Civil Society, Climate Change, COP29, COP29 Blog, Environment, Featured, Headlines, Sustainable Development Goals

COP29

Jagadish Vasudev, known widely as Sadhguru, at COP29. Credit: IPS

BAKU, Nov 16 2024 (IPS) – A sudden flurry of activity as Jagadish Vasudev, known widely as Sadhguru, emerges from an interview room in the COP29 media centre. It’s early days of the conference and there is energy and excitement at the venue in Baku.

With his long flowing beard and blue turban, it’s clear that many journalists are keen to interview the influential spiritual leader from India and the founder of the Isha Foundation, which has been dedicated to humanitarian projects since 1992. His initiative, Cauvery Calling, aims to support Indian farmers by encouraging the planting of 2.4 billion trees through agroforestry to restore the Cauvery River basin.

Now in Baku for COP29, Sadhguru shares his insights in an exclusive interview with IPS.

Inter Press Service: Sadhguru, climate change has been a known crisis for over four decades. Yet despite numerous conferences and terms like “loss and mitigation” and “climate finance,” we’re still facing rising temperatures, floods, and droughts. Why are we not succeeding? Are we missing the right approach?

Sadhguru: “Succeeding in what, exactly? The problem is that there’s no clear, actionable goal. We talk about economic development, which many nations pursue without pausing to consider its impact on the planet. At the same time, those who have already achieved a certain quality of life tell others not to follow the same path. It’s a paradox. We tell people to give up hydrocarbons—coal, oil—yet offer no viable alternatives. If we shut off hydrocarbons today, this very conference wouldn’t last ten minutes!

We’re all focused on what to give up but lack sustainable, scalable alternatives. Solar, wind, and similar sources only cover a tiny fraction of our energy needs—less than 3 percent. For real change, we need technology that provides clean, non-polluting energy, but we’re far from that. Nuclear energy is a powerful option, yet there’s too much activism and fear surrounding it. Meanwhile, electric cars, often touted as solutions, don’t really address ecological well-being; they just reduce urban air pollution.”

IPS: So, what would be a more pragmatic approach?

Sadhguru: It’s simple. We need to focus on soil restoration. Changing the soil composition can mitigate up to 37 percent of climate issues, according to studies. The emphasis has shifted a bit from ‘oil’ to ‘soil,’ and that’s a good sign. But beyond that, our entire mindset needs to shift from activism to pragmatic, science-based solutions. Over the past 70 years, we’ve lost 84 percent of wildlife, 92% of freshwater aquatic life, and 84 percent of insect life. The soil lacks organic content, and without it, trillions of microorganisms essential to life are perishing. Most scientists warn that if we continue at this pace, we may only have 40–50 harvests left—about 25–30 years of viable farming.

IPS: Climate change is often seen as a distant, scientific issue. Many people don’t connect with it. Why is that?

Sadhguru: An idea must have legs to walk. If it can’t, it won’t go anywhere. Rather than lofty ideals, we need simple, actionable goals. Soil is foundational to life: we eat from it, and when we die, we go back to it. Ninety-five percent of life forms depend on it, and over half the human population interacts with it daily. We must invest in soil regeneration, not just technologies to replace oil.”

IPS: How do we make this understandable for the common person?

Sadhguru: The common person doesn’t need to grasp all the details. It’s the responsibility of governments to act—to create laws and policies that enforce soil conservation. Blaming consumerism misses the point. People aspire to improve their lives, and those who criticize ‘consumerism’ often hold to a double standard. You can’t stop human aspirations. If anything, we need to reduce our population’s environmental impact over time, but even mentioning that sparks controversy. The truth is, over the past century, life expectancy has increased dramatically—from an average of 28 years in 1947 to over 70 years today. As people live longer, reproduction should be adjusted to balance the population. But people resist even these pragmatic realities.

IPS: You have been advocating for a long time to make living in a village a lucrative affair. How can we make village life sustainable and attractive?

Sadhguru: Yes, but it’s about making rural life viable, not romanticizing it. If the soil is rich, rural life can be economically rewarding. Today, people pay more for organic produce. Imagine if we branded food by the soil’s organic content—consumers would pay more for nutrient-dense produce, and this would incentivize soil conservation. Our agriculture needs to move beyond rice and wheat dependency, which was a temporary solution during the Green Revolution. Now we must transition from that ‘bridge’ to sustainable practices.

IPS: This needs government policies but there are few.  Why don’t we see climate change as a political agenda?

Sadhguru: In a democracy, politicians focus on what their voters demand, which often isn’t long-term environmental policies. To enact meaningful change, citizens need to express this desire. For example, our Save Soil movement reached 3.91 billion people in a hundred days. This kind of widespread support influences policy. We’re already seeing action in countries like China, India, and parts of Europe, though it’s gradual. Unfortunately, sometimes governments wait for a disaster before they act. Then only I understand there is a flood. It entered your house somewhere. I think, after all, it’s in the flooding region, you know.

IPS: And you’ve also mentioned that thirty percent of the human diet should come from trees. Could you elaborate on that?

Sadhguru: In Kashmir, for example, over thirty percent of people’s diet used to come from trees. They eat a lot of local fruits. When Hyun Tsang visited India, he observed that the intellect of Indian people was sharper because of the high fruit intake. Today, unfortunately, most fruit is bought in supermarkets, often imported from far-off places. The local connection is being lost, and this has implications for health. Eating local fruit is more than just cultural. The microorganisms in our body and in the soil where we live are continuously in contact. This link between diet and our microbiome is often ignored, yet it affects us deeply. The biome in your body has “cousins” in the land where you live. In yoga, we advise eating foods from within a radius that you can walk in a day. This keeps your body strong and in sync with the environment.

IPS: One critical issue back in India is farmer suicide. What can be done to address this?

Sadhguru: They’re not dying out of choice but out of desperation. When they take loans and cannot repay, life becomes unbearable. Many have inherited farming skills but lack alternatives. If someone with an MBA or MSc in agriculture were given land, they would struggle to match the knowledge and skill of a farmer, yet society undervalues this knowledge. Due to small land holdings—less than a hectare on average—they can neither sustain their families nor avoid debt.

In the past, villagers worked together as a community. Today, small farmers fence their tiny plots and install their own bore wells. The costs are immense and lead to further debt. We need to restore community support, enlarge land holdings, or provide viable alternatives to prevent this tragic cycle.

IPS: And what about faith? Can it play a role in addressing the climate crisis?

Sadhguru: Let’s not focus on faith in the context of climate change. It’s our responsibility to act. When things go wrong due to human error, people often call it fate or God’s will. But this crisis is of our making. And the crisis we talk about isn’t the planet’s—it’s a crisis for human survival. Life on Earth relies on delicate interconnections, from insects to microbes. If these were wiped out, life on the planet would soon collapse. Ironically, if humans disappeared, the planet would thrive. This is the perspective we need: climate change threatens our existence, not the Earth’s.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source