|
|
|
Is
Sustainability
an
Unnatural Act?
It’s
human nature for homo sapiens to expand. But the
species may push way past its ecological limits
unless it can make sustainable practices a way of
life.
Environmentalists
and non-environmentalists alike often forget that
humans are part of nature, not separate from it.
Non-environmentalists
forget that humans are dependent on natural
systems. At minimum, the degradation of these
systems changes the quality of human life.
This is easy to understand with regard to the
decline of air or water quality or perhaps the
disappearance of a portion of the ozone layer.
These changes we directly experience.
The decline
of indirectly experienced systems is harder to
understand. No one feels directly the build-up of
toxins in the food chain, the failure of a wetland
system to serve its previous functions, damage to
deep oceans, or the reduction of pollinators in a
region. All of these changes have the possibility
of leading to adverse quality of life for humans
or perhaps our disappearance as a species. Not
only are these relationships unseen by most
people, but unlike air and water systems, we have
a great deal of difficulty in establishing the increment
of loss in these systems that could be tolerated
without adverse consequences. We do not know for
sure whether we are on the brink of a serious
problem or far from it. Moreover, there are other
relationships, like that of humans to a rich,
diverse world of other species (referred to as
biophelia by writer and scientist E.O. Wilson)
that we do not understand at all.
Environmentalists
also often talk as though humans were separate
from nature. Some act as though the expansion of a
species to the edge of the environmental elements
that sustain it is an unnatural act – even an
immoral act. This process, however, of animals and
plants pursuing their successful expansion to the
exhaustion or strain of the sustaining resource
occurs frequently in nature. It is often hidden by
a balance created by predators, but, even then,
species develop tools to out-distant their
predators. Humans have predators too. The viruses
that farm us and kill us are the constant target
of our efforts to evolve beyond their reach.
Predators
are a key part of nature’s “failsafe”
system. When a species is too successful in
exploiting resources, and its population
increases, the population of predators also
increases, reestablishing a balance. When
predators are removed, the species is constrained
only by resources. Remove cougars and wolves, and
the deer population expands to the limit of its
food source. Remove hawks, and pigeon populations
explode. Humans have waged a successful war
against their predators for thousands of years.
While other species depend on natural evolution to
develop tools for responding to predators, humans
shape their evolution. Even this process, however,
takes place within nature, not beyond it. New
predators emerge in the form of new viruses; old
predators adapt to and overcome the human tools.
As humans succeed in their fight against their
predators, their impact on the sustaining
resources increases.
Imagine
an island upon which eight rabbits land as they
are washed off the mainland by a flood. No
predators exist. Food is abundant. Their
population expands rapidly. The natural course of
things is that the rabbits become so numerous that
they over-graze the vegetation, it dies and the
rabbits disappear or die back to what ever level
can be supported. Increasingly to seasonal
variations, rabbits are hit hard by a drought year
because there is no cushion in their food source.
If these rabbits get smart and figure out ways to
extend their food source, and perhaps escape the
increased likelihood of disease in their tight
proximity, they still must overcome the build-up
of waste, the exhaustion of needed minerals in
their diet and the eventual disappearance of
usable land. Rabbits aren’t that smart, and they
die long before these constraints are an issue.
The materials necessary to support rabbits are far
less complex than those needed to support humans.
Most
humans are smarter than rabbits and, as a species,
we have managed to dodge Malthusian prophecies for
several hundred years. The environmental footprint
(the area of land necessary to support all of the
needs of a person-food, housing, energy materials
etc.) of human beings is quite large. The
environmental footprint of humans from developed
countries is huge compared to that of humans from
less affluent countries. The environmental
footprint of humans is growing not shrinking.
Recently Ray Anderson, the CEO who took Interface,
a Fortune 500 carpet manufacturer, deep into
changes to achieve sustainability, outlined the
history of the earth. He presented this history as
a one-mile race. In this one mile, the industrial
revolution with all its global consequences, is
represented by the width of a hair. In this space
of time we humans, like the rabbits on the island,
begin to see the consequences of our expansion.
Our resources decline. Our wastes build. We are
trying to determine the extent by which we have
accidentally changed underlying natural systems
such as the ozone layer or climate.
This
is simply the consequence of a clever primate
going through the natural process of expanding to
the edge of its supporting resources, whatever
those are – water, air, food or waste
absorption. What would be stunningly unnatural is
for this incredibly successful primate to choose
to stop its expansion. It would be as though the
rabbits choose to self regulate.
Unlike
rabbits, humans can predict the consequence of
decline. They can foresee the decline in quality
of life for themselves, their children and
grandchildren. They sometimes choose not to, but
they can. If humans look at the future quality of
life in their cities and suburbs where most of us
live, they may choose to consume less. They may
choose to focus on sustainability. This choice,
whether focused on population or resource use, is
unnatural. It is the election to evolve.
Self-directed evolution.
Humans
can try to lift themselves by their bootstraps
into an evolutionary niche that seeks a form of
stasis and adaptation. Some other species have
achieved versions of this, though not by
intentional movement. (Some birds lay fewer eggs
when in crowded conditions, alligators regulate
the sex of their offspring according to
surrounding conditions and males may eat the young
forced into their territory by overcrowding.)
To
achieve such an evolutionary feat requires
incredible institutional change. Industry,
government and individuals need to take purposeful
steps. Humans need to better understand their
world and the natural systems upon which they
depend in order to achieve true sustainability.
Currently, we lunge and stagger about in our
sustainability efforts with little solid
understanding. We attack where celebrities direct
us, and many of us try our best to make as few
personal or institutional changes as possible. For
humans to evolve, deep and expeditious change may
be necessary.
Interesting
signs suggest the possibility of success. In
mid-November the U.S. Green Building Council had
its first international green building conference
in
Austin
,
Texas
.
The USGBC includes as members environmental
groups, Fortune 500 companies, government agencies
and sustainable design experts. Even though many
other conferences with exhibitions have had
difficulty overcoming the slow economy and post
9/11 tremors, the USGBC’s exhibition sold out.
Instead of the 1800 attendees they hoped for,
registration was cut off at 3100 attendees because
the facilities were at capacity. The USGBC’s
voluntary green building standards and
certification program – the LEED program – has
been adopted by many cities for all of their
governmental buildings. The state of
New York
has adapted the program to give tax incentives to
green buildings. Private developers, institutions,
schools, and the military have begun the process
of using these standards to achieve more
sustainable design.
Although,
only a beginning step, the enthusiasm of the
embrace of the LEED program is encouraging. Clever
primates begin to organize a more sustainable way
of life for the benefit of unseen future
generations.
--
December 2, 2002
|
