• No se han encontrado resultados

5. Análisis del Ambiente

5.1. Ambiente interno

5.1.3. Mercadeo y ventas

As  ecosocialist  Ian  Angus  (2016)  bluntly  points  out,  with  respect  to  the  effects  of   global  warming  and  climate  change  “we  are  not  all  in  this  together.”80  In  the  short   term  at  least,  and  perhaps  even  in  the  medium  term,  affluent  people  with  sufficient   resources  can  insulate  and  protect  themselves  from  the  worst  immediate  effects  of   global  warming  and  climate  change  (Angus  2016;  see  also  di  Muzio  2015).  However,   given  the  uncertainties  involved,  it  is  highly  likely  that  even  the  wealthiest  and  most   privileged  will  not  be  able  to  ‘buy’  their  way  out  of  the  longer-­‐term  effects  of  a   changing  biosphere  if  it  shifts  to  a  different  state.  Scientists  warn  that  changes  within   complex  systems  are  non-­‐linear  and  unpredictable,  and  that  sudden  shifts  within  the   physical  Earth  System  could  take  everyone  by  surprise  if  poorly-­‐understood,  

planetary-­‐tipping  boundaries  are  crossed  (Cai,  Lenton  &  Lontzek  2016;  Lenton  et  al.   2008;  Rockström  2009).81  A  graphical  depiction  of  some  potential  tipping  points,  as   well  as  some  of  the  possible  interactions  between  them,  are  shown  in  Figure  7   below.  

                                                                                                               

80  “We  are  not  all  in  this  together”  is  the  title  of  Chapter  11  in  Angus’  (2016)  book,  

Facing  the  Anthropocene:  Fossil  capitalism  and  the  crisis  of  the  earth  system.  

81  According  to  Rockström  (2015,  p.  5),  four  out  of  nine  planetary  boundaries  have  been  

transgressed:  biosphere  integrity,  interference  with  the  nitrogen  and  phosphorous   cycles,  climate  change  and  land  use  change.  

 

Source:  Cai,  Lenton  &  Lontzek  (2016,  p.  521)  

Despite  the  currently  dominant  factions  of  global  elites  and  policymakers  choosing   to  limit  their  responses  to  these  unfolding  ecological  disasters  to  woefully  

inadequate,  voluntary  and  incremental  measures  that  are  not  legally  binding  and   that  experts  calculate  will  result  in  rising  average  temperatures  of  3.2°C  even  if  fully   implemented  (UNEP  2016a),  Naomi  Klein  is  correct  to  conclude  that  when  it  comes   to  climate  change,  ‘this  changes  everything’  (Klein  2014):  no  amount  of  politicking   can  change  the  reality  of  how  the  actually  existing  Earth  System  responds  to  physical   inputs  and  outputs.82  As  Steffen  et  al.  (2011,  p.  862)  point  out  when  comparing  the   ideologically-­‐informed  rejection  of  Darwinian  evolution  to  a  similarly  ideologically-­‐

                                                                                                               

82  Refer  to  Farrell  (2016)  for  an  analysis  of  corporate  links  to  sources  of  misinformation  

about  the  reality  and  severity  of  climate  change.  

Figure  7:  Map  of  five  potential  climatic  tipping  points  and  possible  effects  on  other  elements  of  the   Earth  System  

based  denial  of  the  urgency  of  reducing  anthropogenic  GHG  emissions  in  order  to   mitigate  climate  change83:  

Darwin’s insights into our origins provoked outrage, anger and disbelief but did not threaten the material existence of society of the time. The ultimate drivers of the Anthropocene, on the other hand, if they continue unabated through this century, may well threaten the viability of contemporary civilization and perhaps even the future existence of Homo sapiens.

While  many  of  those  with  the  wealth  and  power  to  control  world  affairs  apparently   feel  themselves  to  be  exempt  from  the  laws  of  physics  and  believe  themselves  to  be   invincible  (perhaps  because  they  rely  on  some  future,  as  yet  undiscovered  or  

undeveloped,  technological  innovation  to  save  the  day),  ecosocialists  and  climate   justice  movement  actors  are  concerned  about  how  many  of  the  least  powerful,   poorest  and  most  vulnerable  people  who  do  not  even  contribute  to  global  warming   are  the  first  to  suffer  from  its  effects  (Harrington  et  al.  2016;  Savo  et  al.  2016)   Damaging  effects  of  global  warming  range  from  changing  weather  patterns   disrupting  normal  agricultural  production  and  threatening  food  supplies  (IPCC   2014a)  to  increasingly  powerful  typhoons  killing  thousands  and  leave  millions   homeless  (Campbell  2013).  It  is  not  only  disadvantaged  people  in  the  Global  South   that  suffer  the  consequences  of  ‘business  as  usual’:  poor  and  vulnerable  people  and   communities  in  the  so-­‐called  ‘advanced’  capitalist  countries,  who  can  ill  afford  to   deal  with  additional  crises,  also  face  the  devastating  effects  of  changing  weather   patterns  and  ‘extreme  weather  events’  that  result  from  global  warming.  The  lack  of   resources  and  preparedness  of  poor  communities  when  Hurricane  Katrina  struck   New  Orleans  in  2005  greatly  exacerbated  the  effects  of  the  disaster  (Schlosberg  &   Collins  2014),  and  poorer  people  also  suffered  worse  consequences  as  a  result  of   Hurricane  Sandy  seven  years  later.84  These  examples  illustrate  that  whether  they  live  

                                                                                                               

83  UNEP  (n.d.)  explains  the  meaning  of  climate  change  mitigation  as  follows:  “Climate  

change  mitigation  refers  to  efforts  to  reduce  or  prevent  emissions  of  greenhouse  gases.   Mitigation  can  mean  using  new  technologies  and  renewable  energies,  making  older   equipment  more  energy  efficient,  or  changing  management  practices  or  consumer   behavior.”  

84  In  the  aftermath  of  Hurricane  Sandy,  the  realities  of  capitalist  social  relations  asserted  

themselves  in  how    “reconstruction  assistance  was  allocated  disproportionately  to   homeowners  rather  than  tenants,  even  though  the  latter  were  more  likely  to  be  in  the   lower-­‐income  bracket”  (IDMC  2015,  p.  51),  and  how  over  39  000  people  who  had  to  

in  the  Global  North  or  in  the  Global  South,  the  already-­‐precarious  existence  of   disadvantaged  and  poor  communities  further  exacerbates  their  vulnerability  to  the   effects  of  global  warming  and  the  resultant  ‘extreme  weather’  (Leichenko  &  Silva   2014).  Given  the  evidence,  ecosocialists  argue  that  climate  change  is  not  a  Global   North/Global  South  issue:  it  is  a  class  issue  because  in  a  capitalist  system  the  

material  resources  that  individuals  and  communities  have  access  to  determine  their   life  chances  in  a  variety  of  ways,  including  in  how  effectively  they  can  cope  with  the   ravages  of  ‘extreme’  weather  events.  These  ‘extreme’  weather  events  are,  

moreover,  occurring  at  a  time  when  the  reorganisation  of  the  material  forces  of   production  and  the  shifting  balance  of  power  in  the  social  forces  of  production  (that   is,  in  the  balance  of  power  between  capital  and  labour)  result  in  more  and  more   Global  North  workers  joining  the  ranks  of  the  disadvantaged  communities  of  the   Global  South  as  they  ‘fall’  into  precarious  existences  and  poverty  as  unemployment   rises  due  to  the  relocation  of  manufacturing  and  other  industries  to  cheaper  labour   havens  in  the  Global  South,  and  as  governments  continue  to  implement  ‘flexible   labour  market’  and  wage  repression  policies  that  lead  to  underemployment  and  the   casualisation  of  work  (Heyes,  Lewis  &  Clark  2012).    

The  balance  of  social  forces  and  its  implications  for  the