by Edward Milford
17. February 2009 08:39
Whenever people start talking about actions to combat climate change, or tackle other environmental problems, it’s not long before the shorthand phrase ‘save the planet’ starts to slip into the conversation. As publishers, we need to be careful about the words that we use; and while this phrase benefits from being easily understood, it is one that I think is simply annoyingly inaccurate. After all, the planet is going to be fine whatever we do; millions of years from now there will still be a rock going round the sun about 150 million kilometres away from it. On earth, the sun will rise and set, winds will still blow, and waves will still lap (possibly in different places), and some animals will be thriving – my money would be on rats and sharks.
What we should be talking about is surely more tangible. It is about saving a more comfortable way of life with a modicum of security; of saving a future for the next generation of our kith and kin and the warmth of our personal relationships that comes with that security; of saving rational, viable societies with time for some leisure, entertainment and creative activity. In short, about saving a lot of what makes life worth living now – one could even risk saying ‘saving human civilisation’, for short.
Such language also has the benefit of being more inclusive. It reminds us that many people in the world currently don’t enjoy these benefits – and a long-term solution to our environmental problems will have to be one that is globally equitable.
