This book review was written by Eugene Kernes
“A lot of the controversy about these
definitions is because we assume there is an unavoidable trade-off between the
first and second half. It’s human
well-being or environmental protection.
That means one must be prioritized over the other, and for
‘sustainability’ it’s the environment that wins. This trade-off existed in the past. But the central argument throughout this book
is that this conflict does not have to exist in our future. There are ways to achieve both at the
same time, which means there should increasingly be less conflict between the
definitions. So, if you still want to
adopt an environment-only definition, then think of human flourishing as a nice
add-on.” – Hannah Ritchie, Chapter 1: Sustainability: A tale of two halves,
Page 25
“Environmental action is often framed as at odds with the
economy. It’s either climate action or
economic growth. Pollution versus the
market. This is just wrong. Countries have slashed air pollution while
growing their economies at the same time.
Lower pollution, better health and a stronger economy? That sounds like the perfect sales pitch to
me.” – Hannah Ritchie, Chapter 2: Air Pollution: Breathing clean air, Page 51
“The other big change is that moving to a low-carbon, sustainable economy is not seen as the sacrifice it used to be. Fossil fuels were far cheaper than renewables. Electric vehicles cost a fortune. But now low-carbon technologies are becoming cost-competitive. It now makes financial sense to take the climate-friendly path.” – Hannah Ritchie, Chapter 3: Climate Change: Turning down the thermostat, Page 66
Is This An Overview?
The problem with doomsday
environmental narratives is that they can paralyze decision making efforts to
solve the crises, and reduce public trust when the claims turn out to be
wrong. Doomsday claims contain a lot of
misinformation, which enable policies that appear to be environmentally
sustainable but are harming the environment.
Through human
efforts in obtaining environmentally sustainable knowledge, people have changed
practices of production and developed technology that can enable humanity to
achieve sustainability in the 21st century. Achieving sustainability for the first time
in human history, as the world has never before been sustainable. Throughout history, people either could not
satisfy their present needs, or they compromised future needs. There used to be a sustainability trade-off,
a conflict between human well-being and environmental protection as each came
at the expense of the other. But,
technology and methods have enabled the ability to achieve both human
well-being and environmental protection at the same time.
There used to be a
trade-off between cheap energy sources or environmentally sustainable energy
sources. But technology has enabled
environmentally sustainable energy sources to become cost-competitive with unsustainable
technologies. Removing the trade-off as
the cheap energy sources are the sustainable sources. Economic policies no longer need to be in
conflict with environmental sustainably, as economies can grow while reducing
pollution. Although energy use has
increased relative to how much was used before, there is far less pollution
than before. There are many different
ways that human society is much better than in the past such as life
expectancy, food availability, education, and income opportunities. But there is still much for humanity to
resolve.
Caveats?
To overcome environmental sustainability misinformation, various metrics are used to show the evidence of certain claims. The evidence is presented in a way that does not require a statistics background. As the author references, the focus of the metrics is on environmental sustainability, while societies have various needs for which different metrics would be more appropriate.
