A Life on Our Planet: My Witness Statement and a Vision for the Future

After witnessing the social, historical, and ecological changes wrought on Earth over nearly a century—in a place of unique privilege via his personal background and professional career—Attenborough has a perspective on A Life on Our Planet that few can claim. He has seen trends in technology, communications, and attitudes about the environment evolve, for better and worse, over time. And he has been a keen observer of the natural world, along with its unfortunate degradation. While his early years with the BBC are filled with optimism and wondrous encounters with wildlife and wilderness, Attenborough has observed the slow decline of said natural world—a decline that is now increasing with alarming rapidity. In the background of all of this are some key historical events and social changes. From the impact of World War II to the effects of mass media and the space program, Attenborough’s work reflects the most sweeping trends of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

The effects of World War II reverberate to this day. The geopolitical global order is still largely organized based upon the alliances and outcomes of this global war. Attenborough discusses the impact the war had on human societies across the world: “The end of the war provoked the formation of a host of multinational initiatives, including the United Nations, the World Bank and the European Union, all designed to unite the world and ensure that global society worked together” (108). This is important to Attenborough’s project today: without international cooperation, his proposals for the future of the planet—such as placing a moratorium on fishing in international waters or reducing carbon emissions through clean energy initiatives—will have little traction. Success depends on multinational collaboration, such as that once engendered by the end of a long and tragic war.

World War II significantly impacted technological development, as well, bringing about innovations in “medicine, engineering, science and communication” (108). This technological bounty, while largely responsible for improvements in life expectancy, health care, standards of living, and so on, is also accountable for the massive increase in carbon emissions, the disastrous decline in wilderness areas, and the staggering loss of biodiversity witnessed over the last century. Thus, Attenborough acknowledges that technology is a double-edged sword (see Themes: Technological Development). It must be developed with sustainability and the common good in mind.

As Attenborough sees it, certain technological developments have been a boon for humankind. For one, his very career has been built upon the communications revolution and the rise of mass media. He credits his appearances on television alongside others highlighted by BBC programs, such as Dian Fossey and Jacques Cousteau (see Further Reading & Resources), with raising awareness about the threats to endangered species. He also acknowledges, in an indirect way, how technological advancement, including media broadcasting, has separated humanity from nature and natural cycles. After encountering indigenous residents in New Guinea, Attenborough waxes poetic about the sustainability of their hunter-gatherer lives, “in balance with their environment” (51). Shortly thereafter, however, Attenborough is whisked “back [to] the twentieth century and behind my desk in the Television Centre” (51). The implication here is that the sustainability of the New Guineans is not possible in the metropolitan centers of the industrialized world.

The other major impact of the technological development and political will that fomented after the war is the creation of various space programs, particularly the American Apollo missions that would eventually take humans to the moon. It has been argued that the American space program was largely the result of the competing political tensions of the Cold War; that is, the Americans and the Soviets engaged in a space race that was mostly about proving political ascendence and winning adherents to their differing political philosophies. Still, the missions were also inspirational, changing forever the way in which humanity viewed the Earth. Attenborough records the moment when the first picture of Earth was seen from space in breathtaking awe and humility: “With that one image, at Christmas in 1968, television enabled humankind to understand something that no one before had been able to visualise in such a vivid way, perhaps the most important truth of our times—that our planet is small, isolated and vulnerable” (43). After the Apollo missions, the environmental movement flourished: the founding of Earth Day and the EPA both occurred in 1970, and conservationism became a watchword throughout that decade. In recent years, a resurgence in environmental activism led by young people has attempted to confront the challenges posed by climate change.

Attenborough nods to the new generation, with his recognition of the emerging fields of Earth systems science and environmental economics. These newer academic fields of study focus on the sustainability of the Earth as a whole, as well as take into account the issues of social justice and ecological soundness in their discussions of economic development. This all points to a different kind of future wherein nations work together to “undo the wastefulness of today” (206), bolstered by the clamorous support of the people. As Attenborough realizes, this will not be easy work: “Now, however, we must make agreements that apply not just to a single group of animals but to the whole of the natural world. It will take the labours of countless committees and conferences, and the signing of innumerable international treaties” (217). Attenborough implies that if the best lessons of World War II can be revisited, humanity will remember that this kind of international cooperation is within reach.