Introduction
Being a consumer in the US (US) is easy. In fact, the wealth and abundance of goods attract many immigrants to the United States. Who would not want to live in a spacious house, drive a big car and frequent mega-stores such as Wal-Mart and warehouse stores such as Costco? In fact, there is something exciting and enticing about how goods and services are sold in the United States. The point is not that there is a great need, but marketing goes so well and with such skill that the buyer “must have” the items they encounter. Once in a demand article, yesterday it becomes a subject thrown into a garage for the upcoming sale of a garage or a gift from a local charity or disembarked at a landing site for local teams. As if the more, the more, the better, it is desirable that in the presence of material wealth in fashion and in fashion.
To be part of the “this” crowd, one must tirelessly abandon the former (sometimes only days or weeks) and update now a faster, new, elegant, TV, mobile phone, computer or IPOD. This is the case in all suburban communities in the United States. Communities, where 2-4 people are in a 3-4 thousand square foot house, with several large SUVs parked on the driveway, and have access to a number of shops, shopping centers, etc. On the contrary, there is the other side of the city, the part of the city that the majority does not want to recognize or ever visit, unless it requires a service or product that can only be delivered to an ethnic or migrant community.
In such communities, you cannot find a Hummer or Drive near a number of more expensive houses or beautifully groomed lawns. Members of these communities are suburban service providers. These are those who mow lawns, take care of children and clean their employers' homes. They visit their wealthy employers; provide a service or product, and then return home to face the daily struggle. What is described is not unique to my hometown of San Diego, California. In fact, the above circumstances may be in India, China or any other part of the world.
I will not argue that thanks to the best practices of sustainable development we will be able to rid the world of poverty. I also confess that it is difficult to ask the "haves" to share with the "have-nots." In this regard, I would like to explore sustainability in the context of environmental sustainability and explore ways to create equity in distribution. What are some of the obstacles? In the field of social equality, I will consider distributive justice in the eyes of a bi-cultural American. My American acculturation taught me that the consumer approach is good, and the old adage “the more the better.” My Persian heritage and culture taught me that in fact “less is more” and material wealth should not determine my personality. As the author of this article, both of these perspectives will be visible in my letter and the study of environmental sustainability in the framework of distributive justice.
For the purposes of this analysis, I will use the following operating conditions:
Consumerism: the theory that an increase in the consumption of goods is economically desirable; also: concern and propensity to purchase consumer goods. (Merriam Webster Dictionary)
Sustainable development
Caldwell [1] writes: The sustainability of human society in the future depends on the ability and willingness of people to order their behavior and institutions in order to maintain environmental integrity in human relations with the earth. lemons [2]
In addition, to determine sustainability, there are a number of operational definitions used in this area. By itself, sustainability does not matter much when it is associated with development, it has a modified meaning, given that development means some kind of action. lemons [2] Moreover, stability is associated with the conservation of a stationary state and random conservation. However, others have defined sustainability from an economic point of view as “capital maintenance”. Goodland [3]
Environmental sustainability
According to Loenberger [4]Environmental sustainability provides an opportunity to go beyond market-based decision-making mechanisms for plans that will allow long-term and parallel benefits to several stakeholders. Leuenberger [4] Moreover, Leuenberger and Wakin, Sustainable Development in Public Administration Planning: A Study of Social Justice, Equality, and Citizen Participation, explores the prospect of sustainable development as a tool for increasing social justice, equity, and citizen participation in the decision of the state administration. Leuenberger [4] The document states that justice and social justice, based on significant citizen participation, should be part of sustainable development. To be able to focus on long-term changes, incremental steps may not be a solution, but transformational changes may be required. Leuenburger [4]
It is clear that the definition of a sustainable society can be integrated into sustainability. Ofulsa [5] defines a sustainable state as: preserving a healthy biosphere, careful use of resources, own restrictions on consumption, long-term goals for managing short-term elections and the general attitude of guardianship to future generations. Ofulsa [5] Similarities in the sustainability of economic systems and ecological systems are evident in understanding the significance of the Catton throughput concept [6]and Rice [7] This reflects the greatest burden on a person that can be supported by the environment, without diminishing its future suitability to support an equal load. In this case, the human load is a function not only of the population, but also of per capita use. Environmental capacity limits are particularly problematic in the United States, as our growing population, changing population profile and per capita consumption levels place higher demands on our ecological resources and natural capital at the national and global levels.
Elliot [8]Wackernagel [9]and Rice [7] described the relationship between sustainability and natural capital in this way: Sustainability implies that characteristic capital should be used no faster than it can be reconstructed. Nonetheless, trade and technology allowed humanity to gradually use nature at super-sustainable levels at a rapid pace, so that current consumption does not include natural income (“interest” in our capital). This condition leaves a new generation with depleted capital and less productive potential, even when the population and material expectations increase. Wright [10]
Equitable distribution of benefits
Defined as: in fact, just a society ... no need to form people to ensure justice for them ... Speaking of the fact that an essentially just society is neutral towards the goals of its members, we deny that justice is related to any essential concept of that is good, both for man and for society. Kymlicka [11]One time [12]
Within this area, the starting point will be distributive justice. The concept of social conflicts taking place on the basis of environmental rights, how do we share the pie? Martinez-Alier [13] And is it enough to bypass all? Whether intentionally or not, the growth of the global environmental justice movement, which can be a strong factor, focused on how future generations perceive social justice and equity distribution. Martinez-Alier [13] Before continuing the study, I would like to say that not all environmentalists resist growth. Similarly, many of them benefit from the same rich lifestyle as described in the introduction to this article.
Behavioral obstacles
According to Ophuls [5], over the past 20 years, we have done little, but symbolically take care of the celebration of earth day ... we have done all the easiest and least painful things. “Now we have to do heavy things, change basic attitudes and expectations, change the established way of life and structure the economy accordingly.” Ofulsa [5]
The problem of marriage with environmental sustainability with the distribution of justice is similar to the coverage of health care in the United States. In the US, about 50 million people do not have medical care. Many of the people in this group are children, single mothers, students and / or those who work part-time, even those who have a full-time job or work in two jobs, but still do not have medical care through an employer. The reasons for this vary and will not be studied in this manuscript. The point is to use it as an analogy. Unlike the United States, the French and Canadians enjoy universal health insurance. Despite their marital status, age and employment status, both countries decided to provide medical care for their population as a whole. As a result of having a permanent medical home and access to basic and preventive care, people in both countries are experiencing people in the United States. There is a moral and ethical, not to mention an economic decision made to provide care, despite access to wealth. In fact, on the bypass road, the “haves” help in paying cash to ensure health care for the “have-nots”. I would like to link this with social justice. Therefore, consider a model in which health care is considered a resource for wealth creation. Consumption of health care, limited to "haves" for all sorts of benefits, at the expense of others, "has not" interferes with sustainability. The “have-nots” are also a resource, that is, human capital, which is consumed in the absence of medical coverage, has unintended consequences. Social justice cannot take place if those who have access to wealth and capital do not want to share profits with those who are less privileged. But this almost contradicts the ideals of Americans, where happiness is mainly determined by the amount of material benefits, most of them do not want to share with others, but in fact, why should they? It practically stands against the American way of life.
Environmentalists who focus on social justice, by my definition, are not those who are ready to give up all material benefits and live the life of a dervish. Rather, they argue that, despite this, we can maintain a certain status and quality of life without losing the place of the less fortunate. This belief system is based on the ideals of sustainable development. Not only looking at the needs of today, but looking at the needs of tomorrow. According to Caldwell [1] since “development must be sustainable, it must serve the quality of life, and not social and ecological values, which anticipate, above all, the imperatives of economic development plans”. lemons [2] This requires a type of advanced thinking that more or less contradicts the “ideals of the ideal” of Americans. The main desires are now and the presence of minds: “Oh, well, we will simply face evil tomorrow, when and if they arise!”
Perhaps this is not the fault of the Americans for what they think. After all, America is a very young nation with little or no ancient cultural ideals or heritage. Unlike countries from the ancient world, "America" does not have enough wisdom to build the future, and not just for today. If building is green in fashion, it will be done, but not because it is the right thing; not because it is a smart way of building. With all its wealth, the United States must set an example for other nations of the world. The US must become a role model for sustainable development that everyone else can engage in.
Unlike other countries, the US population as a whole was well fed, clothed and accommodated. To use Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, Americans are far superior to others when it comes to meeting basic needs. That is why we have the luxury of worrying about the natural world and our global environment. For others, the immediacy of dinner on the table does not allow us to present a big picture of thinking about tomorrow. Everyday struggle prevents the likelihood of seeing the future and working to create this future. The “future” for most people on this planet is the future tomorrow, or perhaps next week, when there are no questions asked, there will be enough fuel for my children and grandchildren instead of the questions asked: will I stay at work? Will I be able to buy medicine for my sick child? Will I be able to care for my aging parents? Americans in general have a gift, their gift is that they have peace of mind. They can use running water as often or as they wish, they are not interested in accessing the telephone or electricity ... Egypt is in school today. “It is this gift that makes us Americans jealous of others. It is this gift (otherwise referred to as the “American Dream”) that the US is such a magnet for foreigners, they also want to be able to take advantage of some of the bliss that we do not need to constantly fight for our basic needs.
In 1964, Rachel Carson stated:
The modern world worships the gods of speed and quantity, as well as quick and easy profits, and from this idolatry a monstrous evil has arisen. Still evil is long and unrecognized. Even those who create them are guided by some ingenious innovation in order to blind themselves from the harm they have caused to society. As for the general public, the majority rests in the children's belief that someone is caring for things — faith not refracted until some public person, with patient scholarship and steadfast courage, presents facts that can no longer be ignored. Leuenberger [14], Lear [15]
In this case, we must assume the role of stewards of this planet. We have “know how” and means for this. We cannot neglect the management and sustainability of natural resources if we want to preserve and improve the well-being and quality of life of future generations. de shalit [16], Capricious [17]and Page [18] Sometimes economic and environmental problems seem to be obvious and bipolar, but sustainability can serve as a bridge connecting both systems. Wright [10]
Collective consciousness
How can we embed the concept of sustainability in the collective consciousness? Psychologists and philosophers agree that education and exhortation are the goals of achieving such a goal, a society in which people have a stable relationship with the earth. At present, such goals and objectives do not seem to be mainstream and are shared by several, who seem to be fighting resistance to changing attitudes. Such changes are necessary for people “not so much in changing the basic human nature as in changing the social conditions in which human behavior finds expression.” Lemons [2]Let's be a superpower that everyone loves and adores, let's spend less or less on wars and instead provide food and medicine to those in need. It could be argued that this has already been done; we ship millions and millions of dollars to less developed countries. Some Americans claim that we have already done our share. Others apologize, why should we spend US dollars elsewhere when we still have problems to solve in our own backyard? I agree, and I do not propose that we direct more aid to less developed countries. Instead, the proposal is twofold: 1) to be wise with the way we spend our goods and services; 2) be grounded in how we want to build our future. Instead of spending as much as we can, as quickly as possible, let's plan a cold winter.
Conclusion
We have the ability and the luxury to focus on sustainable development. Not because he is in fashion, but rather because he will provide a better life for future generations. But we cannot do this without changing our thinking. We must be prepared to meet with the other side of the city and explore how we collectively relate to social justice. Are we ready to make any sacrifices? Are we ready to give up hard decisions? Can we eliminate our pride and see what others have to offer and ask to cooperate with them. Perhaps it is time to take a closer look at how peasants and indigenous peoples often developed along with nature. Martinez-Alier [13]
Maryam is an associate professor and lead professor of BPA and MPA programs at the National University of La Jolla California. Learn more about Maryam by visiting: www.activepatients.com
Recommendations
[1] Caldwell, LK, Between Two Worlds, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1992.
[2] Lemons, J., Westra, L. & Goodland, R., Концепции и подходы экологической устойчивости и целостности. Нидерландские академические издатели Kluwer, 1998.
[3] Goodland, R., International Association of Impact Assessment (IAIA) Информационный бюллетень 5 (2) (страницы без номера) 1993.
[4] Leuenberger, D., Устойчивое развитие в области государственного управления: совпадение с практикой? Управление общественными работами и политика, том. 195-201, 2006.
[5] Ophuls, W. & Boyan, S., Экология и политика дефицита. Revisited: The Unraveling of American Dream, New York, WH Freeman and Company, 1992.
[6] Catton, W. & R. Dunlap., «Экологическая социология: новая парадигма». Американская социология, т. 41-49, 1978.
[7] Рис, У., «Пересмотр несущей способности: территориальные индикаторы устойчивости». Население и окружающая среда: журнал междисциплинарных исследований, 17, с. 195-215, 1996.
[8] Эллиот Л., «Глобальная политика окружающей среды», 2-е издание, New York University Press, 2004.
[9] Wackernagel, M. & W. Rees., Наш экологический след: снижение воздействия человека на Землю, Филадельфия, PA, Новое общество, 1996.
[10] Райт, С. & Лунд, Д., Грей и Грин?: Управление и устойчивость в обществе старения. Journal of Aging Studies, Vol. 14, выпуск 3, стр. 229-250, 2000.
[11] Kymlicka, W., Либеральный индивидуализм и либеральный нейтралитет, Ethics, 99, p. 883-905, 1989.
[12] Раз, Дж., Либерализм, Автономия и Политика Нейтрального Концерна. Средневековые исследования в области философии, т. 7, стр. 89-120, 1980.
[13] Мартинес-Алиер, Дж., «Экологизм бедных: исследование экологических конфликтов и оценки», Великобритания by Bookcraft Bath Ltd., 2002.
[14] Leuenberger, DZ, Introduction-Signs of Tines: Экологическая устойчивость, граждане, лидерство и социальная справедливость. Сеть государственной администрации. Том 29, № 3, стр. 370-374, 2007.
[15] Лир, Л., Lost Woods: Открытое письмо Рэйчел Карсон. (Boston, Beacon Press, 1998).
[16] de-Shalit, A., Почему процветание: экологическая политика и будущие поколения, Нью-Йорк: Routledge, 1995.
[17] Moody, HR, «Обязательства перед будущими поколениями». Отчет о государственной политике и старения 7 (осень), 8-9, 1996.
[18] Страница, Т., «О проблеме достижения эффективности и справедливости, межпоколенческий характер». Земельная экономика, т. 73, с. 580-596, 1997.
