1. Sustainability is such a blurry subject; in my opinion it could either be very simple, or extremely complicated. But the root of sustainable is a simple one and it should be the foundation for all environmental policies. Thus I believe sustainability should be defined as: ensuring that expenditure of today’s resources will not compromise the quality of life for future generations.
2. This is covered in question 4, but environmental sustainability is a long term goal. Unfortunately our political system is set up such that it encourages short sided policy. In efforts of complying with their constituents demands, politicians tend to keep their policy goals short sided.
3. My framework would be designed such that we rely on expert opinion when making policies. All policies shall not inhibit the quality of life of citizens, thus they will have every opportunity to make comment and influence policy as deemed necessary.
4. This questions deals with the age old issue faced by our society for years. Politicians have a certain responsibility to meet the needs of their constituents. This means all their problems in one term. In the respects to sustainability it is impossible. Creating a long term view for a short sided society will require a lot of convincing.
An example that comes to find is Al Gore’s documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth” provides a great example of how little steps in the direction of sustainability will result a great result in the end. It is this mindset that must be convinced and implemented into our political arenas.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thank you for your comment. Your example about Al Gore's comment is very enlightened.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question,
I think that both theories have their strengths (and weaknesses). Each is to be used depending on the environmental resource being considered, as well as the value and technology that is being used to consume (and substitute it- is so). I believe this evolves per resource because of technology and the environmental evolution society experiences.
Hi Manuel -
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point that expert opinions should be taken into consideration when developing policy. However, I think that citizen input and political debate is just as necessary. Since we should be aiming for sustainability that addresses environmental, economic and social needs, it seems that we should have a diverse group of influences in the policy-making process.
You are right, we've discussed this idea of public involvement and experts in previous weeks. I think that if our goal is to come up with a framework for sustainability, the would include many policies procedures, etc citizen involvement in our sustainability efforts then become part of our end goal. Perhaps we should start thinking about how we persuade citizens. For example, how do we convince people to use the environmentally efficient light bulb, rather than to hold town hall meetings on why its good to use the environmentally efficient light bulb. Of course, I'm not suggesting that the public be taken out of the equation, however, we already know that sustainability is desirable, so the question is how do we persuade everyone else that it is.
ReplyDeleteI really liked your point that said "Creating a long term view for a short sided society will require a lot of convincing." I agree that this is a huge problem in sustainabilty. This is a huge challenge for policy makers. On this plus side, socity seems to be coming around to the idea of the importance of the environment.
ReplyDelete