This all sounds like lower profits. Can’t have that.

The team calls for more interdisciplinary research into what they have dubbed the “human behavioural crisis” and concerted efforts to redefine our social norms and desires that are driving overconsumption. When asked about the ethics of such a campaign, Merz and Barnard point out that corporations fight for consumers’ attention every second of every day.

“Is it ethical to exploit our psychology to benefit an economic system destroying the planet?” asks Barnard. “Creativity and innovation are driving overconsumption. The system is driving us to suicide. It’s conquest, entitlement, misogyny, arrogance and it comes in a fetid package driving us to the abyss.”

The problem is capitalism and the individualism and consumerism it encourages. There’s already plenty of analysis of the problems of capitalism and the difficulties of moving past it. Maybe these interdisciplinary studies would help, but in the end the problem is not so much a lack of understanding of the problem, but that the ruling classes under capitalism will use all means available to obstruct what everyone with open eyes knows needs to be done.

Really? More nonsense about how this is a problem that changing individual behavior can solve? I thought we were past this horseshit after carbon footprints were debunked. The only individuals whose behavioral changes will have a considerable impact on climate change are the wealthiest 1% and industry leaders.

The behavioral crisis is the failure of ordinary people to riot, shut down factories and refineries, and hang greedy CEOs. The research is correct insofar as it suggests people should become more conscious of the fact that a few individuals are marching humanity into oblivion, but the time for more research is past. We already know what needs to be done. If human psychology predicts that humans will never voluntarily give up consumption–and it does–then we ought not be targeting mankind’s goodwill toward the planet or even its foresight. Rather, our efforts–that is, the entire focus of every free society–should be directed wholly toward the annihilation of the institutions on which that consumptive philosophy depend and, where and as called for, the burial of those men who refuse to give them up.

Reason and education have proved insufficient. The remedy of a slave is not to break his shackles, but to kill the masters.

that “behaviour” is capitalism

Great to see an article that goes beyond the usual techno-fixes although the focus on individual behaviour is disappointing as others already noted.

I see capitalism, current behavior and culture as different aspects of the same thing. We can’t address the climate crisis by tackling just one of those we need to do all of them and we need to do it yesterday. If we seek to make changes in only one area the pushback from the other two will stop it.

Obviously that isn’t going to happen, given the political systems humanity has. There is no mechanism for globally coordinated action as a species, especially of the kind that socially engineers new values. The UN is not up to the task.

All we can do is reduce the damage of what is to come.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

“We’ve socially engineered ourselves the way we geoengineered the planet,” says Joseph Merz, lead author of a new paper which proposes that climate breakdown is a symptom of ecological overshoot, which in turn is caused by the deliberate exploitation of human behaviour.

Where discussion of climate often centres on carbon emissions, a focus on overshoot highlights the materials usage, waste output and growth of human society, all of which affect the Earth’s biosphere.

The paper explores how neuropsychology, social signalling and norms have been exploited to drive human behaviours which grow the economy, from consuming goods to having large families.

The authors suggest that ancient drives to belong in a tribe or signal one’s status or attract a mate have been co-opted by marketing strategiesto create behaviours incompatible with a sustainable world.

The authors suggest the best strategy to counter overshoot would be to use the tools of the marketing, media and entertainment industries in a campaign to redefine our material-intensive socially accepted norms.

The team calls for more interdisciplinary research into what they have dubbed the “human behavioural crisis” and concerted efforts to redefine our social norms and desires that are driving overconsumption.

The original article contains 1,039 words, the summary contains 194 words. Saved 81%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!