On this spring evening of Wednesday, May 11, a sophisticated-looking crowd throngs the wooden bleachers of the Natural History Museum. Luxury conglomerate LVMH, which owns Louis Vuitton, Moët-Hennessy…, is holding a strange courtroom with Ubek&Rica magazine, one for generations to come. These generations who cannot defend themselves today. The question under discussion is not at least: “Can we give back to the living what we took from him?”

In the background our entire economic model is questioned. The LVMH group has hired two staff from its eight jurors who will listen to the testimony at the bar. “Do you vow to speak in the interest of the generations to come?”asks the President. “Yes, I swear!”Marine Calmette, a jurist in environmental law and indigenous peoples and president of the Wild Legal Association, is the first to come forward.

“Why should nature be protected?”asks the prosecutor. “It’s his right”says for whom “robbing must stop”calling for inspiration from “intelligence” And “Millennium Trivia” which of them “Sing after the fruit” and that “6% are humans and live on the surface of 20% of the planet hosting 80% of biodiversity”,

“Rolling Back the Day of Overshoot”

For WWF France Advocacy Director Pierre Canet, It’s Necessary “roll back the day of overshoot”, This day, which France has already reached on May 5th in 2022 and comes earlier every year, represents the limit of what nature has consumed. He pleads for a political program that can set him back by 25 days. “So it’s possible!” The lawyer shouts. “Objection!” Responds to the prosecutor.

“It is inaccessible to those who refused to believe in the future!” Helen Valade, director of environmental development at LVMH, argues. company can “Take less, give more”Happen “regenerative”, It can also affect consumers, “Changing the Code of What’s Beautiful” taking sides “Products That Last”,

Laura Magro, director of CEEBIOS, a European research center specializing in biomimicry, shared an alternative to the fallacy shared by a previous witness. However, she cautions against rebound effects, i.e. the risk of losing the benefits of sustainability due to increased consumption.

purify nature

“You are blind to hope! The generations to come should have a good laugh… while their land is drying up.” attacking the prosecutor concluded that “We will never be able to repay our debt”, He reveals his evidence: a researcher in neuroscience claims that a person behaving like a psychopath must be detached from nature, his victim. According to the magistrate of a day only one solution: to save nature to bring her to the sanctuary.

“Don’t be a cynic!”, Feather “Simplicity” Regarding this solution, the lawyer said that humans can correct their mistakes, giving examples of ecological initiatives: manufacturing biodegradable plastics from coal oil, agreement on water as an unsuitable commodity in Chile, sensitive in the UK Recognition of lobsters as creatures…

It’s time for discussion. The jury is divided with four “Yes” and four “No”, Among proponents of NO, the conclusion is clear. “What is destroyed cannot be repaired”invites one. “We have to go there!” do we hear from “Yes”, It is the public, three-quarters of whom are LVMH employees, who come to vote by QR code at 55% to decide between the results. “Yes, we can give back to nature what we took from it”, Court has said, optimism has prevailed. Now the coming generations have nothing left to do.

fanny bruneval