Sustainability Concepts

Essay 1
Lumley and Armstrong discuss how the origins of sustainability concepts where theorized prior to and during the 19th century, and that the idea evolved through a combination of factors linked together (politics, economics, environmental and social policy). Thus making the concepts of sustainability not a ‘new beginning’ in human thought.
Over the time of history human thought has changed depending on the environmental influences we as a species have had to encounter causing the changes we have had to make in order to survive as a species. Survival within the environment on Earth in its modern context has changed dramatically from those hundreds of years ago. The use of natural resources from the environment has changed with the need to supply the ever expanding human population. In addition, technological advances that have developed for greater exploitation of natural resources have helped the human population to be sustained whilst other species have in turn declined because of this trade off. The idea that the environment is at a trade-off with human development was the beginning of the sustainability idea, because of its threats to human survival by resource limitation. However the concepts that make up sustainability as an idea were developed prior to and during 19th century by intellects whom envisioned this correlation between human population increase and natural resources having limits.

Before the 19th century; during the 17th century, ‘Cartesian dualism’ (“mind” and “matter”) was theorised. Whereby, the natural environment was connected with ‘matter’, therefore creating objects with a lifeless image to most of society. This image also allowed the environment to be thought of as a machine that can be altered and improved for the benefit of humans. From this point alteration of the environment had no moral or conscious thoughts, as it was believed that the environment had no limits. (Eden, 2009) Developing this belief caused exploitation to occur because people saw the environment as matter that was lifeless like a machine that could be altered and improved. The effects of human development to the environment eventually saw negative aspects associated with the change and with this led to the realisation that resources have limits. Thus a new perspective of the environment was conceptualised. This could be considered the foundations of sustainable thought, in which ideas from politics, economics, sociology and the environment converged.

During this time development was a main focus throughout most of the western world, with nations striving towards a goal for their people. The interactions between economy and politics were the main concern, with human welfare being less of a concern and the environment hardly being concerned in the least (Glacken, 1978). The environment was merely seen as an array of resources for the benefit and profit of developing societies (Eden, 2009).

The 18th century thinkers were involved in the movement towards sustainable thought through concern towards the welfare of humans mainly in Europe. At this time ‘Mercantilist thought’ was being challenged; this idea revolved around the idea that a large population had the means of developing larger markets and army’s, therefore a sign of wealth shown to the rest of the world. Economic theorist Richard Cantillon (1680?-1734) pointed out that “men multiply like mice in a barn, if they have the means of subsistence without limit” (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). This perception of population growth was important in illustrating that well-being could be improved by the development of production, creating jobs and thus allowing for greater population growth. But this quote also pointed out that “the means” could be limited. At this time society had ambition to improve their living conditions and as individuals become higher up in society. Adam Smith recognised that ‘mercantilist thought’ however caused human suffering and the merchant classes were corrupt (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). This idea could be considered the beginning of equality in society; which constitutes as part of the sustainability idea.

The social challenges that society faced during the 18th century had effect into the 19th century; with focus on moral duty, justice and ethics. The 19th century was one of which economic growth compromised justice and ethics. The thinkers at this time recognized that social justice should be imperative to economic gains (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). Therefore this change in thought; brought about by deteriorating social living standards, was significant in moving from self-centred thought to a more altruistic way of thinking. Many philosophers at this time understood there was a paradox between ethical and altruistic thoughts involving nature. This way of thought is leaning towards utilitarianism; where consideration of an action and its consequences is intended for the maximum amount of happiness for all entities involved. The philosophers at this time brought about this ideal prospect with its intent to improve human development as well as social justice and treatment of the natural environment (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). This manner of thought contributed to the sustainable development idea by weighing up the consequences of a number of different factors and their future outcomes. In addition to the utilitarian theory, some philosophers like John Stuart Mill had concerns for the future involving human welfare as well as Earth’s, alongside the possibilities of human population growth and limits of resources. This was largely due to Malthus’s idea that population growth increases in a geometrical ratio when unchecked whilst subsistence only increases in an arithmetical ratio (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). With this understanding and the realisation that economic development is eminent; and as a consequence the chances of human welfare improving were dubious. The theory of utilitarianism and altruistic thinking in humans was an important step in human thought, in which considerations of environment were contemplated with development The thought that; “limited utilitarianism and controlled economic development could break the power of the rich…and improve the welfare of the human race”; was the vision of Martineau and Smith (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). Nevertheless the wellbeing of humans came prior that of the environment. In addition, by the middle 1800’s intellectuals related environmental destruction (that was for economic and human development) to the more frequent climatic changes and extinctions (Grove, 1990). It is however only because the impacts of environmental destruction could jeopardize humans’ population growth and survival that considerations for protection were contemplated.

Due to the human population in Europe increasing, many immigrated across the world with hopes of a better future and wellbeing. This spread of optimistic people with ambition caused other places over the world to become exploited, where new technologies were used and markets developed. Consequently damaging the natural environments elsewhere; due to people having the idea that there are ‘no limits’ to environmental exploration (Eden, 2009). However some scientist noted the damage they observed in association with environmental destruction, causing decreasing population numbers in some species. This damage was only realised and challenged in the 20th century, when the Brundtland Report “Our Common Future” (1987) was defined (Sustainable Cities, n.a.). This focuses on conservation and sustainable development. It was only up to this point where sustainable development was taken seriously and the moral guardianship over the land was emplaced in the thoughts of society, governments and businesses. The Brundtland Report defines sustainable development as; “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own need”. In comparison; Lumley and Armstrong’s idea of sustainable development was conceptualised in the 19th century, incorporating economic, environment and social policy (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004)( Jay & Morad, 2009). Whereby; the origins of sustainable concepts were shared with the economic theory, thus suggestion that the sustainability notion is not a new beginning in human thought.

Change in perspective over the living environments of people became a concern throughout society as altruistic thinking became more prevalent (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). This way of thinking linked society and natural environments, and realisation that nature was important for humans’ wellbeing. From the development of ethics in human thought, it was recognised that there is different viewpoints on the environment in terms of its aesthetic and instrumental value in relation to protection priorities. The dualism between humans and environment is thought about in 3 different ways: The environment as a resource outside society, the environment as a fragile and damaged by society, and the environment as part of society. Humans also place different environmental objects as either instrumental value or intrinsic value. Where instrumental environments are beneficial to humans, and intrinsically valued environments are more of a moral thought (that everything that exists deserves to exist). (Lumley & Armstrong, 2004). This way of thinking towards the environment may be conscious or even sub conscious; but placing a greater importance of one species over another is due to human preference. Also, human thought has developed over time to be less self-regarding; due to reduced competition for survival by developing markets. Allowing human thought to think in an altruistic manner whereby humans aim to feel self-worth and positive contribution to the world and to future generations.

Although sustainability or sustainable development became popularised after 1970’s due to “Our Common Future”, it is not to say that this idea is a new one or that the many ideas that it’s based around are new. It is however that we are facing a frightening realisation that the past’s destruction could affect us at present, and that the future is looking less optimistic for the next generation. Therefore sustainability of the natural environment has become more important than ever before in history. In spite of this the philosophers prior to and during the 19th century had an understanding of sustainability in regard to natures resource limits, production development, human population growth, economic growth and social justice. It was however the lack of understanding about the impacts of development that governments and the general public didn’t put in place sustainable development management formerly.

References

Bridge, G. (2009). Natural Resources. International Encyclopaedia of Human Geography. University of Hull, Hull UK. Elsevier Ltd.
Eden, S. (2009). Environment. International Encyclopaedia of Human Geography. University of Hull, Hull UK. Elsevier Ltd.
Glacken, C. (1978). The Origins of the Conservation Philosphy. Human Geography Fundamentals: A Reader. Harper Row, London. Pp 272-276.
Grove R. (1990). The Origins of Environmentalism. Nature, Vol. 345, pp 11-14.
Jay, M. & Morad, M. (2009). Conservation and Ecology. International Encyclopaedia of Human Geography. University of Hull, Hull UK. Elsevier Ltd.
Lumley, S. & Armstrong, P. (2004). Some of the Nineteenth century origins of the sustainability concept. Environment Development and Sustainability 6: 367-378. Kluswer Academic Publishers.
Sustainable Cities (n.a.). Brundtland Report: Our Common Future. http://sustainablecities.dk/en/actions/a-paradigm-in-progress/brundtland-report-our-common-future
UN Documents (1985). Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development. UN Documents: Gathering a Body of Global Agreements. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm

References: Bridge, G. (2009). Natural Resources. International Encyclopaedia of Human Geography. University of Hull, Hull UK. Elsevier Ltd. Eden, S. (2009). Environment. International Encyclopaedia of Human Geography. University of Hull, Hull UK. Elsevier Ltd. Glacken, C. (1978). The Origins of the Conservation Philosphy. Human Geography Fundamentals: A Reader. Harper Row, London. Pp 272-276. Grove R. (1990). The Origins of Environmentalism. Nature, Vol. 345, pp 11-14. Jay, M. & Morad, M. (2009). Conservation and Ecology. International Encyclopaedia of Human Geography. University of Hull, Hull UK. Elsevier Ltd. Lumley, S. & Armstrong, P. (2004). Some of the Nineteenth century origins of the sustainability concept. Environment Development and Sustainability 6: 367-378. Kluswer Academic Publishers. Sustainable Cities (n.a.). Brundtland Report: Our Common Future. http://sustainablecities.dk/en/actions/a-paradigm-in-progress/brundtland-report-our-common-future UN Documents (1985). Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development. UN Documents: Gathering a Body of Global Agreements. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm