Aida Papikyan, Green Blogger
Why
is it so difficult in this modern world to control and regulate the balance of the sphere that is called ecology? The answer probably is that environmental conditions have become paradoxical in modern society.
Throughout
history, people have always lived at the expense of natural resources by
consuming them. Due to the hardship of living conditions in the past because of
the high mortality rate, natural resources were sufficient for the number of
people living in the world. However, with the further increase of population,
it has become harder to sustain everyone.
The
history of mankind is a story of overcoming nature and eliminating dependence from
it. With the advancement of science and the industrial revolution, people were
separated from nature. Although it was not entirely possible to cut off from nature,
as human needs were still met by the consumption of natural resources, it became
feasible to get away from nature enough so that people came out of the circle
of the ecosystem. The balance of nature was disturbed. In just 120-150 years, people
destroyed hundreds of acres of forests, including livestock and plants, and
non-renewable resources have reached the brink of extinction.
New substances
were created to overcome the scarcity of resources, which naturally did not
exist on earth, and new machines - for faster transportation and production
purposes. Plastic was discovered as material necessary for the military
industry. Of course, from the beginning, the purpose was not to replace paper,
glass, and other materials in everyday life; it happened as a “side effect”. With
an end of the Second World War, the US corporations started to use the plastic
in construction, in everyday life, in production as it was cheaper as a raw
material. The use of plastic to some extent contributed to the reduction of the
consumption of wood and other raw materials. Furthermore, before the industrial
revolution, animals were largely exploited in agriculture. With the invention
of steam engine animals’ power as a means of transportation was also put an end
to the widespread use. While in 1850 men supplied 15% of energy for work,
animals 79% and machines 6%, in 1960 the proportion was 3.1 and 96%
respectively. Unfortunately, machine production revealed its drawbacks soon
through air pollution by carbon dioxide emissions.
Currently, when the planet Earth is facing serious
damage due to irresponsible consumption of plastic and carbon dioxide, people have
started to look back. For example, currently, banana leaves are used for
packaging, bamboo sticks instead of plastic sticks. So we are facing the first
paradox - what to consume? To use paper or other natural resources without the
risk of polluting nature, but to consume natural resources, or to use plastic without
consuming natural resources, but to pollute nature?
The
developed countries have signed an agreement to support developing countries in
solving their environmental problems with the money generated by the exploitation
of natural resources in these underdeveloped countries. Here we are facing the
second paradox. It is not a secret that developed countries, i.e. European
countries or America, are economically advanced, and that their economy has
developed at the expense of extracting, selling, or exploiting oil reserves or
other resources mostly situated in low-income countries. The latter then
receives money from international organizations to reach sustainable
development goals. The financial support for sustainable development provided
by these organizations has partially been generated from the exploitation of
the same natural resources that should be preserved for a sustainable life. Money
is in endless circulation, like everything else in the world.
And
finally, there is the last paradox – the continuous increase of people's living
standards on the one hand and the necessity to preserve nature on the other.
The higher our standard of living, the more our natural needs, and the higher
the level of needs, the more resources we consume - natural resources or
artificial raw materials. In Europe, for example, basic human needs are
different from those of people living in Africa. We can consider the Swiss
prisons as an example. In Switzerland, the standards for human natural needs
and rights are so high that prisoners are provided with all the equipment,
including computers. In other words, they take care of all the needs of the
people there, restricting their freedom.
As a
rule, basic needs are defined not biologically, but according to culture. If
they were defined biologically, we would only need to nurture our need for eating,
sleeping, protection, and belonging. However, based on the way we live, we need
to acknowledge that we care not only for our basic needs. We need to buy new
clothes at least once a month, take care of our skin and body regularly, based
on beauty standards set by the media; we long to change phones, cars, computers
constantly, and so on. Here is proof that the more society develops
economically, the more human needs grow.
In
line with the requirements of sustainable development, the global institutes
have established a need for comprehensive elimination of poverty, ensuring the
fundamental human rights. But a big question arises here, that is how to define
the basic needs and rights of the people? If we define them according to the
conditions of each state, it is enough for Africans to provide people with
water, shelter, education, etc. But in that case, the equality of all people on
Earth will not be ensured, which is the other main criterion for sustainable
development. This means that based on the principle of equality, all countries
must reach the same level of economic development to meet their needs, but at
the same time without consuming the remaining natural resources. In that case,
how to balance the development of controlling development and resource
consumption?
These
environmental paradoxes are just some of the many obstacles for the
environmental balance. That is why, despite international agreements to
alleviate and overcome the climate crisis, the world is still in the same
situation as it was 33 years ago (the period when the idea of sustainable
development was first introduced).
About
the author: Aida Papikyan is a cultural anthropologist from
Armenia. The environmental issues are among her topics of interest. She is enthusiastic about writing essays where anthropology, environmentalism, and
philosophy are intersected.
0 Comments