The Limits Of Growth ( Tltg )

Intersectionality between different systems of oppression and domination is relevant to Okereke’s article as he states, “The ‘unavoidability of justice’ in the pursuit of environmental sustainability resides in the fact that environmental issues are not distinguishable but rather interwoven, into the fabric of racial, social and economic injustice.” (Okereke 117). Environmental costs and benefits are often distributed such that those who already suffer other socio-economic disadvantages tend to bear the greatest burden. The co-domination of women and the environment is supported by the current power structure upheld by the dominant narrative that Okereke highlights in his article, which discusses the exploitation, over-production as well as over-consumption of natural resources leading to environmental degradation and global climate change.

Ross McKitrick is a Professor of Economics at the University of Guelph specializing in environment, energy and climate policy. This piece was written for the Journal Academic Matters in 2008. This article was written at a time when climate change and environmental issues were at the forefront of people's minds. Policies were being developed and laws were implemented to reduce greenhouse emissions and control climate change. Ross Mckitrick encourages us to view the environment in terms of specifics rather than on the whole. Using a scientific approach with the support of data may support a very different view of the actual state of specific aspects of the environment. The writer uses logos, pathos and ethos in this article. He uses logos by

It is a process of dehistoricization and deresponsabilization. To abandon the critique to capitalism, when it is most needed, since its logic is the main cause of the imminent human catastrophe, is the major fault of contemporary social science, the failure to confront the historical momentum in a stubborn denial of the importance to engage critically with the reality of the environment. (The Ecological Rift, Foster, p. 31).

Since the dawn of mankind, clusters of innovations throughout history have allowed for societal progression at an explosive rate. While primarily fostering a centrifugal system of advancements; humans’ interests in expansion is spiraling out of control. Throughout history elements of collapse can be traced through civilizations and natural resources. Wright’s argument posits humans have hyperextended their utilization of resources at a rate that cannot be replenished, therein by setting up the world for the largest ecological collapse in history (Wright, 2004, pg. 130-131). Due to the cyclical process of past collapse and reformation humans have an advantage to rectify our current consumption rates ultimately avoiding a fate similar to past societies (Wright, 2004, pg. 131). As such Wright’s argument should frame larger discussions of responsible citizenship.

“Many current discussions about sustainability focus on the ways in which human activity...can be maintained in the future without exhausting all of our current resources… there has been a close correlation between the growth of human society and environmental degradation - as communities grow, the environment often declines” (603).

Instead of focusing on the individual, “ecological economics invites us to picture ourselves not as isolated individuals but as housemates” (McFague 132). This model has two goals striving for sustainability and distributive justice which will allow for the earth’s resources to be sustained for future generations. McFague feels that the ecological economic system will provide an efficient system that will suit and support the needs of the world.

That being said, Orr also suggests alternate views in his essay, reporting that, “Arguments for technological sustainability rest heavily on beliefs that humans [as economic maximizers] are incapable of the discipline implied by limits.” He refers to advocates of technological stability who relate humans and human behavior to the model of the “economic man”. The Economic Man Model regards humans as unbeknownst to all limits - including those of sufficiency, sanitation, and appropriateness (Orr 25). These humans are not necessarily concerned with the ecological ramifications unless it is in their their best interest. In contradiction to what seem to be his own views, this view of technological sustainability he presents falls beneath the umbrella of the dominant paradigm of economic growth.

Within this chapter Bell explains the concept of ‘The Treadmill of Production’, where capitalism 's core impulse to expand production without regard to natural limits of growth set by the biosphere. This impulse makes the process of capital accumulation inherently unsustainable and anti-ecological. According to Bell and the Treadmill of Production model, developments in technology, primarily encouraged by owners of the means of production seeking to increase profits, drive the expansion of production and consumption simultaneously. This process leads to a cycle of production demanding more production, because all sectors of society (the state, organized labour, and private capital) depend on continued economic growth to solve problems, such as unemployment generated by mechanization, which are created by growth itself. As more production is required to keep up with demand so too is the increase and acceleration of ecological demands. The advanced capitalist economies are so unsustainable because production is secured into this capitalist treadmill of never-ending expansion and growth for growth 's sake.

The earths resources are finite and we are very close to meeting the earths carrying capacity. We created the era of a constant want and desire for material products which has created the concept of supply and demand; which inevitably led to corporations to go multinational, also known as transitional companies. These transitional companies are what have created sweat shops in third world countries therefore we are not only destroying our own resources to fill this supply and demand, we are also creating an idea of power and dominance over ourselves which has ultimately led to economic disparity. We should be trying to salvage our resources and share amongst ourselves of whatever we have left, not using everything until it’s gone and leaving people better off than others. This constant want and desire for materialistic items has blinded us, forgetting every time we create a phone or a laptop we are taking from the earth and what we are taking can not be replenished.

4. In one of the quotes, the University of Tennessee Chattanooga staff discusses the different roles of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. What are the differences between the three outlets and how can your program use

She reviews the history of environmental progress. In the 1980s there was political movements and changes in environmental activism. However, with the emergence of neoliberal capitalism, there has been an escalation in environmental destruction (increase in greenhouse gas emissions). The first part of the book, she critiques free market fundamentalism, conservative politics and climate change denial, corporate opposition to regulation, the conflict between international trade agreements and renewable energy, the global outsourcing

After the industrial revolution the Earth left its sustainability (Holocene) era to enter an uncertain future. The Anthropocene period involves the Earth’s well-being since this period of sustainability ended and the Earth has become more susceptible to the destructive ways of its human inhabitants. A group of twenty-eight scientist have recently (2009) gathered to devise a way to ensure humans do not continue their trend towards irreversible damage. These scientist came up with the framework for defining a reasonable range for humans to work in. Passing these thresholds could mean effects to local and regional problems to global effects depending on which boundaries are pushed. These planetary boundaries, with each threshold threat stated,

This book is the story of an opportunistic approach to remedy and adapt to the drastic changes humanity has caused to the Earth while also embracing the role humans play in the Anthropogenic era. Humans will always continue to build environments, but the concern now is how are we going to build better environments. These issues will challenge humanity and question our values. How we build the environment around us in the future will be based on whether or not embracing the Anthropogenic era will indeed lead to a sustainable planet or just be a quick fix to the deeper issues of human behavior that have led us astray from maintaining a sustainable planet.

In the late eighteenth century, Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus described how human population, when unchecked, grows exponentially while resources (specifically food) exhibits arithmetical growth (Moseley, Perramond, Hapkie, & Laris, 2014). Malthus primarily blamed the poor for high fertility rates and argued for the abolishment of all welfare, believing that if the poor succumbed to the negative effects of poverty, overpopulation could be stopped. While this may seem a distasteful solution to modern environmentalists, one cannot completely erase population from the environmentalist equation. Despite the technological advances that rendered much of Malthus' musings passé, one cannot ignore the idea that the carrying capacity of earth loom unknown

The concept of ‘sustainable development’ is one that has faced heated debates for decades now. A seemingly harmless concept, it raises a lot of questions as to what it really entails and how exactly it can be achieved. But with more than 1.3 billion people living in abject poverty (less than $1.25 a day), and with a reported 22,000 children dying every day as a result of poverty (UNICEF), the debate for Sustainable Development becomes interesting as it questions the extremity of economic growth policies, in the war against poverty. Many note economic growth and development as the only tool for poverty alleviation. Roemer and Gugerty, for example, report that GDP growth of 10% per year is associated with income growth of 10% for the poorest 40% of the population. However, others question the extent to which economic growth should be put above other socio-economic factors. Lele points out that the focus on economic growth has led to important ecological and social sustainability, taking the backseat. He argues that due to strong emphasis on economic growth, not enough attention is paid to social equity, and economic stability within the development discourse.