By GSD Competition Prizewinner Maia Gorman
I have often thought about how our society’s reaction to climate change is to prevent disasters from happening rather than engaging in positive action to create a better future. Our passive mentality can be one of the obstacles society faces in terms of environmental innovation. I think we should aim for positive change that can not only reduce carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, but improve our general state of living in terms of economic and social sustainability as well. It’s definitely more appealing to think about the good we can achieve rather than the bad we have to prevent and having an overall positive goal feels more gratifying. Maybe it would be productive to additionally focus on generating higher oxygen levels rather than solely focusing on limiting carbon emission levels.
As a Chinese proverb states, “The best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago; the second-best time is now”.
‘is sustainability
sustainable?’
my question echoes
through tainted,
smog-infested air
to live in a world that wants to sustain,
is to live in a world
preaching
neutrality
neutral footprints
walk along the prescribed path,
‘carbon zero’
is the new motto as we chant
in idleness
reduction, prevention, sustenance
the holy trinity of few and fair global
actions
but as we work towards our common
survival goal,
zeal leaves the body
to be replaced with the passive,
helpless search for
neutrality
could the gentle soul focus on
what could be achieved,
instead of only prevented?
a simple, paradigmatic shift:
abundance
suddenly, we are no longer trapped in the loathed
wearedoomedandthereisnogoingback
mentality
the curious human mind
seeks the eagerness
for a good change
sheer sustainability
isn’t enough for a sliver
of hope
carbon neutral?
yes, or how about
oxygen positive?
let us rename sustainability, and
call it
abundance
Header image by 愚木混株 cdd20 via Unsplash
GLOBUS 
Leave a Reply