Moving from environmental ruination to ecological living

April 16 is The Day of Environmental Protection. For Ukraine the topic is too urgent to attract the attention of the society to it just once a year, since in the sphere of ecology, regardless of whether it concerns water, air, earth, forests, or waste utilization, there are many dangers and risks. They are so considerable that they can become more important than military dangers or other threats. But any ecology starts with the ecology of consciousness. 

The corrupt government violates the Constitution of Ukraine, the Water and Forest Codes, cutting Ukrainians off from Ukraine: long fences hiding lakes, rivers, forests, and reserves move citizens off the best natural landscapes. Every day mass media talk about new facts of violations by influential people; however, they are not followed by mass protests. Why do we allow mayors of different cities and officials to deprive us of the best and live at our cost? Moreover, we let them destroy and harm it, since deforestation and deposition of islands, and building roads in preserve zones break the entire natural homeostasis and destroys the entire system. How can we shape the ecological consciousness and worldview for which environment is, above all, a material resource?

With these complex questions The Day turned to Oleksandr STEHNII, a leading research fellow of the Institute of Sociology at the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, executive director of the Center of Social and Political Research “Socis,” author of numerous publications on socioeconomic topics, and the monograph Institutionalization of Ecological Interests in a Society of Sociogenic Risks.

Post-Chornobyl Ukraine is on the edge of ecological ruination. Every day we hear about another devastation of a public garden, barbarous cutting down of green plantations, mass building projects on the territory of preserves, etc. These general problems are characteristic of entire Ukraine. Why, in your opinion, isn’t there mass resistance of the population?

“Your question concerns the ecological sphere, though it should be formulated in broader terms. It deals with the protection of human rights, because when we speak about natural environment, we also mean ecological security, the protection of ecological interests of a person and, actually, the protection of the right to live in a safe environment.

“What happened to social activity? Here one should refer to the notion of legitimacy. The essence of this notion lies in confirming or approving certain social actions by society. If we speak about the legitimacy of the government, this is approving of the steps it takes by the population. Why are there collisions sometimes? When there is legitimization of illegal actions, we see legal norms which allegedly legalize what is a violation. But this legitimacy is not approved by the majority of the population.”

In other words, one can say that a legitimate government commits illegitimate things which are not supported by the society? Why does it happen?

“Regarding the government, let’s consider the past five years. In fact, the government was divided into two big camps which represented the state power, and at the same time didn’t accept each other at all; very often there was a self-destructive struggle. And it influenced mass consciousness. A question arises: what common values can there be in the country if this is a united country?

“The voters realized that the political elite itself neglects the international reputation of the country and this way allows derogating Ukrainian society as a whole. In fact, there is a situation: no matter who is in the government, the government is something bad, and this nihilism in the attitude to political power without changing the sign ‘plus’ and ‘minus’ is already the first serious step to losing the legitimate basis for the Ukrainian government.

“And what happened to the population? Here another phenomenon took place. There is domination of the private sphere of life over the social one. What do I mean? Actually, the privatization of social life is a proven factor. Interest in political life is mostly limited only to talking about politics, like candid ‘kitchen’ conversations on political topics in the Soviet epoch. Politicians reward their supporters by some material benefits for not interfering with the affairs of their ‘political kitchen.’ These words can be easily proven by today’s reality, when some political forces and politicians simply buy the support of a considerable part of voters. As a specific example, I can remind you of the victory of Chernovetsky.”

Mr. Stehnii, in your opinion, when Ukrainians become richer, will they become more socially active?

“I’m not sure. One can’t equal wealth and social activity, though here one can say that the middle class is the foundation of social support for ecological values. One can say about poverty: it deepens and complicates the struggle for ecological interests, but on the other hand, poverty is not the reason for social passivity, while richness isn’t the reason for social activity, either. For example, considering ecologically aware intellectuals, not all of them are rich people. The social context in which a young person is socialized and matures as a citizen has a much stronger influence.”

If you had a possibility to determine the major directions of financing in social sphere, where would you channel the costs into?

“Regarding ecological interests, they are special in their own way. Actually, during the whole Soviet period and even now the attitude to natural resources has been determined by the fact that they are free. However, now meters for water are installed. Natural resources have always been accessible, and therefore they don’t have any substantial price value. This value is formed when there is a big deficit. And, by the way, we already have an example with good drinking water which is made a commodity. It’s sad, but the awareness of the fact that water is a commodity makes it an instrumental value. This includes meters in buildings, paying for municipal services, and buying bottled water. By the way, in Kyiv there are already about a dozen of companies delivering water. Not so long ago one would laugh at someone buying water. But today the reaction is normal, understanding, and here one should take into account the consequences of drinking water for human health. But here we face social inequality, or more precisely, I’d say ecological inequality, for not everyone can afford buying water.”

How much does our government listen to you?

“I’d like to ask a broader and more detailed question: about current relations between the scholarly elite and management decisions and about between the establishment and science. What kind of situation do we have? With all the troubles and drawbacks in the activity of the National Academy of Sciences, there are creative things which can be used in social policy of the state, especially now that we felt the need for energy-saving technologies. The Institute, for example, annually publishes a collection of scientific publications and empirical data entitled Ukrainian Society. The Dynamics of Social Changes. This collection has been published for many years, and we pass it to the Presidential Administration, to profile committees of the Verkhovna Rada, and this way the governmental bodies can use this material in their practical work.

“There is feedback when some administrative decisions are taken. For example, when some program of the Cabinet of Ministers is being discussed, they turn to the Academy of Sciences and our Institute. Our colleagues Yevhen Holovakha and Natalia Panina built a methodology for measuring the index of social feeling. This index measures how comfortably people live in this society. A short version of the index is based on 20 indicators, and there one can see how critical or uncritical it is, and this is a lead for social policy, actually, for the realization of certain forms. We provide it.

“However, in my opinion, our inventions are still not being used appropriately. Why? Let’s remember the beginning of our conversation. There are no general uniting social values for all Ukraine. But here, by the way, there are such values. This can be the health of Ukraine’s population, qualitative education, and legal assistance in protecting our rights. These are goals which can unite our society. I’d be cautious with the search for the national idea in our historical past, since our historical heritage is being understood and used in different ways.”

Mr. Stehnii, to what extent do material things currently dominate over ecological values and attract modern youth? What is shaping our young people, and what do they think about?

“In the monitoring study ‘Ukrainian society: Thoughts, Assessments and Conditions of Life of the Ukrainian Population,’ which has been done for already 16 years, a social portrait of the population of Ukraine is given. Here young people under 30 constitute about 20 percent of the general population of those who were questioned, and the tendencies existing among the youth state that it is very sensitive to those patterns of behavior which are now dominant in our society. And here the older generation is especially responsible.

“When already on the level of primary school there is a competition for possessing some material benefits: commonly it starts with possessing certain brands of cell phones, then boasting about the achievements of one’s parents, but not about their own success in studying. Today for the youth it’s important, and I tell this to my children too, to revive the role of labor and make it dominant in the society. Our children slip into the sphere of consumerism. This can lead to the demise of the community of people who are not indifferent to the protection of their civil rights and freedoms, people responsible for the development of their country.

“Therefore, the thesis that youth is more susceptible to ecological values is only partly true. Why? It depends on the social micro-environment: this can be a public organization, some circle, professional society, a company of friends and acquaintances under the influence of which one’s ecological worldview and respective patterns of behavior are formed. But generally modern Ukrainian society has a negative disposition to the making everyday life more ecologically conscious.”

What is your attitude to the involvement of a considerable part of youth in different political demonstrations?

“In our reality a demonstrator is not a sign of social or political consciousness, but first of all a way of additional income. It is our fault that after a so-called demonstration young people drink beer or smoke. I’m sure that we still need to start with the value of societally useful work, and then, perhaps, there will be activity. Because a working person is already of some use to society. If a person reached some high professional level, he or she is potentially ready, in case of violations, to adopt a civil position. That’s why there are many professional scientists among ecologists, but not alarmists, and in essence their position is professional; their knowledge says that now something bad can happen. And they reach another — social — position of activity. By the way, there can’t be a real professional ecologist without a certain social position, because they understand that their professional sphere shows that there are problems and something should be done. Thus, in many other spheres, look at safety of food products – qualified legal protection of people and qualified medical service. Today the problem is often not in paying a doctor, but in finding the one capable of providing qualified medical assistance.”

What solution to this situation do you see?

“It is necessary to recognize ecological safety and ecological health as the ecological interests and social values of the entire Ukrainian society, regardless of its views on any political force. In this sense I want to stress that ecological safely is outside politics in the sense of certain political preferences. And this understanding must come from the higher ranks of the state government, and then the ecological constituent of our life will become a value uniting Ukrainians regardless of their place of residence. Donetsk, Mariupol, Kalush – this list can be continued. These are different geographical points of Ukraine with different ideological orientations. However, they have a common social value – ecological safety of the population without which it is impossible to ensure appropriate conditions of everyday life. The authorities, the government, and the president should understand: the national interests of the country are at stake, and we suggest in our results where general national priorities can be found.”