The climate change debate: Another perspective (original) (raw)

Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 2010

Abstract

I was intrigued when I read the commentary title by Robert Pereira (2009) on the climate change debate and its potential impact on the occupations of older adults in Australia. I like the way Pereira sets out to bring climate change into the occupational therapy professional discourse, as it certainly is not a dominant discourse at present. However, there are certain areas I would like to challenge to broaden the concepts and debate around climate change in relation to the occupations of older adults. Climate change is regarded as a largely unproven topic in the scientific arena or tends to be portrayed from one side (Wishart & Wishart, 2009). Conspiracy theorists could thrive on the plausible links between the government-appointed scientists and their reports, vs. the non-governmental panels. To pull one non-governmental report forward, the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC, 2008) presents the Manhattan Declaration on climate change wherein scientists have declared that government legislation and costly regulations to reduce CO2 emissions are likely to have a marked effect on prosperity and development. This reduces ‘the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing human suffering’ (Singer & Idso, 2009). Wishart and Wishart (2009) estimate that for the average family in New Zealand, government schemes to reduce emissions could cost $300 per week on top of the already growing pressures within a recessed economy. I would suggest that this would result in a drastic change in occupations and in the choices that people (not just older adults) can make. Perhaps the institutional environment is where potential occupational deprivation could arise rather than from the impact rising temperatures can have on the natural environment. Pereira uses some notable concepts about occupation in his commentary, but fails to address Wilcock and Townsend’s (2000) notion that the intricacy in occupational lives can also result in ‘promoting growth (both personal and ⁄ or as a collective)’ (Pereira, 2009, p. 365). So, although the environment can be a negatively perceived precipitator of change (Kielhofner, 2008), it can also be a positive source bringing new or diversified opportunities. Such growth can occur through people’s ability to adapt, creating sustainable solutions, rather than being the ‘victims’ of climate change. In relation to

Heleen Reid hasn't uploaded this paper.

Let Heleen know you want this paper to be uploaded.

Ask for this paper to be uploaded.