 |
The Future of Sustainability: Have Your Say! Week Two - “Human Wellbeing and Sustainability”
During the second week of this forum we will be exploring why sustainability is a prerequisite for human wellbeing, not only in the long run but right in the here and now. It is common knowledge that the natural environment contributes in a myriad ways to our health, security and the other dimensions of human wellbeing – far more, in fact, than do the economies of all the world’s nations put together. What is not so widely or well understood is that the health of the environment and the persistence of human poverty are also integrally connected in a two way cause-effect relationship that threatens the very survival of human civilization. Only sustainable development can bring about a world that is sufficiently equitable, socially just, materially rewarding and ecologically productive to maintain a decent quality of life for all, now and in the future. But how can the conservation and sustainable development community manage the environment more effectively to address poverty and social equity? The term sustainable development was introduced into international parlance some twenty five years back (at 10.00 am GMT on 5th March 1980, to be precise – when the World Conservation Strategy was launched worldwide by IUCN, WWF and UNEP). It is a term that has a complex range of meanings and nuances, sometimes very different for different people, and has been coopted by different groups to mean virtually whatever serves their interests. Does it still illuminate our discourse on the state of the world in any useful way and add value to our insights, solutions, ways forward? Yes, I believe it does. The fact that it is broadly adopted and owned by a wide variety of sectors, some of which have diametrically opposing interests, provides a starting point for dialogue. Bringing such diverse viewpoints to the table is already a major step forward, opening the door to many more possible steps. I believe that the concept has been of considerable value, capable of bringing about some clarity and power in showing the relevance of the environment to development and vice versa, and introducing notions of inclusiveness and time. But it is has not yet been very good at defining goals or operationalising peoples’ aspirations. People often define their own wellbeing goals in terms of material comfort, happiness, freedom, justice, intellectual fulfillment, cultural identity and spiritual values. As Professor William Adams suggests the concept of “sustainability needs to be made the basis of a new understanding of human aspiration and achievement” (Section 6.2). Should organizations like the World Conservation Union encourage a new generation of thinking about sustainability by helping us redefine what we mean by the ‘good life’? This is a debate that really goes beyond the environment movement and demands fundamental, systemic and structural changes in the ways we live and define wealth and success. There are some interesting experiments around the world. Bhutan, for example, is exploring the concept of Gross National Happiness, rather than Gross Domestic Product, as a measure of success and human wellbeing. This makes room for cultural, spiritual and environmental values in ways that GDP does not. Environmental problems of unsustainable lifestyles and production systems, the frenzy of consumption and the disease of ‘affluenza’ in industrialized (and increasingly even in poorer) economies, not very different in impact or even name from the earlier epidemics of tuberculosis, the plague and influenza, are leading to declines in social health. We need to rethink what constitutes human wellbeing and the good life in the developed as much as the developing world. But for many, these more abstract questions remain irrelevant or even a luxury. To the 3 billion people who survive on less than two dollars per day we can assume that their undivided attention is probably be more on the question of survival rather than some vague measures of wellbeing: a daily battle against hunger, and hanging on to the last vestiges of human dignity and self-respect. Natural resources and environmental services are critical to the livelihoods of the billions of the world’s poorest people, most of whom live in rural areas. Investing in the sustainable management and restoration of these services is key to eradicating poverty. The poor, through the exigencies of survival, sometimes do tax the resilience of the local environment but the stresses they cause to the life support systems of the planet are generally minute compared with those caused by the consumption and production systems of the rich. Besides, if there are healthy ecosystems in different parts of the world, it is often because of the care and custody given to them by the poor, who know far better than anyone the importance of these resources to their own survival. We need to change the way we do conservation. In the past conservation has focused on species and spaces. These are important, but we have been preaching this to the converted for too long. If we want to show the relevance of species, biodiversity, ecosystems to new sectors we need to demonstrate the deeper and more pervasive linkages that exist among them.
|