Conclusion
8 This book has focused on the role of government and public policy in hastening the transition to a sustainable economy based on renewable resources. The idea is to examine the ways in which government can influence private sector organizations to manage their operations sustainably. We began Chapter 1 by defining sustainability management. Then, we discussed the evolution of the environmental movement along with the incorporation of the sustainability perspective into our jobs, homes, and social norms. Chapter 2 introduced the role of the public sector in sustainability policy, and outlined a variety of policy tools and regulations that the government can use to ensure that the transition to a renewable economy is well managed. We looked at the government’s role in everything from funding basic science and infrastructure, to providing financial incentives, to building effective public–private partnerships. In the heart of the book, we provided an overview of sustainability policy tools available at the federal, state, and local levels. In Chapter 3, we reviewed federal market-based tools such as the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for renewables and effective environmental regulation such as the Clean Air Act. We also discussed regulatory failures like the BP oil spill and criticized the federal government for its continued support of the fossil fuel industry through the oil depletion allowance. We reviewed a select group of policies around the world to understand what might be feasible here in the U.S. We discussed carbon taxes in Finland and high-speed rail systems in China. In Chapter 4, we focused on initiatives at the state level—the level that David Osborne once termed the “laboratories of democracy.” We not only examined state energy policies such as regional cap and trade and renewable portfolio standards, but also described transportation, wastewater infrastructure initiatives, and climate adaptation programs. In Chapter 5, we observed that cities are at the cutting edge of sustainability initiatives, and are experimenting with energy initiatives, air quality programs, community design, and climate resiliency projects. We provided examples such as innovative active transport systems in Hangzhou, China, brownfield redevelopment in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and a range of initiatives under New York City’s PlaNYC long-term sustainability plan. In Chapter 6 we shifted our focus and detailed the status of efforts to develop standard sustainability metrics. We analyzed the current status of sustainability reporting as well as at the laws that mandate reporting in other nations. We called upon the U.S. government to develop a national commission on sustainability metrics. Without measurement you cannot tell if your management efforts are making the situation better or worse. Without agreed-upon sustainability metrics there can be no sustainability management and no effective sustainability policy. Chapter 7 provides our broad overview of the politics of sustainability. We discussed the increasing partisanship in Washington, the deregulation agenda, and the impact of lobbyists, money, public opinion, and the media on sustainability. Finally, we speculated on the future of sustainability politics, and how an engaged citizen base, flexible policy design, and informed science can have a positive impact, especially at the local level. However, we are focused not only on government’s role in influencing private organizations, but on that of families and individuals as well. This concluding chapter steps back and takes a big-picture view of the change process now underway, moving the U.S. toward a sustainable, renewable-resource–based economy. We provide some concluding thoughts on the process of changing consumption, technology, and political processes. As we make the long transition to a sustainable and renewable economy and culture, a key question is centered on individual responsibility and personal lifestyle. In the end, our individual behavior as consumers has created the sustainability crisis, but the causes of this crisis are far from simple. First, there are many people in dire poverty who would love to have the problem of overconsumption. Second, there are a number of choices that may seem individual, but in fact are highly constrained by the production and infrastructure systems available to us. For most of us, getting back to the land and living at one with nature is not a realistic option. Our livelihoods and lifestyles are found in cities. Nevertheless, we will need to become the change we wish to see, to paraphrase Mahatma Gandhi. Individual choice will influence political, institutional, and economic systems, and those systems in turn will influence individual choices and behavior. Sustainability requires individual- and system-level change, and both are highly interdependent. So, how do we stimulate this change? The leading edge of the dialogue about the global sustainability crisis is climate policy. In U.S. politics, concern about global warming has become a political fault line. Polling indicates that independent voters understand the reality of climate science, but climate science deniers dominate the right-wing base that controls many Republican primary races. Those that do not see a climate crisis tend to also disbelieve the global sustainability crisis. On the environmental side of the divide, we see a diverse coalition, but a common thread in the discussion is that problems can only be solved when we put ourselves on a consumption diet and stop our super-sized, resource-intensive lifestyles. A second but related thread views the problem of extreme poverty in the world as a direct result of overconsumption in the developed world. We should therefore feel guilty when we consume, and if we would only consume less, the world’s poor would get to consume more and the sustainability crisis would go away. For some environmentalists, the sustainability crisis is a moral issue, particularly when it is combined with the growing degree of income inequality here in the U.S. This is not an argument for an era of superficial, unexamined, conspicuous-consumption lifestyles of the rich and famous glamorized by reality TV. We are asking only that people take a hard look at the interconnection between the economic, political, energy, and environmental systems that we depend on. Put simply, while today’s version of economic development damages the environment, when economic growth ends, the working poor are the first to lose their jobs and their families are the first to suffer. Rich people have plenty to buffer them from the impacts of economic contraction but those without wealth have no margin for error. Our economic and political systems are dependent on economic growth. But economic growth can be decoupled from environmental destruction. The answer is not to reduce consumption, but to change it. On an individual level, sustainability relies on different patterns of consumption, not reduced consumption.
Conclusion
The Role of Consumption and Lifestyle in the Transition to Sustainability