Environmental Sustainability in 2050: Through Alternative Technological Innovation and Ecological Designs - Essay Example

Environmental Sustainability in 2050: Through Alternative Technological Innovation and Ecological Designs s October 2006 Environmental Sustainability in 2050: Through Alternative Technological Innovation and Ecological Designs Introduction Nowadays, the issue of sustainable development has been a very much contested body of knowledge that has received varied reactions from all walks of life. From the North to the South, the question on who should be primarily responsible in taking the blame has already been identified. As easy as it may seem, the issue of sustainability is a highly intricate process that requires the participation of various sectors that are willing to change their current status, habits, attitudes, way of thinking, technology, economic condition, governing regulations and other considerable aspects in return for a more ecologically-friendly, eco-efficient way of living. By meeting not only the needs of the present, but as well as the needs of the future generations, forefront innovators, organisations, multi-national companies, policy-makers, world leaders, movements and concerned individuals have developed alternative ways and means of technological innovation and ecological design to bring true to the meaning of sustainable development. Furthermore, the factors of production have been critically analysed and dissected, from the production line towards to consumer line, as a means to carefully delineate the problems and associated solutions towards an environmentally sustainable future. Efforts in attaining environmental sustainability have been well underway. Whether it would last or continue to develop until the year 2050 depends on how deep society’s consciousness have embedded the term “sustainability” in its hearts and minds (Elliot, 2006). Whether technological innovation and ecologically-designed consumer goods and services are effective in addressing sustainability is another aspect that only the future can tell (Taylor, 2006). And whether sustainable consumption is the way to go may or may not be the trend people will continue to follow. But as much as current society is concerned, environmental sustainability and man’s quest to salvage the greenness of planet earth are here to stay. Sustainable Consumption The debate on sustainable consumption, as well as on the overall issue of sustainability in agriculture, industry and other business sectors all started in the Earth Summit held at Rio de Janeiro. The excessive use of resources and the “un-sustainability” the world has become all pointed out to the so-called “patterns of consumption” of the First World countries (Herring, 2006, p. 11). Since developed countries are not willing to give up their way of life, the underdeveloped countries were put to blame as they comprise almost half of the world’s population, thereby using majority of the world’s resources. To finally put to rest, or at least to make a comprising standpoint, the issue of “technological efficiency” was taken as an uncontested moral ground for all parties. During the same event, participating governments and its representatives defined “sustainable development” as a concept everyone would take on to improve the current living standards, if not change the level of consumption of each country or the increasing population trend. One of the Earth Summit’s crucial policies ever made was the Agenda 21 or also commonly known as the “Agenda for the 21st century.” The underlying framework for almost all sustainable development efforts and movements, the Agenda 21 espoused the need for society, particularly in the highly industrialised areas, to change its methodology of utilising resources through a “sustainable pattern of consumption and production” (UNEP, 1999). Without compromising the society’s current standard of living and its lifestyle patterns, the need to change the materials being used as well as creating new technological innovations that would render the same service to man but in a more beneficial and “sustainable” manner have been deemed an essential tool towards environmental sustainability. As often contested, society is not actually concerned with a technological innovation per se, but on the services and the degree of comfort it renders man. This argument has been emphasised by Herring (2006) as he mentioned that “the concept of service provision rests on the idea that consumers generally do not want products, they want the services the products provide” (p. 21). Although the younger members of society are brand conscious, majority of which still select goods and products based on performance and services offered. People prefer to use the electricity-powered iron to straighten the twists and curls of cloth as compared to the charcoal-powered iron that takes a while to insulate heat. In another instance, consumers prefer those so-called “energy-saving lights” as compared to the commonly known incandescent lights which powers on more electricity than the former. In this regard, the concept of sustainable consumption has been the underlying principle and basis of most technological innovations that are geared towards environmental sustainability. This premise may not entirely solve the current problem of the earth’s rapidly depleting resources, but it is seen as a solution worth taking until a better, uncontested, alternative is at hand. Society Today As previously mentioned, sustainable consumption has received mixed reviews and comments all over the globe. While the Kalundborg Industrial Park in Denmark has already established itself as a zero-waste industrial park and the Dontan Eco-city as world’s first sustainable city in Shanghai, Manhattan in New York continues to be polluted as ever and so as the rest of the globe. Third World countries such as India and Bangladesh are far worse than New York; with its crowded streets continue to excrete waste materials while a drainage system is yet to be established. Although an anti-smoke belching law was passed in the Philippines, factories and numerous buildings persist in releasing dust particles from their chimneys. Developed countries like the United States, Britain and Canada remain ambivalent in its move towards sustainable consumption despite efforts of companies like Xerox, Apple Computers and Nortel among others. They have even considered passing the responsibility to Third World countries, particularly in the issue of carbon emissions. The ratification of the Kyoto Protocol remains a sign that developed countries would prefer paying Third World countries to cut down their carbon emissions in the hope that these could compensate with their very own “uncompromising” carbon emissions. Since almost nobody would want to take the responsibility of cutting-back their highly industrialised way of living, it seems that alternative technological innovations are the more likely option that could achieve environmental sustainability (Roy, 2006). People would somehow be more conscious about sustainable consumption once fully-implemented, not only in their offices, but mainly in their homes, communities and most especially in their own individual living. It is assumed that since everybody has been doing sustainable consumption, people’s behaviours and habits will begin to shift towards an ecological perspective. As people are willing to change, so as the community to which they belong. And not long before 2050, a global cultural revolution would soon start to rise, thus changing man’s consumption patterns from an unsustainable living into a sustainable and ecologically appropriate way of life. Ecological Soundness Ecological soundness can be seen in any product, technological innovation or design given that it is not composed of any materials or ingredients that harm the environment. Furthermore, the commodity may either be re-usable and recyclable, or at the very least its purpose of existence is ecologically sound as compared to other brands of the same type of product. As a point of comparison, consider the release of Toyota’s Hybrid car as compared to an ordinary car. Although both types of cars may travel the same speed at any given time, the Hybrid car is fuel-efficient as compared to the latter. Aside from fuel use, it has the capacity to be powered by electricity within its own mechanism (Toyota, 2006). So with less fuel means less carbon combustion. And less carbon combustion means less pollution to the environment. This simple example answers the call of “eco-efficiency” to do more with less (p. 27). While hybrid cars alters the fuel consumption process of cars while providing the same type of service as normal cars do, agricultural farms in the Philippines with advanced knowledge on sustainable agriculture have been able to establish a closed-system type of farming wherein everything is used, nothing is wasted. Complementation (one part of the system is able to provide two or more uses for other parts of the system) and synergy (two or more components of the system are able to provide more benefit to the system as compared to only one part) are viewed as the central dogma of a diversified farming system. This is exemplified when the waste products of the animal component of the farm is utilised for fertilising the vegetable and rice farming component. On the other hand, synergy is manifested through the use of a multi-storey cropping system such as the combination of pineapple trees being shaded by banana trees. At the same time, banana trees are being shaded by coconut trees (Zamora, 2002). With this scheme, every part of the land is used, while all the components are properly exploited and clean production is achieved. In the textile industry, more and more manufacturers are now using synthetic fibres as an alternative raw material as opposed to the expensive and resource-consuming materials such as cotton, wool and linen (p. 25). On the other hand, the furniture industry has been slowly replacing its wood furniture with the plastic tables, chairs and stools. Meanwhile, metals are slowly being replaced by high performance composites and organic conductors. At the turn of the century, there will hopefully be less demand for highly consumable materials such as fuel, wood, metal, alloy, coal among others. Dematerialisation will be fast on track as technological innovations and designs gear towards ecological soundness. Starting Sustainability with the Self Given that producers are able to achieve ecological soundness to each and every product they make, it is still uncertain whether or not consumers and society in general, would accept these alternative technologies and designs, particularly during the initial stage of product introduction. Although it has been previously mentioned in the text that the likelihood of people wanting to adopt and change their behaviours in accordance to a change in technology is possible, current economic, environmental, cultural and policy or government regulations says otherwise. As of to date, society is still leaning against this change. And for the worst part of it, most people are apathetic to the rapidly changing Earth since its first picture taken from space. This paper has agreed to Herring’s (2006) assertion that indeed current standards of society must rely on technological innovation and ecological design to achieve environmental sustainability. With all the popping technological innovations at both sides of the block, the question now is, how can these products and services can effectively effect change in society in the shortest possible time, in let’s say 50 years? In starting sustainability with one’s self, it doesn’t mean that people should be coerced in using sustainable products and services. This aspect entails government regulations and policies, or if this is not possible, through the use of movements and non-government organisations (NGOs) that will advocate technological innovation in the very basic products humans avail himself. This includes soaps, toothpaste, toothbrush, shampoo and conditioners, clothes and even into food and other services. So how is this done? For the part of the non-government organisations and other related movements, advocacy will be designed towards pushing for policies and implementing guidelines that will guide the government and multi-national corporations in pushing for basic sustainable innovations. Meanwhile, manufacturers of basic commodities such as soap, toothpaste among others are required to push for research and development strategies that will utilise alternative raw materials in their products, as well as devising ways and means to establish eco-efficiency. Shampoo brands such as Head and Shoulders, Vaseline and St. Ives should find alternative means in replacing their ingredients based on organic compounds into chemicals which are directly derived from nature, without necessary leading to the destruction of nature. On the other hand, high-end clothing brands such as D & G, Levi’s, Guess and Louis Vuitton should resort to raw materials, which neither does harm to animals nor to nature itself, through the use of innovative synthetic fibres and sewing materials. The manufacture of toothbrush ought to lessen the use of plastic by means of utilising recyclable plastic materials from old toothbrush, water plastic containers and furniture. Such move entails particular emphasis with each and every research and development department of every corporation worldwide. An ecological design cannot be achieved in one set of product package. There must be a continuous product re-upgrading process to ensure that not only the consumers will benefit from the product, but as well as man’s very much contested planet Earth. Backed with appropriate regulation schemes in each and every country, full development of ecological designs are not far behind. These measures will somehow inculcate conscious awareness for consumers from class A to class F. Little by little, these alternative innovations will create self-awareness of the fact that the world’s finite resources is dwindling at a rapid rate; and the need for environmental sustainability is definitely underway. Knowing that man’s basic commodities have been built on the basis of sustainable consumption, society will now question their own roles and responsibilities to nature, the extent to which they could contribute towards the sustainability of man’s existence not only for the present, but as well as for the future generations. As years go by, society will be able to constantly hold their defences down against the need to change consumer patterns and lifestyles. This may sound as a radical approach to effectively promote change; but while the Earth is not getting any younger, so as the rate at which change must be implemented at the soonest possible time. Limitations On the way to sustainability, political hindrances are inevitable. Moral and ethical concerns will surely crop up from time to time. As mentioned before, unless other methodologies are created to ensure that environmental sustainability is attained, society has no other choice but to tackle the issue of technological innovations and ecological designs as the tools needed to raise awareness on how unsustainable current societal efforts of patterns of consumption have become. Society may trigger population growth against the tide of the Malthusian Theory, as developed countries have pointed out, but the increasing demand for basic commodities may never cease to halt in time for its near depletion; the same goes for carbon and greenhouse gas emissions all over the globe. The need for deeper initiatives from the current leaders of society may also be a hindrance as most of them fear that any unpopular move they make would be tantamount to lost of power or the voters’ confidence. Habits, attitudes and norms are only a few of the features of society that must be swayed against the tide of unsustainable consumption patterns. The need for a cultural change is inevitably a must for any technological innovation or design to succeed (Holden, 2006). Hence, unless people are willing to embrace the change, environmental sustainability is not far behind. Conclusion Environmental sustainability in the year 2050 is really not far behind. Efforts from various NGOs, grassroots movements, multi-national corporations and government policies have been slowly taking its shape amidst having a “consensus” crisis over the issue. Society is on the right track of focusing on alternative technological innovations and ecological designs. The very problem now is, can we handle the change? Or can the change handle us? References Elliot, D. (2006) Diffusion: Consumers and Innovation. The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes. Herring, H. (2006) Consumption: Innovation for sustainability. The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes. Holden, G. (2006) Markets: Designing for People. The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes. Roy, R (2006) Products: New Product Development and Sustainable Design. The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes. Taylor, E. (2006) Invention and Innovation: An Introduction. The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes. Toyota Website (2006) Retrieved October 2006 from website . Zamora, O. B. (2002) Sustainable Agriculture in the Philippines. Read More