Designing a Sustainable Future, Part 3
Future Sustainability Responses – From Reviewing to Rescaling
Image: Findhorn EcoVillage in Scotland
Recap
I explained in the previous post (Part 2) that this formerly conceived four-part “designing series” now consists of five parts. I felt this was necessary to limit all posts to no more than 10 minutes of reading. Another decision for this designing series involves using R-words (prefix “re”) to reference the reality that most of what we need to do is review the origins of our species and come to realize the unique role we fulfill within the ongoing evolutionary process, as one species among many. It’s somewhat unique in approach, but it seems to make sense, at least to me.
I’ve also mentioned that this post would include coverage of human population, which, for reasons too complex to discuss adequately here, has become a controversial topic. However, I agree with a growing number of well-informed global thinkers, including socioecologists, scientists, academics, and environmentalists, who are deeply concerned about an increasingly deteriorating planetary bio-ecosphere. Any open-minded, critical-thinking person understands that no topic should be off the table for discussions involving sustainability issues, especially given the shrinking timeline for mitigation and adaption in a rapidly changing world. Bearing this explanation in mind, please remain humanely receptive to the information provided herein – and also in future posts.
It seems appropriate to reiterate selected population-related information presented in previous posts that recently-joined readers might have missed. For those who have read most posts up to this point, such information may serve as a reinforcer.
Effective Growth and Development Responses –Recapping and Reviewing
For our purposes here, it will suffice to begin with recapping and reviewing our ancestral transition around 10,000 years ago, from a hunting-foraging existence to human settlements, many in the Middle-East’s Fertile Crescent, a strategic region for agricultural and civilizational developments. Over the next few thousand years, small settlements expanded to towns, cities, and eventually empires and civilizations.
It's important to understand that, until that time, the global human population had remained relatively stable. From around 200-million humans in CE100, global population grew to around 610 million in CE1700, to one billion in CE1800, and 1.65 billion in CE1900. This remarkable expansion occurred over eighteen centuries, beginning with a global population of 200 million and arriving at nearly two billion at the beginning of the 20thcentury. Even more remarkable is to realize that, since 1900 the population has surpassed 8-billion world citizens, and headed for 9 billion.
Prior to CE1700, human health and lifespans were moderated by such means as impoverished living conditions, wars, lack of hygiene, deadly diseases (including plagues), and inadequate medical care. Thus, human population remained relatively stable—births minus deaths—until the 17th century, when wood was used to fuel steam-powered machines. Coal largely replaced wood as the chief fuel for powering machinery in the 18th century with the advent of the Industrial Age in England, and effectively accelerating the use of fossil-based energy to power society. Some experts refer to this industrial period as the First Industrial Revolution.
The next major energy push occurred in the 19th century, with the discovery of the two additional supercharged “energy slaves” of oil and gas, consequently propelling the global economy with rapid material growth in all sectors of life. With this new fossil-energy impetus, a Second Industrial Revolution was set in motion, along with a burst of technological innovations to power society’s material growth, which notably includes human population.
It's particularly important to understand, and appreciate, that the most intensive expansion of our human population has occurred largely during our “present” 110-year timeframe (all persons currently alive), which, since the mid-20th century, has been termed the Information Age. Beginning with 1.7 billion people in 1914, global human population increased exponentially to 8.1 billion in 2024. In 2023 alone, 75-million global citizens were added, births minus deaths, a slight decline from previous years. Unfortunately, growth-oriented proponents disparage any news about a declining base of capitalist hyper-consumers.
Hence, by means of innovative technological advancements, humanity’s growing dependence on energy to power and advance every area of life is a major driver of the multiple crises we’re facing. In sum, a professional explanation attributes our resultant existential socioecological human predicament to three contributing factors: 1) human overpopulation (8.1 billion and growing); 2) ecological overshoot of natural resources; and 3) material waste products, including toxins that pollute the bio-ecosphere (all animate beings and inanimate entities).
The formula I=PAT, as proposed by Paul R. Ehrlich and John P. Holdren in the early 1970s, provides a way to calculate humankind’s overall impact on the ecosphere. IPAT represents the four principal factors that help explain our developing ecological crises. Thus, Impact (effects) = (the results of) Population (size) x Affluence (consumption) x Technology. Note that population is the main driving factor, effectively amplifying per-capita consumption of merchandise and the resource input/output of the technologies used.
This brief recap-review seems sufficient for moving on to further consideration of how the market-based economic refrain of “grow, grow, grow” continues sounding like an ear-worm in our twenty-first century consumer brains. Maybe we need to reconsider revising, resizing, and rescaling our impact on the planet.
Effective Responses – Reconsidering, Revising, Resizing, and Rescaling,
Although resizing and rescaling our human population should be an essential goal regardless of population scale, we must also methodically begin reconsidering our extravagant use of fossil energy in producing and expending an excess of unessential goods and services. Fossil fuels will surely be needed into the far-distant future for essential heavy-duty work, so reserving as much as possible should be a fundamental long-term strategy, a sensible reason for reducing usage. Doing so will require instilling in the minds of all world citizens an ethos of stewardship based on safeguarding, conserving, and preserving all non-renewable resources for use by future humans.
Making lifestyle changes that downsize consumption will present major challenges for most people, particularly for wealthy citizens accustomed to having whatever is desired. One notable example of a highly-consumptive trend is the growing constructing of barndominiums, essentially large garage-condo structures intended for storing expensive possessions and hanging-out “man caves”, some of which even serve as second homes.
For consumption-habituated people, transitioning to a less-materialistic lifestyle might pose extreme psycho-emotional distress. However, after experiencing the advantages of a lower consumption lifestyle, it’s possible that most people will eventually adjust as needed, and grow to appreciate a simpler, more sustainable lifestyle. Unburdened by unnecessary possessions, they could have more time for socializing, recreating, pursuing special interests, and serving worthy causes. Above all, such a lifestyle can provide a quality of life that engenders happier, and healthier people.
Of course, adopting a sensible degrowth strategy in hopes of attaining a wholesome, balanced lifestyle for people will require a massive educational campaign. Informing the general public begins with thorough explanations regarding the systemically complex and complicated nature of our human predicament, defined as a metacrisis. Well-substantiated information will be needed in clarifying all recommended strategies and methods proposed for resizing and rescaling material consumption, in addition to addressing concerns associated with consuming and wasting finite materials.
All of this suggests that, in anticipation of a future that may well be defined by dwindling, hard-to-extract, and very expensive natural materials, we need to reconsider the need to revise our acquired mythical perception of the “American Dream”. Rather than continuing to support our current profit-driven economic system’s addiction to material growth, we could turn our attention to promoting non-material growth. We humans and the bio-ecosphere could surely benefit from the pursuit and practice of values based on such virtuous qualities as love, compassion, curiosity, gratitude, happiness, creativity, and so on. Actually, there are no limits or negative externalities associated with increasing the kinds of virtuous character-building qualities that produce minimally-consumptive, resilient, and sustainable lifestyles.
To repeat an ongoing theme presented throughout this exploration of our human story, having a lower-sized world population of around two-billion global citizens would also make it possible for everyone to enjoy a modest lifestyle similar to average contemporary Europeans. In an ideal sustainable world, there would be no extremely poor people, nor would there be extremely wealthy elites capable of exerting inordinate socio-economic and oligarchic power over society. In all areas of life, every global citizen would receive equality and equity.
If you’re curious about the advantages of a reduced human population, an article I wrote in 2023 addresses this topic. A Smaller Human Population for a Sustainable Future explains the benefits of living in a less human-dominated world capable of existing sustainably within Earth’s bio-ecosphere. For delving deeper into this sensitive topic, I recommend consulting respectable population organizations that propose only humane strategies (AI overview) in resizing our human population. These four organizations offer a well-rounded overview of relevant issues: Population Balance, Population Connection, Earth Overshoot, and Center for Biological Diversity.
Wrap Up
To reiterate, transitioning from a hectic, highly-complex modern lifestyle to a simpler, more modest and balanced way of living can ultimately provide a more fulfilling and rewarding way of living. Understandably, a sensible lifestyle will probably present challenges during what could become a challenging adjustment period of undertaking requisite mitigative and adaptive measures, but it should be possible, at least in the remaining fewer habitable areas. An appropriate motto or slogan for such a worthy movement could be ‘shrink toward sustenance’.
Achieving such an ambitious goal will require an educational philosophy and process that, from childhood to old age, instills in all humans wide-ranging knowledge, deep respect, and altruistic love for the rights of nature. Moreover, as I’ve mentioned in previous posts, I believe a sustainable future will be more likely if all world citizens gain a profound understanding and devotion to Truth, Goodness, and Beauty, the trinity of transcendental virtues explained in a previous post, along with moral imperative of The Golden Rule (treat other beings as you wish to be treated).
Given the many existing and forthcoming socioecological hurdles ahead, such a positive scenario may seem almost too good to be attainable. Nevertheless, we are compelled to reimagine what could be possible. Unfortunately, our window of opportunity for taking constructive action is slowly closing. Time is fleeting, and so are our chances for creating a sustainable future. In the next week, please ponder what you—and we—might collectively do to affect positive change.
Till next time . . .