The environmental crisis is
real, urgent, and of global reach and significance. Climate change is
framed as the largest threat. But this threat is seen almost exclusively
as a problem of too much CO2 emissions. Is climate change more
important and more urgent than the loss of biodiversity, the degradation
of arable soils, or the depletion of fresh water? Can any of these
phenomena even be considered in isolation from each other? This paper argues that the way we describe and frame a problem very
much predetermines the kinds of solutions and answers we seek, e.g.
carbon-centric mode creates and even destroys knowledge at the same
time. The authors of this essay invite the readers to take a step back
and brush climate policy against the nap.