Oh, the irony.

With the inundation of technology in our society, It’s important for both consumers and producers of media to understand the benefits and drawbacks of visual media. Particularly when it comes to environmental activism. With a multitude of new platforms from Youtube to Facebook, it’s crucial to communicate the reality of climate change in a way that is factual, engaging and helpful.