In the West, there are many factors that cause this situation. Most notably the rise of capitalism, but also historically the Enlightenment belief in the use of nature for the betterment of humanity, and the historical Judeo-Christian rationalization of dominion over nature based on some (but not all) religious ideas: “Go forward and multiply”; “everything that is alive and moving will be your food. In general, this fosters the need to rule the wilderness for a sense of conquest, or the desire to flee society for refuge.
With evidence that humans have violated the limits of nature (e.g., nine planetary boundaries), now is the time for an international effort to develop a new level of self-awareness around our relationship with nature, especially if we are to protect the integrity of natural ecosystems, Rather than fall into the trap of neo-colonialism – even those places that seem positive, such as those seeking to enjoy mountains and wilderness. It’s long overdue to get away from nature and the wilderness.
For thousands of years, cultures around the world have maintained a spiritual or sacred relationship with mountains and wilderness. Known for this relationship, the Native Americans of North America have historically practiced collective land ownership as opposed to the capitalist private land ownership model of the European colonialists.
In northern India and Tibet, Mount Kailash is near the source of the Indus River, Sutlej River, Yarlung Zangbo River and Kanali River. It is a holy place for four religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Bonism). The spiritual center of the world. Therefore, attempting to climb it is forbidden, an edict born of a place of deep respect.
However, the importance that the community places on the mountains is not always respected by wealthy societies. An important origin lies in colonial conquest and the establishment of settler communities who, by definition, are invaders and do not respect local traditions and beliefs of indigenous communities. Two poignant examples: Uluru and Sagarmatha/Everest (renamed Ayers Rock and Everest respectively during colonial times).
Located in central Australia, Uluru is sacred to the Anangu people, the region’s aboriginal people. They don’t climb boulders. Since the arrival of white settlers, however, tourists (including the late Queen and the current King) have started to climb to the top – despite calls to stop them. Fortunately, rock climbing was eventually banned — but not until 2019.
climbing colonial heights
Moving across the China-Nepal border, Sagarmatha/Everest (Nepalese for “Goddess of the Sky” or Tibetan for “Goddess of the World”) is sacred to many surrounding cultures. However, many people, especially those from the West, feel entitled to use the capital they have accumulated in countries where the process of natural exploitation has been systematized, to seek “awe” and even “conquest” from the mountain, buying trips, equipment and guides.
Sherpas bear most of the risk, repairing ladders, carrying oxygen tanks, setting up camp and providing food and drink. In 2014, Sherpas even went on strike due to unreasonable demands from foreign climbers who depend on them.
Beyond cultural disrespect, trying to force humans into mountains and other places of natural beauty will inevitably lead to environmental impacts: In 2019, the Nepalese government cleared 11 tons of rubbish in Sagarmatha.
During some climbing seasons, tragedies occur as climbing routes become blocked, but these are translated into stories of heroic efforts to be emulated, while often ignoring the locals who made it all possible – often suffered multiple times. Lives are at risk just to make ends meet – and the detrimental impact these unfortunate events have on local traditions and customs.
rethinking our relationship with nature
In addition to the cultural significance of the mountains, respect for the mountainous landscape stems from the practical standpoint of the harsh environment it presents. However, there is a growing lack of awareness of this aspect of the relationship between humans and nature. For example, in modernizing countries, more and more people want to “return to nature” as a means of escaping the challenges of modernity, but they fail to realize that for most of human existence, nature is not just a place A place where peace and tranquility exist by default.
Instead, it is only through human visitation and intervention that the environment can be pruned and made for our habitation and recreation. Another example is the rough safari in Africa, where hordes of so-called nature lovers want to get close to lions hunting and eating other animals, film these encounters from the comfort of their four-wheel drive, and experience the animal world by now owning cruel.
This disconnect is central to the way advanced societies view modernity’s relationship to the environment: nature must be transformed into tangible capital or intangible experience to improve our lives. In many cases, this allows people to have bragging rights. The intrinsic value of nature is already contained by its instrumental value.
Hence the inevitable irony of current trends in terms such as “nature-based solutions”, “bionics” and “green finance” that are commonly used in the field of sustainable development. Indeed, we have succumbed to oversimplification and selectively exploiting aspects of nature that create value for us, most often masking or directly contributing to its overconsumption and further exploitation, while actively ignoring homeostasis, carrying capacity and Lessons from symbiosis characterize many ecosystems.
Even the language we use shows how certain cultures have evolved a transactional relationship with nature. In English, for example, the etymology of the noun “environment” is derived from the Old French environer, meaning “to surround or enclose.” In this definition, humans are observers placed at the center of the imagination, while nature is what surrounds them: separate, irrelevant, observed.
This is a profound distinction, and – going back to Australia – it does not exist in historical Aboriginal languages: there is no concept of environment or nature, because their culture did not (and in many cases still does not) associate human separate from nature. Plants, animals and landforms.
In the Philippines, the Kankanaey community of the Cordillera Mountains has a specific word — inayan — for “immoral behaviour,” including those that harm the environment. Through inayan, public forest conservation is achieved and natural resources are used at a sustainable pace.
In southern Belize, the Q’eqchi Maya call themselves Ral Ch’och’, people who depend on and care about the earth.
There are many more examples of different understandings of nature embedded in language, but their prominence is increasingly at odds with how modern economies and societies work.
retreat from the wilderness
Ironically, as we become more aware that our modern relationship with nature is not the natural order of things, we shouldn’t delude ourselves into thinking that promoting further enjoyment of nature through more fanciful discussions of the benign nature of ecotourism will remain sustainable. For example, or it will convince most aweers to decouple from the systems that allow us to unchecked destruction of the environment and other cultures and traditions. Instead, it’s time to carefully plan a retreat from the wilderness.
First, this has to happen at the system level: our economies and corporate structures are designed in such a way that the natural resource base is converted into economic capital through a linear consumption model. This is the only way we can avoid catastrophic civilizational collapse due to existential risks such as climate breakdown, loss of biodiversity and loss of indigenous knowledge of caring nature.
However, such systemic change cannot happen if there is a shift in the mindset of societies, especially wealthy ones. That means you and me. This self-righteous mindset of mine stems from and feeds a greater disregard for our natural environment.
For many, this is not an easy pill to swallow because it requires sacrificing what we perceive as entitlements and entitlements when it comes to the pleasurable and rewarding aspects of our privileged lifestyles. But not everyone can or should seek awe of nature in these ways. A Polish study has linked mountain hiking to eutrophication in alpine lakes, while others have shown how scuba diving has damaged coral reef systems in Thailand and marine environments in Mexico. It’s worth noting that even these seemingly remote places are demeaned by thrill-seekers who want to go where few people can or do go.
Admire the wilderness beyond. If you yearn to seek awe in nature, find value in the practice of respecting every aspect of the nature that surrounds you. Help it reborn, minimize your own influence on it, and start advocating for systemic change in the “awe industry.”
Chandran Nair is the founder and CEO of the Global Institute for Tomorrow and a member of the Executive Committee of the Club of Rome. He is the author of Abolishing Global White Privilege: Fairness in the Post-Western World and The Sustainable State: The Future of Government, Economy, and Society.
This article first appeared in the July/August 2023 edition of Resurgence magazine.
