Avoid a Collision between Human and Environmental Wellbeing

Many people, if not all, wonder what will happen when countries like China and India – together with about one-third of the world population – achieve a similar level of income and consumption as rich countries have nowadays. China saw its income per person (purchasing power parity) increased by no less than 140% from 2005 through 2013, India by 86%, both far above the world average growth of 40%. Will the ecosystems of our planet be able to survive such development? In other words, are Human Wellbeing (HW) and Environmental Wellbeing (EW) on a collision course?

The challenge

To answer this question we have correlated HW and EW with Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita using the data of the five editions (2006-2014) of the Sustainable Society Index, covering 99% of the world population. The result is shown in the picture below.

Results of the study correlating HW and EW with Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita.

The figure unmistakably supports the common opinion that higher income leads to higher HW and to lower EW. It means that if we continue with ‘business as usual,’ we can expect the planet’s ecosystem to spiral out of control. The main challenge of humankind will thus be to change the collision course of HW and EW by decoupling the growth of HW and EW.

What to do

Below are suggestions on how to approach and possibly achieve the decoupling.

Local initiatives

At national and international level, many countries fail to make sound decisions with respect to development, especially concerning matters of sustainability, and hardly ever take adequate measures for sustainable development. However, at local level,  people ‘just do it.’ Local cooperatives have started producing renewable energy, producing local food, saving resources by repairing goods and trading in second-hand goods, setting-up local money systems and so on. Businesses are following; local governments often hurry to embrace these initiatives and facilitate and support them. Local initiatives not only generate renewable energy, but also lots of social energy.

Circular Economy

Our  current, prevailing economic system is a linear one: take resources, manufacture products, use products, discard products and thus, lose most resources. This system can never be sustainable. Innovative technologies will only be able to extend the final depletion by some time, but not prevent full depletion from happening. Thus, we have to rapidly make the change from a linear economy to a circular economy, in which resources will be recycled and re-used. One can already see this happening all over the world, but on a small scale.

The transformation towards a circular economy will be greatly strengthened by the actual implementation of the well-known principle ‘polluter pays,’ be it a tax on CO₂ emissions, water and air pollution or anything else which pollutes the environment or wastes scarce natural resources. This will support the re-use of products, will stimulate the use of all kinds of renewables and will make biologically produced products more competitive, if not cheaper than ‘traditionally’ produced goods.

Redevelop the financial system

The financial system is not meant to be a system in itself: originally it was developed to facilitate people’s lives, the production of goods, trade, etc. Nowadays, we painfully experience a financial system that has grown into something with different purposes than originally planned. The needs and interests of the people play second fiddle. Profit-making has become the major – if not the only – goal. This persuades people to go on with consumption in every possible way and keeps them away from efforts to achieve a sustainable world.

We’ll have to give the financial system back to the public and redevelop it so that it will serve society.

Re-establish the power of civil society above the power of global firms and lobbyists

We – at least many of us – have a strong focus on materialism: buy the latest gadgets, don’t repair the vacuum cleaner etc. Why? One of the main reasons might well be the enormous power of advertising by big firms. But, not only that, multinational firms have the power to persuade governments to take measures in the firm’s favor, but the measures do not look out for public interests.

But consumers are powerful too. They can break up the power of firms and direct them towards sustainability. Consumers should not hesitate to use this power.

Getting results

To achieve the objectives mentioned above requires a change of mind and behavior of people. To change human behavior might well be one of the toughest challenges. But it can be done. It requires continuous information given out to the public at large to further raise sufficient awareness and the feeling of urgency: storytelling, information and education are crucial factors in this process. If we are successful, it will result in a society of which the characteristics might be:

• an inclusive society in which no living human being will be excluded. If not, there will be no liveable society left.
• a society primarily organized at a smaller scale. If not, people will completely lose control.
• a society with a taxation system that penalizes unsustainable behavior.
• a society with more equal income distribution. If not, social unrest, transmigration and conflicts will continue.
• a society with a more equal distribution of workload and working hours. If not, on the one hand we will face high unemployment figures and on the other hand continuous stress.

Geurt van de Kerk has served as the chairman of the Sustainable Society Foundation since 2006. Previously, he worked worldwide as a management consultant.

Featured photo courtesy of Lee Gross.