Sustainability in its Macro scale.

We are living in a world which consist of limited resources. The words “Sustainability” is often brought up as a topic among the world elites. Indeed developing sustainability is a beautiful sounding type of idea but it has becoming an intellectually bankrupt. It leads to wrongheaded thinking about the real causes of economic and environmental troubles. Plus, it encourages governments to adopt terrible policies. The original meaning of sustainability in 1987, the Norwegian prime minister, Bro Brundtland, quoted that “Sustainability should meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Well, i think it is the time for us to think back the true meaning of sustainability.

First of all, the meaning of “developing” sustainability is a process when a system changes its state of equilibrium, a non- moving state. The contradiction is when we can not have a development without constant expansion of the system. Thus, this notion of developing in sustainability is a restriction of the growth and exploitation of the resources creates a huge contradiction. However, have we started to apply such expansion of development in sustainability at a macro level? And how do we expand it into a macro scale?

The problem today, is that we tend to think a lot.  At this age, we humans tend to always depended on another to have things done for us, and life is been too easy. We started to take for granted. Today computers do most of the job for us. Everything is laid out for us, we are decreasing the physical and metal ability as human. Yet, most of the sustainability issues can be solved. There have been so much evidence that man can change nature for the better good. For example, Israel, a country where is surrounded with desert, but how are they capable to be one of the food exporters in the middle east? Because, its people did not sit and make excuses about water deficiency, instead they started by desalinate the sea waters and created irrigation for their farm lands. Besides that, California, in reality is also a desert, yet the state became America’s major farm exports as well. This is because the human mind would be able to overcome any sustainable issues.

As for fossil fuels, we understand that it is a finite resources, and can only serve us some time to come. If someone could just take the hydrocarbon molecule that goes into oil and synthesize as sample in lab, as a matter of fact, during this process the harmful elements of the molecule will be extracted, and a cheap, clean oil will be its result. We often heard people started the debate of sustainability from the blame of overpopulation. But, in a macro level, the world has enough of land to support 10 to 20 billion people. Even the U.S will be able to sustain 500 Million population easily. There are vast swaths of land that are uninhabited. You see, people would prefer the easy way to be gain their financial and started to migrate into metropolis city. Thus, it is the city itself not able to sustain the amount of population, not the land mass.

Solutions and opportunities are everywhere in order to push forward the concept of “Sustainability”. The term is not only in a micro but a macro level. I do appreciate with the advancement of science and technology in sustainability but we, human can start applying these technology in a macro scale. In another words, we shall not concede to any terms that what corporations think the best but what is the best for a community.

 

Reference :

http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/338

 

Advertisements

1 Comment

  1. I think an interesting aspect to look at when discussing limited resources is fossil fuels like you said. We are trying to limit the amount the United States can emit but does it really matter? Emerging countries like Brazil, China, and India are using fossil fuels on levels with the U.S. We want to tell these countries to lower their emissions but how can we when we did the same thing during our industrial revolutions. I think that it is important as a world leader for us to be the example of lowering emissions for other countries. We need to show that it is profitable to do so which definitely will prove difficult.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s