Shifting Focus: "Preparing for a New Economic Era"

"A visitor from outer space might conclude, with considerable justification, that our species measures well-being by the amount of garbage we generate."
           -David C. Korten from Environment and Urbanization (1996)

I began this blog with a discussion of consumerism and our society's seemingly constant quest to obtain more and more material goods as a measure of our worth. This idea has been present throughout the course of the semester, and once again appears in this week's examination of community economic development. Ultimately, it seems to me that discussions of sustainability always come down to the basic concept that we need to refocus our intent and purpose in life and focus on the quality of our lives, as opposed to the quantity of things we procure in a lifetime. The idea of local, community-based economic development as a model for this ideological shift is inspiring and empowering, because it puts the power to make this change happen into our very own hands.

As described by Korten in his book, Environment and Urbanization, our current system, which revolves around capitalism and consumerism, encompasses three socio-ecological classes: the over-consumers, the sustainers, and the excluded.

The over-consumers are, I'm afraid to say, most of the people reading this post- myself included. They are the ones that require an average of three planet Earth's (or more) to sustain their lifestyle choices.

The excluded are those bottom 20% of the world's population who live in "absolute deprivation," as Korten puts it. They are the people the over-consumers toss under the train tracks without a second thought via their addiction to obtain ever more material goods.

The sustainers are yet to be defined in our culture. They are (ideally) the ones that live within their means and the means of the Earth, giving back as much as they take and not causing irreparable harm.

From a sustainability approach that targets environmental health, economic prosperity, and social equity, moving both over-consumers and the excluded towards this middle ground ideal is the ultimate goal. For the excluded, this means an opportunity for them to experience social equity for the first time in their lives. For the over-consumers, this does not mean total sacrifice of their affluent lifestyles, but it does mean a readjustment of values and overall perception of how success and wealth are measured- do we measure wealth by the quantity of material items we own? By the prestige that monetary wealth supposedly brings us? Or do we measure success and wealth based on overall quality of life and happiness? On our ability to be compassionate and care for other people and the Earth itself?

We say time and again that money can't buy happiness, so why aren't people abandoning our financial economic system that is tying us down to a sinking ship? We are sinking in our economic system as it is now, we need to get off and grab onto the lifeboat moving towards sustainable thinking and practices. Developing community, developing the social bond and the social capital in our local settings is our way out. It is essential that we recognize that "social bonding is as essential to the healthy function of a modern society as it was to more traditional or tribal societies." Only when we realize this will we be able to move away from our destructive, consumerist life-approach into a new economic era where success and wealth are measured not in terms of how much we own or how much money we have in the bank, but in terms of happiness and overall quality of life.

Bloomington Community Orchard (Sustainability-Related Event #3)

This weekend I attended the Bloomington Community Orchard's first-ever Cider Fest extravaganza! The event was a great success, filled with cider making (and tasting), face painting, wassailing, hammer dulcimer playing, and all-around good cheer. I helped greet people as they entered the orchard, collected donations, and passed out maps and information about the orchard to those who were interested.


I had gone to the initial meetings at City Hall when the orchard was just getting started, and worked at Collins LLC to get people voting daily in the Edy's Plant a Tree competition, but it wasn't until this weekend that I actually have made it out to the orchard in person. I was so impressed with what it has become, and definitely want to be involved in the future in more of the hands-on work (weeding, composting, watering, and planting)! For those who would also like to get involved, the next orchard work day is on Sunday, November 20th (details can be found here). Kudos to Amy Countryman for beginning such an amazing project that ties together care for the environment, community, and social justice all in one marvelous place!

Personal Project (Tangent): An Update on Developing a 4th St Cooperative Recycling System

View of restaurants along 4th St. in Bloomington IN.

Over the last two weeks, I have been working on gauging interest in forming a recycling co-operative with the other restaurants on 4th Street, in a similar fashion to the operation going on at The Village Deli. This project is tangentially related to my personal project, "The Greening of Little Tibet," and will not be completed this semester, but is instead a long-term goal that I would love to see come to fruition over the course of the next year.

My initial work regarding this idea has included the initial field research into the Deli's cooperative system, ongoing discussions with Liz Sanders, manager at the Village Deli, and most recently, the development of a survey (see below). Before continuing with the idea of creating a recycling co-operative on 4th St, I want to see what the general perception and attitude toward recycling are at the restaurants.

In my initial post stating the subject of my personal project, I made the assumption that all of the restaurants along 4th St lack well-developed recycling capabilities, and while I am fairly certain that this is indeed the case, I want to find out for sure, as well as determine what barriers exist that deter these restaurants from recycling. Thus, over the last several weeks  I have developed a survey  (thank you SurveyMonkey!)to address some of these questions and concerns and have begun to administer it to the restaurants along 4th Street.


Below you will find an example of the survey that I am asking the restaurants to fill out. Once I have some responses, I'll check back in with another update on this long-term project!

(Sample) Survey to Gauge Recycling Interest on Fourth Street

Business Name:

Contact Person:

1. What materials does your business CURRENTLY recycle? Indicate all that apply.

a) Cardboard           

b) Steel                       

c) Plastic           

d) Glass                       

e) Other recyclables

f) We do NOT currently recycle.                       

g) We didn’t realize the above materials are recyclable.

2. What barriers deter you from recycling? Indicate all that apply.

a) Cost: Recycling is too expensive                                   

b) Space: There is no room for recycling at our facility

c) Time: Too hard to separate recycling from trash           

d) Time: Too hard to get the recycling to a recycling center

e) Lack of interest in recycling.                                   

f) Unaware that these materials are recyclable.

3. If recycling were offered at a consolidated site along “Restaurant Row” on 4^th Street, would your business be interested in participating in recycling?

a) Yes                        b) No                         c) Maybe

4. What would deter you from participating in a cooperative consolidated recycling system for 4^th St Restaurants?

a) Cost (If it was too expensive)                       

b) Space (There would be no room for recycling storage)

c) Time (It would be too hard to separate recyclables from waste)

d) Time (Employees wouldn't want another task to perform)

e) Other (Explain: ___________________________________________________)

5. What would encourage you to participate in a cooperative consolidated recycling system for 4^th St Restaurants?

a) Being able to advertise as being "Green" and/or "Sustainable"

b) Reduction in quantity of waste (and potentially costs)

c) Nothing, I have no interest in recycling.

d) Other (Explain: _____________________________________________________)

6) How much might you be willing to pay for recycling pick up each month? (Write in a dollar amount below.)

7) Would like to be contacted in the future if further plans develop to implement a cooperative recycling system for 4th St Restaurants?

a) Yes                        b) No

Sierra Club Hosts "Real Climate Project" Lecture (Sustainability-Related Event #2)

The second sustainability-related event that I am reporting on this semester was this evening's lecture on climate change hosted by the local chapter of the Sierra Club at the Monroe County Public Library, entitled "The Climate Reality Project." While I normally find lectures on the topic of climate change to be interesting and enlightening, or at a bare minimum, accurate review of information I've already learned, I was very disappointed in the lecture presentation this evening.

The lecture was essentially a brief summary of some of the key points of Al Gore's famous documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," but in my opinion the information that was presented was very outdated, overly simplified, and in some cases, incorrect. Perhaps it is because I have taken a significant amount of coursework that has examined in detail the inner workings of climate change and looked extensively at the physics, chemistry, and biological ramifications and driving processes of climate change that made this presentation frustrating to listen to. However, more significantly, it worries me that outdated information is being disseminated by a supposedly reputable organization with Al Gore's backing, and is incorrectly informing listeners who don't have a science background about what climate change actually is and its implications for human and environmental health.

Although the presenter clearly had good intentions and is certainly well-versed in his presentation script, I think that The Climate Reality Project would do well to update its information before passing along seriously outdated information to listeners around the country.

The third "E" of Sustainability: Environmental Justice

Of the three "E's" of sustainability (which address economics, the environment, and social equity), environmental justice is oftentimes underrepresented, both in discussion as well as in policy implementation. When considering sustainability initiatives, the economic and environmental pros and cons are usually laid out on the table, and sustainability is often viewed as a give and take process that strives to find a balance between the two, but the third "E" is often ignored entirely. This may be in part due to the wide range of social issues that social equity encompasses. As Robin Morris Collin, Professor of Law at Willamette University succinctly explains, "Environmental justice is an American-based movement challenging disparities in risk-exposure and access to benefits. Environmental justice and sustainability reflect a deep division along race and class lines."

Although we would like to think that in 2011, the U.S. has achieved social equity and is a land of equal opportunity for all people without regard to the color of people's skin, socio-economic background, or other characteristics, the truth is that not all communities in the U.S. are equal when it comes to "protection of environmental, health, employment, housing transportation, and civil rights laws" (Bullard). Many communities face environmental discrimination, such as when "NIMBYism" allows wealthier communities or communities with more political sway to force environmental health risks from industry or waste disposal into communities that are less wealthy and/or have less lobbying power.

Environmental injustices can be seen in communities around the country, such as in North Carolina, where a 2006 study done by the Department of Epidemiology in the School of Public Health at the University of NC-Chapel Hill, showed that the odds of a landfill being placed near a community were as follows:

• 2.1 times higher in communities with more than 10% people of color compared to communities with less than 10% people of color; and

 

• 1.4 times higher in communities with average house values less than $100,000 compared to areas with average values $100,000 and greater.

 Another version of environmental injustice is evidenced in Appalachian communities where mountain top removal is performed by outside companies, despite public outrage and the high risks the industry presents to human and environmental health. As Bullard explains, "In Appalachia... (the people) are basically dumped on because of lack of economic and political clout and lack of having a voice to say "no" and that's environmental injustice."