Author: hartsa6

As part of the Greenbelt course’s recent lifestyle project I experimented with vegetarianism. Although through the end of the experiment I did not continue with vegetarianism–I did rediscover a permanent staple in my diet: Sweet potato. This particular root vegetable is worthy of our collective adoration for a number of reasons I wish to relate. First, the sweet potato is part of an elite and mysterious group of transpacific edible flora. In fact, there is some anthropological evidence suggesting the sweet potato made the 5000 mile (8000 kilometer) trek from the Andes to the Highlands of New Guinea hundreds of years before Columbus’s voyage, probably by way of Polynesian sailors who (maybe) used the hardy vegetable for sustenance on these long voyages (Doucleff 2019).

“The sweet potato made three independent trips to Southeast Asia. The Polynesians probably introduced it in 1100 A.D. (red). While the Spanish (blue) and Portuguese (yellow) brought other varieties from the Americas around 1500” (Doucleff 2019).

From this evidence–and our own experience–we learn solutions to deeply situated problems of sustainability. That is, how do we reconcile, on the fronts of production and transportation, the simultaneous health crises of overconsumption, overnutrition, malnutrition, and undernutrition. Bovell-Benjamin writes, “Currently, in some developed countries, overnutrition rather than undernutrition presents a major public health challenge. However, from a global perspective, undernutrition, food insecurity issues, droughts, and limited agricultural technologies are major problems. In developing countries, many farmers are highly dependent on root and tuber crops, as contributing, if not principal, sources of food, nutrition, and cash income… The sweet potato… is high yielding and drought tolerant, with wide adaptability to various climates and farming systems.” Moreover, “the roots, leaves, and shoots [of sweet potatoes] are all edible” (Bovell‐Benjamin 2007). Sweet potato is filling enough to prevent its own overconsumption, and nutritionally dense enough to serve as a cheap staple in the diets of millions of people. Cartabiano et al. succinctly note: “Sweet potatoes are a convenient food to be used as a nutritional supplement in the diet of vulnerable people” (2022).

Furthermore, Afzal et al. recommend increased sweet potato production in order to encourage a variety of sustainable development goals. Goals, which importantly, seek to protect some of the most vulnerable people on the planet: [S]weet potato can contribute positively to reducing poverty by creating sustainable income generation opportunities for small farmers. This is due to its profitability, potential for biofuel production as a result of its high starch content, the selling of vines due to their high multiplication rate, low production costs due to low input requirements, and the potential for high yields” (Afzal et al. 2021). Afzal et al. goes on to note that studies of farmers in Uganda, Malawi, and Nigeria demonstrate the success of sweet potato production in increasing income for struggling farmers. Which further increases their access to food, clothing, medication, and education.

Afzal (2021) and Cartabiano (2022) both go on to note how incredibly understudied (and underappreciated) sweet potato is by academia and consumers. For me, I appreciate sweet potatoes for their decadence and sweetness. As individuals dedicated to sustainability, I think it is important that we find sustainable activities, hobbies, and foods that that feel decadent, relaxing, and fulfilling, that don’t also feel sacrificial and laborious.

In late February 2015, the Republican senator from Oklahoma, James Inhofe, brought a snowball from outside the Capitol building onto the Senate floor to prove that the Earth is not getting warmer (Barrett 2015). We can address Inhofe’s misinformation with simple ecological definitions: in which, the climate is the general trend of atmospheric conditions, and the weather is the atmospheric conditions of a discrete moment in time.

Ontology is the branch of philosophy concerned with being. It attempts to answer questions like, “What does it mean for something to be a thing?”; “If you were to break a table in half, do you now have two half-tables or one table that is in two pieces or all three of those things?”; and “How do our interactions with objects change their identities?” With that in mind, Inhofe unintentionally raised a very interesting ontological question that we could frame as, “Without the use of any specific scientific jargon, what is Climate Change?”

Philosopher Sean Esbjorn-Hargens provides one answer, stating, “Climate Change is a complex phenomenon that is enacted by multiple methodologies from various disciplines. No single method by itself can ‘see’ or reveal climate change in its entirety.” He continues, “[Climate Change] is a multiple object. So, while it may be multiple… it is an object nonetheless… it is real!” (Esbjörn-Hargens 2010). So, climate change is a complex web of intersecting and interrelated causes culminating toward a trend. The warming of the Earth is not the only aspect of climate change; it also encompasses poverty, famine, instability, flooding, drought, disease, etc. Climate change’s identity is necessarily entangled with all these factors.

This complexity is very difficult to unravel.

Perhaps this is why much of the up-to-date literature on how we ought to think about climate change, sustainability, and the environment seems to draw an opposite conclusion: mindfulness. Mindfulness, as Ericson et al. write, “[is a meditation practice that] means being aware, taking note of what is going on within ourselves and outside in the world… It can be defined as ‘paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally’… one simply pays attention to one’s experiences, from moment to moment” (Ericson 2014). This doctrine, when applied to the environment, resembles Inhofe’s snowball. Mindfulness seems to suggest that we should care that it’s snowing, not just that it will be warmer next summer.

However, research shows that this perspective is useful for developing a more sustainable mindset. “Mindfulness meditation [is] widely practiced for the reduction of stress and promotion of health” (Tang 2015). Additionally, “stress, depression, and physical pain make it harder to consider societal concerns such as climate change” (Ericson 2014). See fig. 1.

This leaves us with a seemingly intractable dilemma—how can we balance the ontological fact of climate change’s complexity and interconnectedness while thinking about it in a way that does not feel completely overwhelming? This can lead to stress and, consequently, more unsustainable behavior.

Tang et al. suggest something akin to what a psychoanalyst might call ego-death. They propose that an ideally mindful practice looks less intrapersonal and more like a breaking down of the walls between the self and the rest of reality. “The distinction between self and object is absent… awareness is itself the subject of awareness” (Tang 2015). On the other hand, Esbjorn-Hargens offers a perspective that claims that the real nature of what climate change is is  contingent on your personal relationship with it. “The argument is no longer that methods discover and depict realities. Instead, it is that they participate in the enactment of those realities” (Esbjörn-Hargens 2010).

These arguments are not mutually exclusive, but I don’t think that they are universally applicable. Which I find problematic. Tang’s account is logically consistent but pragmatically unhelpful. Per their own account, years of intentional practice are often necessary before we can measure physical neurological changes from mindfulness (Tang 2015). We must also remember that meditation is hard, achieving ego-death even moreso. Esbjorn-Hargens’ suggestion may fail to resonate with the layperson; if I am not a climatologist, political analyst, or an Arctic researcher, am I really ‘participating in the enactment of reality’? Or, if I am, what else is there to do?

My perspective is that the simple awareness of one’s climate-related stress—or any stress—is as good as it gets. I would still suggest that anyone practice mindfulness; it does help you become happier, healthier, and more sustainable. However, it may not alleviate the overwhelming nature of climate change because it is not designed to do so. As Viktor Frankl once wrote, “An abnormal reaction to an abnormal situation is normal behavior” (Frankl 2006). Meditation will not make climate change any less overwhelming; it will only provide you with more freedom in how you experience being overwhelmed. For me, even the simple act of saying to myself, “I am feeling overwhelmed, I am feeling stressed, and the reason is climate change” can provide almost immediate relief.

It’s worth noting that I try to avoid “I am…” and instead start the mantra with “I am feeling…” or “This person is feeling…” in order to create distance between myself and the emotion. When I just state “I am overwhelmed,” that feels like tying up the entirety of my identity with my momentary mental state. This is what separates mindful reflection from Inhofe’s snowball argument. The distinction is between existing in the moment and being tied-up in it. There is a difference between me and the weather, or the climate and my emotions.

References
Barrett T. 2015 Feb 27. Inhofe brings snowball on Senate floor as evidence globe is not warming. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2015/02/26/politics/james-inhofe-snowball-climate-change/index.html.

Ericson T, Kjønstad BG, Barstad A. 2014. Mindfulness and sustainability. Ecological Economics. 104:73–79. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.007. [accessed 2023 Sep 9]. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800914001165.

Esbjörn-Hargens S. 2010. An ontology of climate change integral pluralism and the enactment of multiple objects. Journal of Integral Theory and Practice. 5(1):143–147. [accessed 2023 Sep 9]. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283763880_An_ontology_of_climate_change_integral_pluralism_and_the_enactment_of_multiple_objects.

Frankl VE. 2006. Man’s Search for Meaning. Boston: Beacon Press.Tang Y-Y, Hölzel BK, Posner MI. 2015.
Tang Y-Y, Hölzel BK, Posner MI. 2015. The neuroscience of mindfulness meditation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 16(5):312–312. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3954.