There is mounting evidence that efforts to mitigate the adverse effects of human activity on climate and biodiversity have so far been unsuccessful. Explanations for this failure point to a number of factors discussed in this article. While acknowledging cognitive dissonance as a significant contributing factor to continuing unsustainable practices, this article seeks to explore hegemonic rationality of industrial expansion and economic growth and resulting politics of denial. These politics promote the economic rationale for exploitation of the environment, with pursuit of material wealth seen as the most rational goal. Framed this way, this rationality is presented by political and corporate decision-makers as common sense and continuous environmentally destructive behavior is justified under the guise of consumer choices, hampering meaningful action for sustainable change. This article underlines forms of alternative rationality, namely, non-utilitarian and non-hierarchical worldview of environmental and human flourishing, that can advance sustainability. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
Presentatie van lector Inga Wolframm bij een lezing tijdens de Nieuwjaarsbijeenkomst 2025 'Paardrijden in de Kempen' i.h.k.v. project 'Biodiverse paardenhouderijen'.
MULTIFILE
Technology has always been a very distinctive feature of human existence. Technology is to humans what nature is to other organisms: our host. Man is nature, but through technology – humans came to stand against nature and its biodiversity; technology is now a global enterprise, advancing on a scale and pace that has never been seen before. The paper argues that this poses a threat not only to the planet and biodiversity but above all to humans themselves. A psychological perspective is chosen, that of the thinking and feeling person, which is contrasted with emerging (smart) technologies. It is concluded that man is not a rational “machine”, but a small-scale storyteller, a provider of meaning, especially emotionally involved with each other. Systems and standardization stand in the way. But as globalized humanity faces the dangers of diminishing (bio- and cultural) diversity, we need the unifying power of technology to restore balance.
MULTIFILE
The Water Framework Directive imposes challenges regarding the environmental risk of plastic pollution. The quantification, qualification, monitoring, and risk assessment of nanoplastics and small microplastic (<20 µm) is crucial. Environmental nano- and micro-plastics (NMPs) are highly diverse, accounting for this diversity poses a big challenge in developing a comprehensive understanding of NMPs detection, quantification, fate, and risks. Two major issues currently limit progress within this field: (a) validation and broadening the current analytical tools (b) uncertainty with respect to NMPs occurrence and behaviour at small scales (< 20 micron). Tracking NMPs in environmental systems is currently limited to micron size plastics due to the size detection limit of the available analytical techniques. There are currently no methods that can detect nanoplastics in real environmental systems. A major bottleneck is the incompatibility between commercially available NMPs and those generated from plastic fragments degradation in the environment. To track nanoplastics in environmental and biological systems, some research groups synthesized metal-doped nanoplastics, often limited to one polymer type and using high concentrations of surfactants, rendering these synthesized nanoplastics to not be representative of nanoplatics found in real environment. NanoManu proposes using Electrohydrodynamic Atomization to generate metal doped NMPs of different polymers types, sizes, and shapes, which will be representative of the real environmental nanoplastics. The synthesized nanoplastics will be used as model particles in environmental studies. The synthesized nanoplastics will be characterized and tested using different analytical methods, e.g., SEM-EDX, TEX, GCpyrMS, FFF, µFTIR and SP-ICP-MS. NanoManu is a first and critical step towards generating a comprehensive state-of-the-art analytical and environmental knowledge on the environmental fate and risks of nanoplastics. This knowledge impacts current risk assessment tools, efficient interventions to limit emissions and adequate regulations related to NMPs.
