by Dorret Groot Wassink

In the headlines: 25% of our mammal species are in danger of becoming extinct. Their main threat is habitat destruction. Facing the facts of our world, our earth’s very survival, is not easy. Yet only by facing brutal facts can we work on solutions. It’s the same as in the medical profession. There is no use trying to get rid of symptoms if the real cause of the disease has not been treated. 

The patient we call Earth is showing many symptoms:

• Icecaps are melting
• Weather patterns are changing, becoming much more turbulent: more frequent tornadoes and increasingly powerful hurricanes
• The average temperature is rising, you might say it has developed a fever
• Species in all categories are endangered: mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, insects and fish
• Our seas are more polluted and over-fished
• Human population is rapidly growing and ‘our current standard of living’ places huge demands on the world’s resources

So what disease does the world suffers from? It’s not just global warming; the fever is just one of many symptoms. 

The real problem is a huge human population that is polluting the world and taking over the habitats of its other inhabitants. In so doing it destroys the world’s lungs responsible for purification of the air and turning C02 into Oxygen. 

To realize we are the problem is one thing. To do something about it in a way that the balance and ‘liveability’ of the earth is restored is our real challenge. 

The big question is not if we will be able to do what’s needed. The big question is: Are we willing to do what is needed to restore balance? 

We all do our bits: recycling, reusing, turning the thermostat down, driving more energy efficient cars, buying carbon offsets for flights taken, supporting charitable causes that help animals, the impoverished and even fight global warming. 

Yet we still live comfortably in a disposable world, where we replace things not because they are broken or no longer functional. Rather, we replace them because they are no longer the newest, fastest, or most fashionable. 

Most of the ‘stuff’ we buy is not purchased because we need it – needing as in for our survival. We buy ‘stuff’ because we like it, we can and it’s nice to have. 

Let’s be fair though, how much of that ‘stuff’ you currently have is ‘need to have’ and how much is ‘nice to have?’ And of the items in the ‘need to have’ category, are they ‘need to have’ because ‘others’ have them too or because those others expect you to have them? 

If we honestly stripped everything down to what we really need in this world to live, there’s quite a bit left over: most of our clothes, the ‘stuff’ in our house, our toys, all of our gadgets, most of our homes, vehicles and so on.

The current world paradigm though is based on exploitation and instant gratification, getting the most out of something as soon as possible. It’s a world where enough is not a concept. The driving force is acquiring more, more, more!

What if we could build a new world based on more sustainable principles; less is more, and enough is better than more, how different would that be? 

Imagine a world with no waste. It would become a challenge to use everything as long as possible and only replace something when it can no longer be fixed. We would keep old systems running until they ‘need’ replacing and only then update to something new. 

In a sustainable economy, companies would focus on making less products better and only use quality materials as needed. At its extreme, materials would be reused. Families expand only allowed if someone passes away and the environment would not have to cope with more people. We’re not talking China’s one child policy, rather keeping the world in shape… taking care of its animal habitats might be our most important task in a sustainable world. Creating human habitats that do not interfere with animal ones. 

Of course this world would call for different economics. What might they look like, I don’t know, the economics that reward using less, making less, rewarding leaving no ‘footprints’. If it sounds alien, it is.

Yet the current crisis is showing that the economics of more, more, more; of greed – are breaking down. The current financial meltdown and class divisions breaking down with it is but one example. Rewarding greed and exploitation must stop. 

The big question remains: are we willing to do what’s needed to restore the health of what makes life possible: our earth? If we want to survive, there are difficult measures to take. One of the most difficult is limiting our numbers. China did it from 1979 on when it was faced with overpopulation. It was one of the most painful measures, with nasty side effects: Killing new born babies, mainly girls, or leaving them somewhere to be found and adopted. 

Most wealthy nations have found that population numbers self-stabilise, because when people have enough and know their children are safe, there is no need for more kids. Somehow in those countries the ‘be fruitful and multiply’ religious doctrine fades away. Interesting isn’t it?

Finding a way to limit our numbers is a big challenge. Implementing the economics of sustainability is an even bigger one.