(This is Part 39 of a series. Go back to Part 38.)
3. Steady-state population and economic activity
This subject has been discussed earlier in this series, but is mentioned again here since it would seem to be a crucial part of any sustainable vision. The reason it's so important is because nothing else will work without it. We can use alternative fuels, use more efficient appliances, sequester coal, endeavor to preserve forests and water and biodiversity and so on, but if we don't come to grips with our worship of growth at all costs then all else will be for naught.
And really, the vision isn't to stop things or hold things right at the limits of the earth's carrying capacity. Given that we can never know with great certainty exactly where those limits are, it would be wise to envision living under the earth's limits rather than at them.
As M, R and M point out, there is an unavoidable trade-off between the limits of population and the limits of economic activity. The material level at which the average person on earth can be supported is very much affected by how many people there are, and vice versa. Further, as World3 suggested to us, the longer we delay the more difficult and constrained this trade-off will be.
It is even conceivable that a global society, finding itself in overshoot, could contemplate negative growth in certain areas, or even overall for a time, to attempt to get back under the earth's limits in a voluntary and steady way rather than through an involuntary collapse.
Thus an important part of the vision is to see popuation and economic activity holding in a steady state, in a way that is creative, heartful and equitable, in a way that serves all of life on planet earth.
4. Meeting the three sustainable conditions
Along with achieving equilibrium in population and economic activity, a worthy vision will almost certainly include Herman Daly's conditions for sustainable use of resources. To recap briefly:
—To be sustainable, the rate of use of renewable resources must be below the rate at which they are being regenerated;
—To be sustainable, the rate of use of non-renewable resources must be below the rate at which appropriate renewable substitutes are being found and brought onstream;
—To be sustainable, the rate of pollution emissions must be below the rate at which the biosphere can sustainably detoxify or assimilate them.
These conditions, of course, apply at two levels: There is the separate level, where resources are considered individually in terms of meeting the conditions for sustainability. Resources such as water or fossil fuels or forests or CO2 assimilation in the atmosphere must individually meet the conditions for sustainability. Are we using our forests renewably? Our fresh water? Are we using our fossil fuels no faster than renewable energy sources are coming online to replace them? And so on.
Then there is the general, global level: Since all things in the biosphere are so connected, we also want to ask: Globally, are we implementing adequate renewable substitutes for non-renewable resource losses? Are we below the earth's carrying capacity in terms of overall assimilation of pollutants? And are we below the earth's limits for regenerating her renewable resources? One of the biggest challenges of the 21st century will likely be accurately responding to such questions.
(This is the end of Part 39. Go to Part 40.)
—jim sloman, 6.21.07
|
