Globetrotters

What does that term even mean? It’s like the mythical unicorn, a beautiful beast we’d love to believe in but one that simply does not exist.

In the early 1980’s Hans & I traveled to Cancun. The grids for the roads were just being laid out & we knew something BIG would grow there. We recently saw a TV documentary that Cancun generates over 30% of the national revenue for all of Mexico, but at what cost? Overdevelopment threatens the ecology of the ocean, endangering the very reefs which draw the tourists who feed the coffers.

At the other extreme is Sipadan, an island off Malaysia. Touted as a dive paradise, the government began issuing permits for hotels & resorts. Then they realized that construction to accommodate tourists to the site threatened to overwhelm the fragile reef system, so they simply shut it all down! Now only day trips are allowed & on a strictly controlled basis so that very few divers a day enjoy this paradise.

Environmental issues aside, what about how development affects the people of a country?

In his book “Twilight in Italy” D.H. Lawrence glorifies the life of the peasant & mourns its passing with the advent of the machine age…but is living off the land really so fine a life? Nature can be harsh & lives ruined with a single turn of the weather.

We often look at local cultures as colorfully existing just for our entertainment. But what about the people themselves & their cultural heritage? As my dear uncle once said, “What’s worth saving about the tradition of cliterectomy?” Why can’t people be free to choose what works for them & discard what doesn’t? They could certainly learn by observing first world nations what to avoid in their own development. Sadly though it seems they focus on their desire to acquire the material wealth of developed nations, rather than an awareness of the cost of that development in terms of the environment & social systems. What price ‘progress’?

D.H.Lawrence concluded, in describing “the horrible, desolating harshness of the advance of the industrial world upon the world of nature”:
“It is better to go forward into error than to stay fixed inextricably in the past.”

Change is inevitable, but does that make it progress? How do countries ensure that they move forward in a positive way & avoid repeating the errors of others? How much is enough? Must we all live in MacMansions?

This is one definition of sustainable development from the
International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)
website- www.iisd.org:
“Sustainable development ‘meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ (1987 UN Convention on Environment and Development); not simply the use of resources at a rate which could be maintained without diminishing future levels, but development which also takes environmental and social implications into account. Sustainable development entails ‘the integration of economic, social and environmental objectives, to produce development that is socially desirable, economically viable and ecologically sustainable’ (Hens, in B. Nath, L. Hens, and D. Devuyst (eds.) 1996), and this may involve the prevention of irreversible environmental change.
The term “sustainable development” was popularized in 1987 by the World Commission on Environment and Development. It refers to a systematic approach to achieving human development in a way that sustains planetary resources, based on the recognition that human consumption is occurring at a rate that is beyond Earth’s capacity to support it. Population growth and the developmental pressures spawned by an unequal distribution of wealth are two major driving forces that are altering the planet in ways that threaten the long-term health of humans and other species on the planet.
Human health is dependent on the healthy functioning of the earth’s ecosystem. These systems would be overwhelmed if all of the earth’s inhabitants were to match the consumption patterns of wealthier nations. Sustainable development requires alterations in the lifestyle of the wealthy to live within the carrying capacity of the environment. To achieve sustainability there is a need for holistic responses to global issues such as urbanization and energy overconsumption, and there is a need for better measures of ecological and social sustainability. “

What are you doing to support sustainable development? Recently we made the difficult decision to eventually move out of Playa Blanca & live in a green development on Saboga in the Pearl Islands-www.islasaboga.com


The developer, Grupo del Sol, promises a low impact green project that invests in recycling, solar power, & modern waste management. They also donate part of their profits to the local community-putting a new roof on the school, hiring another teacher & putting computers in the classrooms. Money is invested in local entrepreneurs with micro loans to support new businesses. And 250 acres-2/3 of the island- will be set aside to remain undeveloped as a nature reserve!

Still the nagging belief that such pristine beauty should remain untouched bothers us. On a recent visit to the island we asked people living there how they felt about the project. They were quite enthused about the prospect of not having to eke out a subsistence living for themselves & hopeful for a better life for their children. Isn’t that what we all want really? Simply to live a comfortable lifestyle BUT simply is the key word-to manage it simply without extreme conspicuous consumption, Below are some cautionary statistics from the website www.worldwatch.org:

“Global Inequities
“People must consume to survive, and the world’s poorest will need to increase their level of consumption if they are to lead lives of dignity and opportunity.”
While the consumer class thrives, great disparities remain. The 12 percent of the world’s population that lives in North America and Western Europe accounts for 60 percent of private consumption spending, while the one-third living in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa accounts for only 3.2 percent.
The consumer society has strong allure and carries with it many economic benefits, and it would be unfair to argue that the advantages gained by an earlier generation of consumers should not be shared by those who come later. Indeed, lack of attention to the needs of the poorest can result in greater insecurity for the prosperous and in increased spending on defensive measures. The need to spend billions of dollars on wars, border security, and peacekeeping arguably is linked to a disregard for the world’s pressing social and environmental problems.
Meeting the Poor’s Basic Needs

• As many as 2.8 billion people on the planet struggle to survive on less than $2 a day, and more than one billion people lack reasonable access to safe drinking water.
• The U.N. reports that 825 million people are still undernourished; the average person in the industrial world took in 10 percent more calories daily in 1961 than the average person in the developing world consumes today.

Curbing Our Wealthy Appetites
“If the consumption aspirations of the wealthiest of nations cannot be satiated, the prospects for corralling consumption everywhere before it strips and degrades our planet beyond recognition would appear to be bleak.”
Despite rising consumption in the developing world, industrial countries remain responsible for the bulk of the world’s resource consumption—as well as the associated global environmental degradation. Yet there is little evidence that the consumption locomotive is braking, even in the United States, where most people are amply supplied with the goods and services needed to lead a dignified life.
The U.S. Consumer

• The United States, with less than 5 % of the global population, uses about a quarter of the world’s fossil fuel resources—burning up nearly 25 % of the coal, 26 % of the oil, and 27 % of the world’s natural gas.
• As of 2003, the U.S. had more private cars than licensed drivers, and gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles were among the best-selling vehicles.
• New houses in the U.S. were 38 % bigger in 2002 than in 1975, despite having fewer people per household on average.

Problems in Paradise
“If the levels of consumption that…the most affluent people enjoy today were replicated across even half of the roughly 9 billion people projected to be on the planet in 2050, the impact on our water supply, air quality, forests, climate, biological diversity, and human health would be severe.”
Today’s human economies are designed with little attention to the residuals of production and consumption. Among the most visible unintended byproducts of the current economic system are environmental problems like air and water pollution and landscape degradation. Nearly all the world’s ecosystems are shrinking to make way for humans and their homes, farms, malls, and factories. WWF’s Living Planet Index, which measures the health of forests, oceans, freshwater, and other natural systems, shows a 35 percent decline in Earth’s ecological health since 1970.
Environmental Impacts of Consumption

Calculations show that the planet has available 1.9 hectares of biologically productive land per person to supply resources and absorb wastes—yet the average person on Earth already uses 2.3 hectares worth. These “ecological footprints” range from the 9.7 hectares claimed by the average American to the 0.47 hectares used by the average Mozambican.

Social Fallout of Consumption
“The failure of additional wealth and consumption to help people have satisfying lives may be the most eloquent argument for reevaluating our current approach to consumption.”
Individuals often face personal costs associated with heavy levels of consumption: the financial debt; the time and stress associated with working to support high consumption; the time required to clean, upgrade, store, or otherwise maintain possessions; and the ways in which consumption replaces time with family and friends.
Aggressive pursuit of a mass consumption society also correlates with a decline in health indicators in many countries, as obesity, crime, and other social ills continue to surge.
Social Impacts of Consumption in the U.S.

• An estimated 65 % of U.S. adults are overweight or obese, leading to an annual loss of 300,000 lives and at least $117 billion in health care costs in 1999.
• In 2002, 61 % of U.S. credit card users carried a monthly balance, averaging $12,000 at 16 % interest. This amounts to about $1,900 a year in finance charges—more than the average per capita income in at least 35 countries (in purchasing power parity).

Consumption and Well-being
“The economies of mass consumption that produced a world of abundance for many in the twentieth century face a different challenge in the twenty-first: to focus not on the indefinite accumulation of goods but instead on a better quality of life for all, with minimal environmental harm.”
Consumer advocates, economists, policymakers, and environmentalists have developed creative options for meeting people’s needs while dampening the environmental and social costs associated with mass consumption. In addition to helping individuals find the balance between too much and too little consumption, they stress placing more emphasis on publicly provided goods and services, on services in place of goods, on goods with high levels of recycled content, and on genuine choice for consumers.
Governments can reshape economic incentives and regulations to ensure that businesses offer affordable options that meet consumers’ needs. They also have a role in curbing consumption excess, primarily by removing incentives to consume—from subsidized energy to promotion of low-density development.
A New Role for Consumption

• Several European governments are implementing or considering reforms to working hours and family leave benefits.
• Industrial countries can help developing nations lower the impact of increased consumption by assisting with the adoption of cleaner, more efficient technologies.
• Governments could rein in high consumption by removing economic subsidies for everything from gas-guzzling vehicles to suburban homebuilding—which total around $1 trillion globally each year.”

End of excerpt.

Eye-opening huh? I was surprised myself at the dire consequences of global unfettered consumerism. Sad to say, looking at the US it certainly does not ensure a better life-more is not better! As a nation we have so much stuff, yet so many grouchy gringos. I only hope the developing nations learn from us & balance material desires with the fun factor. How about instead of: “S/he who dies with the most toys wins” we change it to: “S/he who dies with the most joys wins.”??

One woman we spoke with on Saboga said that since development was inevitable at least this group wanted to do it right…we’ll see won’t we?