The global struggle against climate change is a challenge to mankind and requires the willing participation of humans from all continents. Hence, antiquated concepts and approaches have to make way for innovative ones. Particularly, in order to develop and implement technologies which are adapted to the needs and demands of the populations in NICs and developing countries, a top-down approach does not appear to be advisable. Diversified, regional and local demand will remain a vastly unknown factor. It is necessary to speedily allocate locally adaptive, technological and economical intelligence and creativity. To date, companies have erected research departments in urban regions of development countries which appear to be or to become attractive markets. These research departments are expected to study local markets and wants and, thus, to initiate technological innovations.
But bottom-up approaches like these have to proliferate if we take the right to develop and the willingness to develop climate-neutral ways of life and the economic opportunities of emerging markets seriously. About half of the human population of the planet lives in rural areas, approximately one billion people live off less than $1 per day (purchasing power equivalent). In order to fully max out the innovation potential, the necessary technological innovation thrust has to reach the particular conditions of rural and sparsely developed areas, and it has to be complemented by a thrust of lifestyle innovations. This is only feasible given a vast network of supporting institutions, structures and basic technologies.
One crucial building block of the new industrial revolution is swift and broad knowledge dissemination. Evidently, even removal of all other obstacles would still not bring about swift and broad implementation of sustainable technologies in NICs and developing countries if there would not be a complementary wave of knowledge and skill dissemination. There are three crucial spheres of activities: tackling the negative aspects of climate change which already impact lands and populations; developing and establishing sustainable lifestyles in order to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions; facilitating the implementation of sustainable technologies in technologically backward regions. Of course, these spheres of activities are interconnected.
The challenge is extraordinary: for example, local people in technologically backward countries or regions characterised by suboptimal infrastructures and poverty have to learn to operate and maintain sophisticated technological devices. Adaptation of these technologies to local conditions will not be feasible without their participation, but to date most of them lack the ability to participate effectively. Furthermore, the presence of these technologies will radically transform their lives. Although the majority of effects will be positive, most notably regarding the necessary fight against poverty, it should be kept in mind that the sudden immersion of heretofore excluded people in the mainstream of the globalized world brings about hazards. The struggle against climate change demands sustainable lifestyles, and clearly local communities in NICs and developing countries have to shape their own.
This need for sustainable lifestyles in newly industrialised and developing countries is an urgent one in the context of climate protection. Taking into account the great numbers of people and communities in these countries who conduct their daily lives using the outdated technologies which they have or can procure, it becomes obvious that radical change is necessary. It is important to note that this change cannot be postponed until significant technology transfer actually takes place. Is has to be initiated now. This radical change has to take place locally, and the actual transaction of this change will be a local process. In other words, although this change ultimately has to be a global process and will transform countries and global regions, it consists of a myriad of local processes. Global success depends on local successes. Given the significant differences between local conditions in newly industrialised and developing countries and the multitude of aspects involved – geographical, meteorological, cultural, environmental, to name but a few – any top-down strategy devised in industrialised countries is sure not to work if applied. Thus, local sustainability paths must be developed, and they must be developed by initiating and maintaining a local process involving experts and teachers as well as the local people.
To date, the knowledge which is necessary to do so is not available for them. There is also another prerequisite: their willing cooperation. Approaches to achieve a new industrial revolution and proliferation of sustainable lifestyles which make sense in local contexts without their consent are doomed to failure. If the crucial role of local populations in NICs and developing countries for global climate protection is realised, this should be taken into account in the process of developing strategies for the new industrial revolution.
Change is unavoidable. Drastic changes have to take place, particularly since the global financial and economic crisis also adds significant pressure to the challenge of global warming and the still looming failure of the international climate negotiation process. Failure to successfully meet one of these challenges in good time would result in unimaginable but unfortunately possible global consequences. Therefore, approaches which potentially meet all of the challenges at once have to be thoroughly assessed, appropriately refined and speedily employed. This is particularly true regarding the need of global knowledge dissemination.
From the perspective of people in the majority of developing and newly industrialised countries, climate change is predominantly a local phenomenon. There is an important distinction between even an educated and well-informed stakeholder in an industrialised country and a stakeholder in a global region which is already under the impact of negative climate change effects. To date and in the immediate future, the distant observer will not experience alarming phenomena related to climate change in his immediate surroundings. Beyond these relatively and transiently safe observer positions, the fact that climate change is, in every respect, a global phenomenon, is important for comprehensive understanding, but not an immediate perception. This distinction has nothing to do with education deficits in developing and newly industrialised countries – it can be doubted that central Europeans, for example, would show a more rational reaction pattern as victims of water famines, crop failures, floods or other climate change impacts. It is a distinction that takes into account the difference between observation contexts.
Although climate change must be tackled on a global scale, this has to happen locally. Sustainable technologies for energy generation, for example, are not implemented on maps but on land, and they have to be maintained by people who conduct their daily lives within easy reach of the site. This basic pattern, which involves humans and machines and communal as well as private lifes must be spread rapidly across the whole globe if the struggle against climate change is to succeed. What must be achieved is a dense web of interconnected technology sites. But despite the fact that modern grid, logistics and ICT technology can cover vast territories, the overall effectiveness of this web depends on the effectiveness of the single nodes.
Effectiveness of technology basically depends on two factors: the overall quality and performance of the technology in question, and its degree of adaptation to local conditions. Disregard of the second factor can subtract from the technology's effectiveness or even render it useless if it breaks down or requires so much maintenance that the expenditure outweighs the benefit. Another decisive factor could be called the human component. Even automated technology requires skilled maintenance, and incidents from minor malfunctions to more serious damage demand qualified response. Obviously, implementing and maintaining novel technologies in a region characterised by technological backwardness, suboptimal infrastructure and poverty is an endeavour which demands significantly greater expenditure and more thorough consideration than the mere maintenance of a plant or site in privileged surroundings. It follows that the role of the local poulation in a developing or newly industrialised country is decisive one as far as failure or success of local projects is concerned. Thus, the successful outcome of the struggle against climate change depends on a great number of local successes.
When the needed sustainable technology is available, local success, thus, depends on expertise and motivation of the local workforce which is a part of the local population. Expertise and motivation are equally important and interconnected. Qualification, education and training programmes which are rejected by the local population are doomed to failure. Thus, there is a need for models which enlist local populations in developing and newly industrialised countries in the struggle against climate change. Instead of being the objects of a top-down „education“ process, they should willingly and knowingly participate in a local knowledge and expertise generation process.
Climate change in developing and newly industrialised countries is predominantly a local phenomenon, and successful implementation, adaptation and maintenance of sustainable technology on-site depends on the comprehensive knowledge of local conditions. There are a lot of aspects the local population knows best. Assessment of local conditions should, thus, be conducted as a dialogue between scientific and technological experts and the local population. Likewise, teaching of technical skills and establishing work structures should take place as a dialogue in order to safeguard willing cooperation of the local population. It becomes apparent that, instead of just transferring knowledge, teachers and experts from industrialised countries should be participants in a process of bringing forth the knowledge for a local sustainability path.
Establishing such processes would mean to follow the Humboldtean tradition. Wilhelm von Humbold insisted on the nature of the university he had designed as an institution for the finding, not the transfer of knowledge. For Humboldt, searching for knowledge was an infinite process and, hence, all established knowlegde was transient and to be superseded perpetually by new and better insights. Thus, as a specific local knowledge is needed at the many nodes of the global sustainable net, following the Humboldtean tradition may be a very effective method to bring it into being.
But teaching technical skills, even within the framework of the Humboldtean tradition, is not enough. Although climate change in developing and newly industrialised countries is predominantly a local phenomenon, it is still a global threat. It is important to understand that local populations, once they integrate modern sustainable technologies into their lives, also undergo a transformation regarding their position on the global stage. Where there are energy supply and reliable logistics, markets emerge and bring about business, TV, cell phones and all the other contraptions of the modern world, i.e. of contemporary western urban lifestyle. A local community facing such a development will also face new problems and new questions. What should we do and why should we do it? Informed decisions require a compehensive knowledge of the contemporary globalized world and its specific Euro-American „Western“ characteristics. It is not recommendable just to ignore this aspect because the effectiveness of the local nodes is decisive for successful struggle against climate change, and sudden immersion into the mainstream of the globalised world brings about hazards. But neither is it recommendable to teach local populations how to deal with this by employing top-down structures. Instead, the Humboldtean model should be chosen as an instrument to empower local populations in developing and newly industrialized countries in their dealings with the globalized world.
Clearly, „what should we do and why should we do it?“ can only be answered by referring to technical or scientific knowledge if the context of the question is strictly technical or scientific in nature. Informed economic, political and social decisions require other kinds of knowledge, and it is no coincidence that Humboldt's university focussed on these spheres of knowledge. Whereas, in the early 19th century, French polytechnic institutes focussed on science and mathematics which were taught strictly top-down, the Humboldtean university with its particular structures for learning and teaching focussed on history, the classics and philosophy – the spheres which are labelled „the humanities“ today. The French formula was „rationality by science and mathematics“, the Humboldtean formula was „moulding of character by participatory research“. Measured against technological progress and economic strength, it was the Humboldtean model which proved superior. The responsible, independent, innovative thinkers it produced proved to be much more capable than mere technical experts and tended to excel in every sphere of knowledge they applied their methods to. One of the more obvious resons for this was their capability and experience regarding collaborative knowledge generation processes in contrast to simple repetition and direct application of technical knowledge. In other words, the Humboldteans were able to generate the knowledge they needed instead of referring to a predefined corpus of knowledge.
The question „what should we do and why should we do it?“does not only refer to momentary decisions but also to permanent arrangements like lifestyles. Climate protection demands sustainable lifestyles, and local populations in developing and newly industrialised countries clearly have to shape their own. Technical knowledge is clearly not sufficient for this. Accordingly, the Humboldtean approach should be employed to bring about the necessary local knowledge. This way, a local population can blend local traditions, technological and scientific knowledge and, last but not least, the European tradition of the humanities to shape their way of living in a globalized world.
Like in the spheres of technology and science, a local knowledge should be produced employing the Humboldtean principles. Such an approach facilitates the integration – not assimilation – of local populations in developing and newly industrialised countries in the globalised world. This, in turn, will strengthen their effectiveness in the global struggle against climate change.
