Sustainable Reader
The introduction to Limits to Growth provided an important component that is frequently missing in the interaction between those who understand the global issues faced by the human race and those who do not understand those issues. Meadows lends a calm sense of urgency to these problems and provides reasonable conclusions should they go unaddressed. She does not make overly ambitious statements about the fate of humanity should we choose to place our plastics in the waste bin rather than the recycle bin or if we do not turn the water off while brushing our teeth. Meadows simply states that changes will come and it will get harder to reverse their impacts the longer we wait to implement changes.
In today's sound bite era, where gloom and doom characterize many of the sustainability problems we face, only black and white ultimatums are given and many seem outrageous. As a general example, “If you do x,y, or z the earth won't be here in 50 years”. Such drastic ultimatums overwhelm individuals, and, for many, leads them to reject that the problems exist altogether. But Meadows provides a reasonable middle ground in which the issue is no longer “'do or die”, rather “do now or later, but it would be tragic and foolish to do later”. Should more experts and professionals communicate sustainability concepts to the public in a more reasonable manner, that allows the individual to feel they are making a rational decision, perhaps sustainability would be a less hot button issue for the general population.
While it was manageable to follow the ideas in the Development of Underdevelopment article, it was difficult to follow the terminology and conclusions Frank drew from the analogy he created regarding the metropolis and satellites. What does he mean by weak ties, and what would be a weak tie in the real-world system? What does it mean for a metropolis to be autonomous? What does it mean for the metropolis to hold monopolistic power over the satellites?
Ian McHarg's perspective on development is closely related to the ideas of Ebenezer Howard. McHarg also recognizes the biophilia of humanity, and how the city should work to find common ground between the built environment and the natural environment. McHarg also graphically characterizes the space between urban life and rural life, the suburbs, as a destructive failure of land use and shallow monuments to the American dream. But those who sought nature by moving onto the fringe of the city were eventually swallowed by those who came after, also looking for a piece of nature. This concept still characterizes many council meeting arguments regarding zoning. Someone moved into a neighborhood attracted by the view of the mountains or a water feature, only to lose that benefit and their increased property value once a new developer squeezes in between their home and the natural world. Unfortunately for this individual they forget that they were not the first victims, but were the transgressors of another homeowner upon their arrival to the neighborhood.
The introduction to Limits to Growth provided an important component that is frequently missing in the interaction between those who understand the global issues faced by the human race and those who do not understand those issues. Meadows lends a calm sense of urgency to these problems and provides reasonable conclusions should they go unaddressed. She does not make overly ambitious statements about the fate of humanity should we choose to place our plastics in the waste bin rather than the recycle bin or if we do not turn the water off while brushing our teeth. Meadows simply states that changes will come and it will get harder to reverse their impacts the longer we wait to implement changes.
In today's sound bite era, where gloom and doom characterize many of the sustainability problems we face, only black and white ultimatums are given and many seem outrageous. As a general example, “If you do x,y, or z the earth won't be here in 50 years”. Such drastic ultimatums overwhelm individuals, and, for many, leads them to reject that the problems exist altogether. But Meadows provides a reasonable middle ground in which the issue is no longer “'do or die”, rather “do now or later, but it would be tragic and foolish to do later”. Should more experts and professionals communicate sustainability concepts to the public in a more reasonable manner, that allows the individual to feel they are making a rational decision, perhaps sustainability would be a less hot button issue for the general population.
While it was manageable to follow the ideas in the Development of Underdevelopment article, it was difficult to follow the terminology and conclusions Frank drew from the analogy he created regarding the metropolis and satellites. What does he mean by weak ties, and what would be a weak tie in the real-world system? What does it mean for a metropolis to be autonomous? What does it mean for the metropolis to hold monopolistic power over the satellites?
Ian McHarg's perspective on development is closely related to the ideas of Ebenezer Howard. McHarg also recognizes the biophilia of humanity, and how the city should work to find common ground between the built environment and the natural environment. McHarg also graphically characterizes the space between urban life and rural life, the suburbs, as a destructive failure of land use and shallow monuments to the American dream. But those who sought nature by moving onto the fringe of the city were eventually swallowed by those who came after, also looking for a piece of nature. This concept still characterizes many council meeting arguments regarding zoning. Someone moved into a neighborhood attracted by the view of the mountains or a water feature, only to lose that benefit and their increased property value once a new developer squeezes in between their home and the natural world. Unfortunately for this individual they forget that they were not the first victims, but were the transgressors of another homeowner upon their arrival to the neighborhood.
McHarg differs from Howard, however, in that he recognizes the need to build with nature and to respect and capitalize on natural features that provide ecosystem services to local populations. These features include surface water, marshes, floodplains, aquifers, aquifer recharge areas, steep lands, prime agricultural lands, and forests and woodlands. McHarg used satellite images to map these features in order that communities might use the maps to develop according to the topography. This would allow the preservation and utilization of these processes by the surrounding communities.
Andre Frank, in the Development of Underdevelopment, argued that development assistance provided by wealthy nations to third world nations was used to make the economies and social structures of poorer nations dependent on wealthier nations. Frank posits that development resulted in a hierarchy of economic systems that leave poorer nations (or 'satellites') on the bottom of the chain and wealthier nations (or 'metropolis') on the top. Some may argue that economic policies and mechanisms that support free trade between developed and third world nations helps to perpetuate this effect. Among other effects, this drives down prices and wages of those in poor economies for those making purchases in the wealthier ones.
In the introduction of Limits to Growth, Meadows provides a compelling model that depicts the level of concern individuals' have for different units of society over different scales of time. The results indicate that individuals are primarily concerned with their family unit over the scale of the week (or perhaps the two week period in between paychecks), and the level of concern dissipates as the time period lengthens and the unit of society extends to greater populations. In developing this model, Meadows and the research team used the scientific method and computers. This was the first time such methods were used to analyze the future of humanity.
The study resulted in three conclusions. If consumption and environmental depletion continue unchanged from the current patterns, the humanity will reach the limits to growth within the next one hundred years. Humanity is capable of avoiding this outcome by pursuing environmental and economic stability. Lastly, the sooner these changes are made, the greater are their chance for success. Waiting to enact changes, the more difficult it may be to observe meaningful results.
After considering new data and running the models again twenty years later, Meadows found that the results of this conclusion held true. Today we can observe these results picking up speed. Over-fishing of the world's oceans is leading to the rapid depletion of wild fish. Climate change threatens to alter the world's ecosystems. Stores of phosphate rock, a nonrenewable but key ingredient in industrial agriculture, have been almost entirely exhausted. We are approaching these and many other limits to growth, but many in the mainstream view these as isolated events rather than the result of our unsustainable systems.
Herman Daly defines growthmania as the attitude that the thirst for consumption can never (and should never) be quenched. Growth is infinite and desirable. Today, the Gross National Product (GNP) is used to measure spending and growth in the United States. While national economic advisers recognize that there are costs associated with the growth of the GNP, there is no attempt to seriously measure those costs to see if they outweigh the benefits of GNP growth. Not only is there no measurement, but those costs are in turn added to the GNP as a part of growth. Oil spill clean ups, health care costs, and military expenditures during wartime are all added in the GNP – again, the measure of all things economically good and holy. So despite the fact we are producing things detrimental to our health and society, we are encouraged to continue in such behavior as it reinforces this inappropriate measure.
Daly proposes the implementation of a steady state economy after the environmental steady state. He states that the world is finite and successfully operates in equilibrium. Because our economy relies on the environment, we in turn are not capable of physical infinite growth.
While I find this to be a reasonable idea that addresses environmental constraints face to face, instead of playing a smoke and mirrors game regarding costs and benefits, the barriers to transformation are enormous. It will take a public and obvious disaster to gain enough support and momentum to switch from one system to another. Recently we have seen enormous fall out from hypergrowthmania in the housing market. But rather than addressing the core problems in the economic system that drove this disaster, we scold financial leaders and 'fiscally irresponsible' homeowners but enact no real reforms that will prevent future growthmania fallout. Also, in a society that is quick to point to anything that seeks to limit income, spending, or a shared resource as socialist, it would be social, professional, and political suicide to pursue this system head-on. But this shouldn't stop anyone who finds it to be solution to growthmania.
Toward Sustainable Communities
One important component and obstacle in pursuing sustainable development is the need to bring all of the stakeholders to the table to devise solutions that are effective and meaningful to the community. Roseland discusses this in his section on mobilizing citizens. He specifically mentions environmental organizations and activists finding trouble relating their work into the larger sustainability movement. It can be argued that it's difficult for anyone in a professional niche to feel they fit into the larger sustainable development picture, it is interesting that Roseland picks on this group specifically. Environmental organizations and activists, due to their profession, are predisposed to bias regarding the topic for which they are advocating. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to assume that they find it particularly difficult to address the needs of other actors at the negotiating table and agree to compromises, especially when the topics at hand are personal and emotionally/passionately embedded. This is the reason why many non-governmental organizations with similar missions do not frequently partner, despite the fact they have strength in numbers. But as Roseland notes, if these groups are earnestly interested in environmental protection, it is vital that they work with other groups across disciplines and sectors despite their differences. If they don't, they risk duplicating efforts and miss out on the significant benefits of collective action.
While I find this to be a reasonable idea that addresses environmental constraints face to face, instead of playing a smoke and mirrors game regarding costs and benefits, the barriers to transformation are enormous. It will take a public and obvious disaster to gain enough support and momentum to switch from one system to another. Recently we have seen enormous fall out from hypergrowthmania in the housing market. But rather than addressing the core problems in the economic system that drove this disaster, we scold financial leaders and 'fiscally irresponsible' homeowners but enact no real reforms that will prevent future growthmania fallout. Also, in a society that is quick to point to anything that seeks to limit income, spending, or a shared resource as socialist, it would be social, professional, and political suicide to pursue this system head-on. But this shouldn't stop anyone who finds it to be solution to growthmania.
Toward Sustainable Communities
One important component and obstacle in pursuing sustainable development is the need to bring all of the stakeholders to the table to devise solutions that are effective and meaningful to the community. Roseland discusses this in his section on mobilizing citizens. He specifically mentions environmental organizations and activists finding trouble relating their work into the larger sustainability movement. It can be argued that it's difficult for anyone in a professional niche to feel they fit into the larger sustainable development picture, it is interesting that Roseland picks on this group specifically. Environmental organizations and activists, due to their profession, are predisposed to bias regarding the topic for which they are advocating. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to assume that they find it particularly difficult to address the needs of other actors at the negotiating table and agree to compromises, especially when the topics at hand are personal and emotionally/passionately embedded. This is the reason why many non-governmental organizations with similar missions do not frequently partner, despite the fact they have strength in numbers. But as Roseland notes, if these groups are earnestly interested in environmental protection, it is vital that they work with other groups across disciplines and sectors despite their differences. If they don't, they risk duplicating efforts and miss out on the significant benefits of collective action.
Roseland defines sustainable community as one that maintains social and economic resilience by continually adjusting to meet the community needs while maintaining the environment used to support it.
Where some heavily criticize urban areas for the plight and pollution associated with them, more are recognizing cities as a part of urban ecology with benefits that can outweigh the benefits of living on the fringe of cities and in rural areas. Cities cover less land, provide more opportunities for community connections and mobilization due to proximity, discourage sedentary lifestyles, allow one to live and work in their neighborhood thereby increasing a sense of place within the community, and can provide shared infrastructure (transportation, municipal centers, sewage, electricity, and broadband) at a low cost. On the other hand, the amount of concrete in cities raises the temperature, a process known as the urban heat island effect. Many cities lack the green space needed to maintain the temperature and also lack the green space needed to provide for the individual's desire to interact with nature. The runoff from cities that lack permeable infrastructure collect pollutants and contaminate the groundwater. The pollution from condensed transportation increases health care costs. Also, cities are generally not self-sufficient. Roseland states that cities “appropriate carrying capacity from..rural and resource regions”. They import food, materials, water, and energy. Then they export environmental degradation through the methods of energy extraction and the creation of pollution and garbage. A northern city is different from a southern city in that the residents of a northern city are over-consuming and the southern are barely consuming. In the northern city the residents get ill from over-eating and in the southern residents get ill from a lack of food. In a northern city residents have the infrastructure needed to protect against rampant disease, but pollution rates are significant.
Roseland states that cities in North America were built on the assumption that energy and land would be infinitely abundant. While I agree with that many carry this perspective (like those pursuing the American dream), I imagine that the economists, financiers, and developers investing in North American cities were not occupied with the limits to growth, but were interested in the vast sums money to be made meeting the demands of Americans for single-family plots. Indianapolis and most of Bloomington follow this model, which essentially centers around low-density housing, compartmentalized zoning, and the use of the automobile for daily activities.
These unsustainable building and consumption patterns in North American cities have resulted in enormous ecological footprints. The footprint, the amount of land and water (in hectares) required to support a defined human population indefinitely, of this region is about four to five hectares per person. Should every city live like the average North American it would take the resources of two additional earths to support the planet's population.
Roseland suggests using alternative development mechanisms to make urban environments more sustainable. He recommends making more walkable communities by installing attractive urban design and calming traffic, allowing for increased pedestrian activity. Other tools should vary based on the location and individual characteristics of the community. Low-density cities are prime for solar panel installation and urban gardens, while high-density cities can reduce their footprints through the use of mass transportation.
No comments:
Post a Comment