Environmental literacy articles

Richard Boothman 11/15/25 Richard Boothman 11/15/25

Make them pay

Since I began studying environmental issues such as climate breakdown and the destruction of biodiversity, I’ve been interested in the role of business in these multiple and interlinked crises.

This is particularly important when successive governments and all opposition parties are ideologically fixed on the idea that economic growth is the only thing that’s important. They promote policies that increasingly unshackle businesses, particularly big businesses, from the restraints that have been placed upon them. In the UK, towards the end of 2025, we’re fed the line that the economy remains in crisis (a state it has occupied since the financial crash in 2008) and that, as a result, we can no longer afford vital public services or to protect nature against unconstrained development. We’re also being told that renewable energy will increase our energy bills when, deep down, we know that the opposite is the case.

This does not seem to stop the government from increasing spending on so-called “defence” to meet some arbitrary percentage of GDP to comply with demands of the US government. This too, benefits the multinational businesses that develop weapons and the means to use them.

This should not be too much of a surprise when big business has spent the last few decades co-opting government and making sure that policies are geared towards maximising business profit and the wealth of the highly paid and often unaccountable leaders.

But a tax on the super-rich and more effort to make polluters pay for the harm they’re doing could make a massive difference. That’s why Global Justice Now has joined a civil society alliance to call on governments to “Make them Pay”! In the context of this campaign, “them” means the wealthiest members of society as well as the corporations that have made vast amounts of money from exacerbating climate breakdown.

If you’re interested in joining the campaign, you can sign the Global Justice Now petition.

Karen Boothman 1/29/25 Karen Boothman 1/29/25

Petrolhead

This is a difficult confession for someone so invested in environmental issues and who spends his time encouraging others to think about the environment.

I used to be a petrolhead!

I got my first Mini (which was ancient, even then) soon after I turned 17. I spectated at motor rallies and once drove from Yorkshire to Kent to watch the British Grand Prix at Brands Hatch. (This probably tells you immediately that I’m no longer as young as I think I am!) I read books about Timo Makkinen and Paddy Hopkirk and their exploits in the Monte Carlo Rally. I subscribed to Autosport magazine and watched motor racing on television.

I now drive a sensible family car. I try to drive economically and only when it’s necessary.

I can’t help but be tempted by some of the car adverts I see on television and daydream about being able to drive the latest shiny new sports car or SUV.

But then, reality sets in and I see that the vision of car ownership portrayed in these adverts is nothing more than an illusion. When did you last drive along the meandering coastal roads of the south of France, or Italy’s Amalfi coast in glorious sunshine? And if you have done, when were you able to drive on these roads without encountering another car or, more concerning, a coach full of tourists or a juggernaut hauling 40 tonnes of stuff from the nearest port!

Car ownership and use is still being peddled as a dream of the open road, unlimited time and resources to enjoy the sunshine and scenery. The reality for most of us is very different.

For me, an almost recovered petrolhead, I’m now considering and, to some extent, looking forward to the time when I no longer need a car. This expensive, polluting metal box on wheels, which spends most of its time parked up and going nowhere, can become someone else’s problem.

I’m not even excited by the increase in availability of electrically powered cars as we still have to drive them on horribly congested roads. And in the UK, at least, we haven’t yet developed the infrastructure we need to support a wholesale shift to electric vehicles.

Has your relationship with cars changed?

If you don’t use a car, how do you travel?

Matt Boothman 1/21/25 Matt Boothman 1/21/25

Is climate breakdown causing mass migration?

There is no doubt that climate breakdown leads to drought, crop failure and hunger; or floods; or other extreme weather conditions. These, in turn, force people to leave their homes. But does this lead to cross-border migration?

I’ve often told learners that the climate crisis is leading to increasing migration. In fact, I’ve suggested that the number of migrants reaching more affluent countries today will be dwarfed by the number moving across international borders as the climate deteriorates further. This seems to be the accepted belief, reinforced by most media outlets.

But I realise I may have been making some inappropriate assumptions and, in turn, passing on these ideas to learners on our courses.

Hein de Haas, Sociology Professor at the University of Amsterdam has, in his book, “How migration really works”, encouraged me to examine these assumptions again.

Professor de Haas suggests that the popular idea that illegal migration is out of control is incorrect as there’s evidence that most migrants who move from the global south to the global north continue to do so legally. What is changing, however, is that the legal channels allowing such migration are being closed. If this trend continues, we may see an increase in illegal migration as genuine asylum seekers and other migrants try to find ways to reach their desired destination.

Rather than migration increasing due to drought, crop failure and hunger, or extreme weather conditions it increases as countries become richer. Increasing levels of income and education alongside infrastructure improvements raise people’s capabilities and aspirations to migrate. Rather than being a desperate flight from misery, migration is generally an investment in the long-term well-being of families and requires significant resources.

If you’re not sure about this, just think about the amounts reported to be paid to people traffickers! And families appear willing to pay more than once if an initial attempt to reach the desired destination fails.

Poverty, on the other hand, deprives people of the resources to move long distances. These unfortunate people are barely able to reach the nearest refugee camp or international aid zone and are certainly unable to cross continents.

This is why climate breakdown may not, in fact, trigger mass movements of “climate refugees”. Research into the effects of droughts and floods shows that most people stay close to home. The most vulnerable people are the most likely to get trapped, unable to move anywhere.

Professor de Haas indicates that international migrants account for less than 3% of the world’s population. This figure hasn’t changed much for around 50 years. About 10% of international migrants are refugees, representing only 0.3% of the world’s population. 80 to 85% of refugees stay in their region of origin, migrating internally. They will only cross borders if the borders are close.

So: are we wrong to think that climate breakdown will lead to increased international migration? In common with most aspects of the climate and other, associated crises, we can’t consider migration in isolation. We need to think about it alongside broader debates around inequality, labour markets, social justice and, more broadly, an understanding of the type of society we want to live in.