Least Sustainable Societies

What is an unsustainable society?
Factors that Cause a Society to be Unsustainable
Throughout the course of human history, societies have evolved and developed via the consumption of natural resources. The human population boom that we are currently experiencing follows a similar curve to that of fossil fuel consumption and as a result, people have built societies that are entirely unsustainable in the long term. These societies span all continents and cover all different levels of affluence, however, when we look at what causes societies to be unsustainable, the themes of over population, over consumption and excessive creation of waste resonate throughout all.
There are a number of factors that can contribute to an unsustainable society. Historically, societies have been created on unsustainable practices as a result of lacking in foresight. Had the ideas of conservation, preservation and sustainability been around during the creation of modern societies, the environment might be in a better condition currently and not experiencing the effects of unsustainable practices. Although hindsight is 20/20, the thing to do now is promote and subsidize sustainable development and the renovation of systems that use as excess of energy, water, or any non-renewable natural resource. Societies are now beginning to adopt small practices into their lifestyles such as the use of Compact Fluorescent Lamps and energy star appliances to reduce individual impact. Although it was a concern for some for over 30 years, the majority of our societies have not caught on the importance of the movement toward a completely sustainable existence and only recently is the trend beginning to take hold globally. Being an unsustainable society is becoming increasingly difficult due to the reduction of easily accessible natural resources, and our continually growing population.
Many things can attribute to whether a certain society is sustainable or not. The trends seem to indicate that more developed countries tend to be doing the most harm to the environment. Some factors include simply the population and density of the city. As a city grows it has to take responsibility for its growth in use and waste and make sure they are handled in a fashion that can continue to maintain a similar lifestyle. This brings us to another factor of the standard of living. According to the Human Development Index 2007/08, the US is ranked the highest on the scale with an HDI around 0.96 and an Ecological Footprint around 9.5. There is a correlation observed between that of higher standards of living and less sustainable societies. The higher the standard of living, the higher the levels of waste seem to be. The Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) was published between 1999 to 2005 by Yale University's Center for Environmental Law and Policy and Columbia University's Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), and the World Economic Forum. The index was put together to chart out a list of different pollutant levels in a number of different countries. This chart can help to show who is improving and progressing towards a sustainable society, and who is not quite headed in the right direction.
A sustainable society is one that thrives within its means. It is able to provide a high standard of living without severely drastically affecting the natural systems that support it. A sustainable society also achieves the goal of sustainability which is "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs". Humans must seek to achieve sustainable societies as we rely on nature to "provide food, water, energy, fiber and life-support services such as the pollination of crops and creation of soils". By living in sustainable societies, humans can reduce our impact on nature, improve the quality of life for others and ensure future generations success'.
Case Studies of Developed Unsustainable Countries
The United States of America
The United States has long been considered a world leader for economic growth and high standards of living for its people. However, most of this success has been achieved through non-sustainable practices starting with the mass consumption of fossil fuels. Since then, the United States has become a leader in consumption of natural resources, generation of waste, and production of green house gas emissions.
Natural resource consumption is at the heart of the United States unsustainable society. American citizens consume the second largest amount in per capita consumption of poultry and third for beef and veal according to the most recent US census. In 2007, the United States consumed 20,680,000 bbl / day of oil, more than twice that of China, the second largest consumer. However, the Americans were the 23rd largest consumer of oil on a per capita basis with 68.672 bbl / day per 1000 people. According to the same report, the United States consumes more coal than any other country including China with 1.33 Billion tons of coal annually.
With such large consumption of natural resources, there is inevitably a large amount of waste generated. Not surprisingly, the United States produces more municipal waste than any other country with 249.6 million tons of total solid waste and 4.5 pounds per/person/day ranking it fourth among all nations. Due to the large energy demand that is required by the United States, there are a significant amount of Greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels. Annually, the US produces 6,103.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, the vast majority of which is coming from the burning of fossil fuels for energy production and transportation.
The United Kingdom
In a 2007 World Wildlife Fund report, the group ranked 60 UK towns and cities on the basis of average consumption of food, goods, transportation, housing, and services and put it in terms of number of "planets" required to support the current habits of its residents. The findings showed that Winchester, Hampshire UK has the largest carbon footprint. Data showed that Winchester is harming the planet at a rate of 3.62 beyond what is sustainable. The commuter city Saint Albans, Hertfordshire UK scored second place as least sustainable UK city, with a score of 3.51 planets. In Scotland, Edinburgh scored the worst at 3.2 planets. In Wales, Bangor had the largest ecological footprint, at 2.93 planets. The UK cities that scored well on the environmental impact scale include Glasgow (Scotland) at 2.89 planets. In Whales, Newport scored 2.78 on the impact scale. In Brittan, Plymouth came in at 2.78 planets.
China
China, has become one of the fastest growing economies in the world and in order to keep up with this high level of growth, China has needed to consume ever increasing amounts of natural resources, generating more and more waste and leading to an ever decreasing sustainable society.
China is currently the world leader in consumption of coal with 1.33 billion tons of coal being consumed annually along with two new coal-fired power plants being built weekly with no indication of slowing down as the country grows at a rapid pace. China is the second largest consumer of oil in the world yet still consumes less than half that of the United States with 7,578,000 bbl/day. The real problem that China is facing in the coming future is that their country shows no signs of slowing down.
Case Studies of Developing Unsustainable Countries
Africa
South African cities are some of the most inefficient and unsustainable cities in the world due to the policies of separate development of the apartheid government. Even in absence of these policies, the urban form lives on.
In 1994, a new city planning method was introduced and rejected. This plan was intended to change the layout of the low density, sprawling, fragmented apartheid cities, and to promote sustainable integrated settlements, with high density and mixed use.
Water quality problems are one of the largest ecological issues Africa is currently facing. The main toxin existing in South African rivers and reservoir systems is cyanobacteria, also known as blue-green algae. According to the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), cyanobacteria can cause diarrhea, vomiting, and even liver damage. The council names the source of the cyanobacteria as “prevailing high levels of eutrophication caused by inadequate treatment of domestic and industrial effluents discharged in their catchments”.
For decades, Haiti’s environment has been degraded by unplanned, unsustainable timber harvesting, agricultural clearing, and livestock cultivation. These actions have lead to an increase in the devastating effects of hurricanes and floods. Under a congressional directive, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is formulating a plan to help improve the country’s watershed management, forestry and agriculture practices, and rural livelihoods, thus reducing its people’s vulnerability to natural disasters.
The environmental crisis in Haiti is complicated and solutions require a multidisciplinary approach. Haiti is increasingly vulnerable to flooding, due to the loss of topsoil and forest cover. Some estimate that only 3 percent of Haitian forests remain. Furthermore, rapid population growth (2% annually) has forced people to live in less than ideal locations, such as floodplains and fertile land. The effect: slums in fertile areas and agriculture on hillsides and steep landscapes.
Because of the minimal impact of past attempts to treat these problems, the effort has been renewed by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). With support from congress, the USAID assessment team compiled recommendations for projects in hopes of gaining national support in balancing Haiti’s complex environmental systems. The assessment covered the following areas:
* Agro Forestry
* Watershed management
* Forests and parks management
* Population-health-environment linkages
* Disaster preparedness and urban planning
* Policy and institutional reform
* Energy alternatives
* Value-added agricultural commodities
North Korea
According the 2005 ESI, North Korea is the least sustainable country in the world, with an ESI of 29.2. North Korea is a heavily forested, mountainous country, which clearly faces serious environmental challenges. Population growth is a rising social and environmental problem in North Korea. According to the DPR Korea State of the Environment 2003 report, North Korea’s population is expected to grow to 29 million in 2020. The mounting population problems are directly contributing to deforestation and coal consumption. Coal consumption directly contributes to air pollution, yet the national goal is to quintuple coal consumption by 2020. Deforestation directly contributes to North Korea's soil erosion problems. During a late 1990’s famine, many hillside and common land trees where cut down to make room for food growing, thus triggering soil erosion. Although the people managed to grow extra food, heavy rains washed off the hillsides, causing mudslides, erosion and flooding in the watershed in 1995. These floods cost North Korea $15 billion (USD) in damages and 15 tons per hectare of erosion.
Like Africa, North Korea has problems with water purity. Unlike Africa, this pollution is not algal. Although multiple sewage treatment plants have been built, small towns and rural areas still discharge untreated sewage into surface waters. Some areas are particularly suffering from this practice. Pyongyang, the countries capital located on and fed by the Taedong River, has a flow of which is blocked to protect against incoming flood waters. This barrier, along with low river volume, causes human waste to compound in the city, and have reduced the river’s purification capacity greatly.
Efforts to correct the North Korea problems have been futile. The government has acknowledged the problem, and initiated programs to plant trees and conserve water. However, in the face of North Korea’s unique political/economic situation, these efforts have amounted to nothing. North Korea is one of the world’s most centrally planned and isolated economies. The industrial infrastructure is practically beyond repair as a result of years of underinvestment and spare parts shortage. Industrial output has been declining for years and military spending has been massive.
Model for a Sustainable Society
Sustainable Societies
"Seattle is the most sustainable big city in the nation, according to a list compiled by Smarter Cities, a Natural Resources Defense Council project that looks at the progress American cities are making toward going green. Not surprisingly, San Francisco and Portland are the runners-up".
Finland is ranked number four on the EPI and scores high in the areas of science and technology, private sector responsiveness, environmental governance, and water quality. These factors point towards the society’s observance of living sustainably and incorporating this into their lifestyles. This trend is now incorporated into the corporate side of Finland where around 70% of companies publish separate sustainability or corporate responsibility reports annually. In 2006, The Prime Minister of Finland’s Office published “Towards Sustainable Choice: A Nationally and Globally sustainable Finland” with the vision to “… assure well-being within the limits of the carrying capacity of nature nationally and globally”. This effort along with a cultural change to accept sustainability as a way of life have put Finland as a globally leader for sustainable living.
Low Cost Housing vs. Sustainability
Many have criticized low cost housing for being unsustainable because of its low-density layout, singular function, and its locations surrounding cities. This criticism is misplaced for multiple reasons. First, the low income housing accounts for less urban sprawl than medium to high income housing. Furthermore, low cost housing areas are more sustainable in terms of density, mixed use and travel patterns. The reason for this misconception about low cost housing can be attributed to the disconnection between building density / type, actual density, and activity. This issue needs to be solved so that we no longer have to choose between low cost housing and the level of sustainability of the house. New inexpensive materials and methods can help to achieve these lower cost but sustainable housing. Although the density and type of structures found in the middle to high income homes make them less sustainable in these aspects, alternatively, they also have the financial ability to afford more efficient and advanced appliances and materials to produce a much more sustainable home. Government subsidies are a great solution to produce a sustainable home at a low cost. There are many different forms of receiving these subsidies including replacing old inefficient systems with new and improved options. There are also local rebates that can be found and taken advantage of. These incentives are not only offered to homes up for remodeling, but homes that are in the planning. If designed and built right, a home today built to maximum potential will pay the owner on a monthly basis because the house would be producing more energy than being consumed, therefore pumping in back into the city “grid”. The “grid” of the city is the wiring that carries all the power produced in the local power plant to the consumer, but for this overproducing house it will act as a battery to hold the excess energy and transfer it for use in other nearby houses.
Tribal Societies
The Tribal Societies of the Jeypore Tract of Orissa is an example of a society working to make their livelihoods and food security sustainable through a number of natural solutions. These actions include agricultural biodiversity conservation, genetic resource management, and environmental protection. Awareness between the human villagers and the natural environmental development has been the main contributor to the increase of soil, water, and forest conservation. Over 120 different medicinal plants are under strict conservation for the protection of these keystone species. Water conservation is helping the growth of the forest and enabling the natural environment to flourish. The act of conserving the resources surrounding the community has helped the villagers to value the gifts provided by the earth. These goods harvested from the natural environment create a market and helps place a value on farming. As these markets grow, there are revenues generated for the community. These revenues help with income diversification and promote the growth of the markets from within. With the environment happy, the Jeypore will coexist and be provided with all the necessary nourishment from the earth to sustain the tribe. Their hard work has also spread to neighboring villages where they have replicated the process of conservation, multiplication, evaluation and exploration of rice germplasms.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu