(long-term well-being)
Well-being can be sustained when activities:
#1
Use materials in continuous cycles.
#2
Use continuously reliable sources of energy.
#3
Come mainly from the qualities of being human (i.e. creativity, communication, coordination, appreciation, and spiritual
and intellectual development.)
Long-term well-being is diminished when activities:
#4
Require continual inputs of non-renewable resources.
#5
Use renewable resources faster than their rate
of renewal.
#6
Cause cumulative degradation of the environment.
#7
Require resources in quantities that undermine
other people's well-being.
#8
Lead to the extinction of other life forms.
We Have to Clarify the Design Criteria if We Hope to Focus on Resolving
the Crisis.
- Do these points seem accurate ?
- Is anything missing ?
- Can a sustainable society exist within other boundaries ?
Affecting all these topics are the encompasing issues of
Participation in decision making.
Peace versus Militarism.
Population.
Work
Health Care
Brief explanations of all these points follow.
Sustainable Activities:
1) Use materials in continuous cycles.
Pictures from space show our blue and green planet as a small sphere
orbiting with its moon in a vast emptiness. A closer look reveals that the
layer of materials actually of use to living things is only a very thin
film over the planet's surface.
Within this limited stock of materials, any substances needed regularly
must over time, be used again and again. The cycles which bring the needed
materials back for reuse must either occur naturally, like the cycles of
water and carbon, or they must be maintained through mindful recycling programs.
2) Use continuously reliable sources of energy.
We are consuming supplies of coal and oil at a far greater rate than
they are created. The dangers of releasing all the carbon in these resources
aside, their massive use cannot be our custom if civilization is to be a
permanent presence on Earth. The same is true of nuclear energy. The enormous
cost and danger could perhaps be overcome, but the raw fuel is, in the end,
also limited in supply.
This leaves heat from the Earth's core, tides, the sun (nuclear fusion
at a safe distance) and the wind and water which the sun sets in motion.
These power sources are abundant, and can be harnessed practically anywhere.
With the exception of the problems associated with large dams, these renewable
sources of energy have little or no negative environmental impacts.
3) Come mainly from the qualities of being
human.
Once we have secured the food and shelter necessary for healthy life,
worlds of opportunity open up for personal growth and satisfaction. The
three "L's:" Learning, Love and Laughter,
as well as art, music, dance, sport, communication, service, and appreciation
of the universe within and around our selves, can all make life worthwhile.
They can provide pleasure, purpose and meaning to our lives without harming
the Earth.
Non-Sustainable Activities:
4) Require continual inputs of non-renewable
resources.
Non-renewable resources are resources available only in limited quantity.
Metals, coal and oil are notable examples. They can be very useful, even
essential, for building a sustainable society, but if our way of life always
requires that more and more of these materials be extracted, we will eventually
run out. Dependency on more at that point would be disastrous.
5) Use renewable resources faster than their
rate of renewal.
Renewable resources are resources which grow and increase through natural
processes. Some examples are forests, fish stocks, ground water and soil
fertility. As long as the rate at which they are used is not greater than
the rate at which they grow or accumulate, the situation can remain viable.
When the rate of use exceeds the rate of renewal, the stock will become
depleted and problems will follow.
6) Cause cumulative degradation of the environment.
Certain amounts of pollution are cleansed by natural processes. When
we create waste which nature cannot handle, or which cannot be absorbed
as fast as we create it, pollution builds up, causing problems which become
more and more serious as the activity continues. Some pollutants can create
serious hazards even when thoroughly diluted. Small amounts of toxic materials,
after being absorbed by tiny organisms, can accumulate in the flesh of the
creatures that eat them. If these creatures are then food for larger ones,
the accumulated toxins are concentrated even further. Through this biological
accumulation, some poisons, although thinly dispersed, can be found in dangerous
concentrations -- for example, in the fish people eat from polluted water.
7) Require resources in quantities that undermine
other people's well-being.
The cooperation needed to build a sustainable world order will not come
about as long as some groups of people take unfair advantage of others.
Inequity often leads to social strife and armed conflict. Furthermore, the
people at the bottom of the pyramid of exploitation are often forced by
desperation to degrade the environment around them for day to day survival.
The degradation of their territories not only makes life worse for them,
it undermines the global systems which provide for those at the top of the
pyramid as well as for those below.
8) Lead to the extinction of other life forms.
The web of life is intricate and mutually supporting. However, it is
weakened with each life form lost. If we maintain patterns of development
which regularly destroy or significantly diminish the presence of other
forms of life, we progressively undermine our own existence as a part of
the global ecosystem. With the loss of species we also lose genetic possibilities
for fighting disease, in people and in food crops, as well as potential
new sources of food. In addition to the dangers and loss to people, one
can also argue that other living things have their own right
to exist.
Encompasing Issues:
Affecting all these topics are the encompassing issues of
Participation in decision making
One of the key determinants of health is the amount of control individuals
feel they have over the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy, when
effectively practiced, gives people the opportunity to have their concerns
addressed. There is much work to be done before that ideal is realized:
- Money, alone, must be prevented from determining who gets elected and
who gets heard.
- Legislative bodies need to represent people's views proportionately to
the numbers of people holding those views. Such proportional representation
leads to balanced debate and decisions that more closely represent the will
of the electorate.
- The principle of subsidiarity has to be respected. That is, decisions
should be taken at the level where their effects are felt and no higher.
For example, the planetary atmosphere needs to be dealt with at the global
level, while the raising of young children is a family matter, unless misguided
actions lead to neighbourhood concerns. Other issues are best dealt with
by nations, regions or communities. When a decision is taken at a level
higher than the issue warrants, there is a risk of alienating those directly
affected by that decision. From another angle, the people effected are the
ones who will have the most detailed information about what is at stake,
and hence are best qualified to make effective, responsible decisions.
As decision making becomes a cooperative art, the potential emerges for
participants to manifest a sensitivity and intelligence superior to the
sum of all those involved. Co-intelligence, as it has come to be known,
may be the leap in ability that we need to meet the sustainability challenge.
Peace versus Militarism.
The prospects for achieving sustainability are diminished when differences
are settled by warfare. War is destructive and reduces our creative potential
with each trauma, injury and death. It wastes material resources, damages
ecosystems and drives huge conscious and unconscious wedges between peoples,
often accelerating viscous circles of revenge and destruction. All of these
results inhibit our opportunities for working cooperatively with what remains
of natural resources to secure a sustainability future.
Population.
Every problem arising in the relationship between people and the Earth is
made worse by expanding population. The effects of population must be looked
at in the context of the amount of resources that each individual consumes.
Those who consume only the amount required for good health, cause far less
damage than do those who buy into the "standard of living" notion
and consume as much as they can. However, even the simple production of
food, for each additional person, requires that some portion of land be
removed from what is available to other living things. Humans already consume
40% of everything that is produced by life on land, and a great deal of
the ocean's productivity as well. While more people can be supported if
we each consume less, there is no point in finding out how big our population
can become before the systems we rely on collapse under increasing demand.
There are reasons to believe that 6 billion humans will be very hard to
support when petroleum is gone. On the other hand, the Earth could support
hundreds of billions of people, if we live our lives, two or three billion
at a time over the millennia to come.
By acknowledging that the Earth is full, stabilizing population will gain
legitimacy and would influence decisions about having children. More effective
yet, would be the assurance of social support in old age. Without the need
for many children to provide such support, population would decline toward
sustainable levels through natural attrition. Information
available about population.
Work.
Everyone needs to be able to do something that they can trade for what they
need. A society is failing if it cannot involve everyone who needs to participate.
People without income have either to grow their food on marginal land, resort
to theft, or starve. There are three approaches to insufficient work. One
is to stimulate demand, so that more people have jobs making more stuff.
Another is to divide up the work so that everyone can be involved, and the
third is to pay people to remain idle. Each of these has its consequences
in terms of resource consumption, pollution, leisure time, self-esteem and
motivation.
Health Care.
One's health is the single, most significant factor contributing to individual
well-being. There are two sides to the health issue. On one side is the
money intensive care of people who have developed health problems, on the
other side, the life-based choices that can prevent illness. There is a
great deal of money to be made from treating people who have become sick.
The advantages to society arising from a healthy population are also great,
but less tangible: individuals feel better, have a better outlook on life
and are more productive. If individual health is the purpose of the resources
invested in health care, taking care of the factors which determine health
becomes the priority, rather than doctors, equipment and drugs. The determinants
of health include: food quality, community stability, the way in which income
is distributed, education, self-esteem, pollution levels, exercise, stress,
participation in decision making and the like. The Question of Direction
is clearly represented in these two approaches. While there will always
be a place for doctors and medicine, much less money would have to be spent
on them if we concentrated on prevention.
