"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.
I think one of the ways we can change the situation is to do what Hawken says and stop pursuing growth via jettisoning workers and start treating people better. As long as labor is the one thing that companies want to cut to reduce their bottom line, companies will continue looking at the money world instead of the natural world (in Korten's words). Treat people humanely, and maybe the money world becomes less important.
ReplyDeleteA very inspiring blog, Rachel! thanks :)
ReplyDeleteRachel - Great job on a thought-provoking blog, I've got a couple thoughts and questions:
ReplyDelete1. It seems like you are assuming that the world economy is a zero-sum game, as if over-consumption by one group of people leads directly to the absence of consumption by "the excluded." If this is true, how can we explain the rise out of poverty of hundreds of millions of people in the developing world (India, China, etc.) while the developed world has also continued to increase consumption?
2. What do you mean by "financial economic system" and why should we abandon it? What aspect of the current system is the cause of unsustainable consumption? Is it free markets? Capitalism? What kind of economic system would you recommend in its place? How would the new system successfully prevent people from wanting to consume?
Rachel,
ReplyDeleteThis is a powerful personal essay. If a critical mass of people reach the same level of understanding that you have expressed here, I have hope that we can make the kind of transformation to sustainability required to avoid system collapse.
Brian, you ask fundamental questions, as usual. Yes, an economic system that depends on overconsumption and infinite growth will work for a while, and it has for the past 150 years, resulting in over 7 billion of us. The problem we have been discussing in this course is that the natural system within which our economic system operates is reaching or exceeding limits to its ability to regenerate critical systems (air, water, food, etc.). This cannot be sustained. Unless we can transform our economic system such that it helps preserves the function of the system it is dependent upon, the laws of physics and biology dictate that we are headed for the ultimate market crash.
A natural capitalism that is more integrated with and regenerative of natural systems might be able to move us toward that transformation. Unfortunately, you missed our discussion of Natural Capitalism and the incredible success of Interface, after it moved to a "Mission Zero" goal. As Interface demonstrated, this challenge of achieving sustainability represents a huge opportunity for new graduates who can see the bigger picture and innovate accordingly. Business as usual is always risky in a world of rapid change, but never so risky as it is now, in the 21st Century, in your generation. How will you measure success at the end of your career?