The question of how much do we impact upon the environment can be tricky to answer, simply because we are rarely cognisant the consequences of our actions. So much of our impact is hidden from us either through society, or by the organisations who manufacture the products that we use. For example, consider where your rubbish goes, where your sewerage goes, and how water just appears out of your tap as if by magic!

I’ve touched upon many negative aspects that have brought us to the realisation that we have to make a change. On one side of the equation are all the things that we do that have contributed to our predicament, and on the other are all those things that we should be doing in order to live a sustainable life. In an ideal world, we will have the technology and ability to live perfect lives according to the model principles of sustainability. However, right now, we do not have these technologies at our fingertips, therefore we all exist somewhere between these two polarisations.

This is the space where we find ourselves, and it is from here, that we need to focus our efforts, and make incremental gains towards the ever-changing target of sustainability.
The Ego / Eco Paradigm is a method of understanding how we interact with the world, and how to make those much needed incremental gains in our sustainability efforts. According to the Ego / Eco Paradigm, we can divide our actions into two categories depending on the impact.

Ego

These are the actions that offer short term benefits to a minority, while incurring long term negative impacts to the majority. Although we may understand the negative consequences of our decisions, we use the short term economic benefits to ourselves as a justification for our actions. Ego actions cannot continue indefinitely as they are unsustainable.

The Ego mentality:

• Is born out of the idea that mankind has been placed on Earth to dominate, abuse and utilise as we see fit.
• Considers itself as above the laws of nature.
• Considers change as a threat.
• Equates development with consumption.
• Believes that innovation should be a driver of needs and wants.
• Believes in wants before needs.
• Focuses upon limitations rather than possibilities.
• Changes the environment to suit itself.
• This disconnection is responsible for the challenges that we face today.

Eco

In contrast to Ego, Eco actions offer long term economic, environmental and social benefits. These actions are characterised by a sustainable impact which can be absorbed, replenished or reversed through natural processes or human intervention. It must be understood that these actions do not conflict with economic development principles, but rather define an ethos that facilitates economic development. Eco actions are sustainable and can continue indefinitely.

The Eco mentality:

• Is born out of the idea that mankind is connected to the natural world through the universal laws of nature.
• Recognises possibilities rather than limitations.
• Understands that needs should drive innovation.
• Understands that change brings opportunities.
• Understands that we share this world with other animals and rely upon the environment for our existence.
• Changes itself to suit the environment.

Although it may appear simplistic to categorise decisions into Ego or Eco, there are in fact many degrees of Ego-ness and Eco-ness.

Sustainability is a journey that consists of a bold series of steps that are built on change management, innovation and responsible leadership. It is not something that just happens overnight, but rather a process that all organisations and individuals must undertake.
A few years ago, I was taking out my rubbish for collection and decided to have a look at what I was throwing away. Before that moment I had always considered waste as something that I just left out on the street for collection. Something that was not my problem.

I noticed that I was consuming products that came with large amounts of waste either as packaging, or as a result of the product itself. Much of my waste could be separated for recycling, and some of it could go into my garden as compost.

My first question was where could I take my recyclable waste? After a quick search on the Internet, I found a local recycling depot and learnt how to separate the different materials. I created a compost heap in my garden for my organic waste which had the added benefit of returning nutrients back to the soil.

When at the supermarket, I made a conscious decision to choose products that didn’t come with large amounts of waste. This involved choosing products with less packaging, or packaging that I knew could be recycled.

I also noticed that when I put my rubbish bags out on the street, a group of informal recyclers would sort through the rubbish, taking out items that they could sell to a recycler. One morning I sat outside on the curb and waited for them to arrive. I wanted to find out what they were looking for and how I could make it easier for them. The answer was so simple, they were collecting certain plastics and glass for recycling.

Soon after, as I sat in my garden admiring the flowers growing in the well-composted soil, I thought about how to reduce my electricity consumption. After installing a prepaid meter, I could measure how much electricity I was actually using, and also how much each appliance was using. Changing to energy efficient lighting and being conscious of leaving on lights in unoccupied rooms was a cost saving exercise. My fridge stopped working and after failed attempts to get it repaired, I decided to buy a new fridge. Naturally I purchased the most energy efficient fridge I could afford.

Through a process of examining my life in an open and honest way, I managed to reduce my impact which, in turn, reduced my living costs. This drive towards living a more sustainable life, started by learning about the impact of my actions and decisions, and finding out how the problems that I create could be better managed. As a consequence, I have maintained my lifestyle while reducing my impact and saving costs.

If I had to imagine a perfect situation, then I would be growing my own vegetables, generating my own electricity and harvesting rain water. I realise that sustainability is not a quick process, but rather a series of incremental stages towards a goal. The duration of each step differs according to the organisation’s or the individual’s values and beliefs. In the same way that I implemented changes to reduce my impact, organisations must undergo the same transformation.
Regardless of the type or size of an organisation, the pursuit of sustainability consists of the following steps, each with its own challenges and opportunities:

• Denial.
• Compliance.
• Incremental Change.
• Innovation.
• Breakthrough.

The road to sustainability may appear to be a linear journey from one point to another. However, the goals of sustainability change over time. There will never be a time when an organisation becomes 100% sustainable, as there will always be opportunities to be taken advantage of.

The pursuit of sustainability is a never-ending cycle of continuous improvement. As sustainability goals are achieved, external forces may redefine what is achievable, which results in revised targets and goals.

When we think about the value of nature in terms of human perception, an automatic thought process rates one aspect over another. Consider the following ways in which we place value on aspects of the natural world:

• Emotional Value
• Direct Value
• Indirect Value
• Bigger Is Better

To answer the question of how much a natural asset is worth, we need to be more conscious about the importance that it has upon our very existence rather than how much money we can make from it. Once an aspect of the environment is degraded, destroyed or made extinct it’s gone either forever.

Mankind has neither the capacity nor the aptitude to replicate natural systems at the same level that nature does. That takes geological time. Imagine creating a giant weather machine that regulates global weather patterns, or enormous refrigeration plants at the Earth’s poles that prevent the ice from melting. If we could, they would be very useful right now, but the fact is that we cannot and will never be able to. We have to rely on natural systems to regulate global weather patterns and maintain ice at the poles. This is the deceptive power of the human ego.

We have to realise that many aspects of the natural environment are so vital that they fall outside of the anthropological ideology of economics. However, there is another method from which we can place a value upon nature; a method that exemplifies authentic and true value for all – ecosystem services.

If we think about the relationship between the impact that we have, how we consume and the technology that we use, you’ll see that it’s all interconnected. Irrespective of our lifestyle, the amount of money we earn, or where we live on planet Earth, our impact can be expressed as the following equation:

Your Impact = Consumption x Technology

We can easily see that in order to reduce our impact, we must either change our consumption habits, use more efficient technology, or both. Consider how recycling waste, using products with less packaging, using renewable energy sources, replacing light fittings, and consuming locally produced products, provide you with the same “services”, yet at the same time reduce your impact.

How many conservationists does it take to screw in a light bulb? One! Changing a light-bulb is easy; anyone can do it. Using LED lighting will reduce your impact. However, leaving the lights on 24 hours a day will overshadow the benefits of this technology change. If you really want to make a difference, you also have to change your behaviour.
Susan Freinkel wrote in her book, Plastic: A Toxic Love story, “For all the environmental troubles single-use shopping bags cause, the much greater impacts are in what they contain. Reducing the human footprint means addressing fundamentally unsustainable habits of food consumption, such as expecting strawberries in the depths of winter or buying of seafood that are being fished to the brink of extinction.”

Modern man has accomplished many great things. We have been to the moon and back, we fly around the world at supersonic speeds and have even managed to alter life itself in the form of genetically modified organisms. However, if we think that modern civilisation is impervious to the changes that we are all responsible for, that mankind is so ingenious and so resourceful that we can overcome anything that nature challenges us with, then we are mistaken.

Steve Jobs said in his Stanford commencement address in 2005, “You can’t connect the dots looking forward you can only connect them looking backwards”. If we want to understand the future, we have to look to the past.

Human history is littered with the ruins of once advanced civilisations. We only have to look a few thousand years into our past to see the future of our short comings. Consider the demise of the following civilisations that left behind only monuments of their once great and mighty existence.

The Egyptian Empire

The Egyptian empire collapsed partly due to environmental change. They relied so heavily upon the Nile river and its seasonal flooding to provide fertile soil and for water to irrigate their crops. When the climate changed and the Nile ceased its annual flood, crops failed, famine ensued and their magnificent cities were abandoned. As a result, the citizens migrated away from Egypt to more favourable areas.

The Roman Empire

There have been many theories regarding the decay of the Roman empire, ranging from economic troubles (notably inflation), reliance on slave labour, ineffective leadership and political infighting. It is widely believed that the demise of the Roman Empire was a result of social and political issues.

The Mayan Empire

The exact reason for the collapse of the Mayan empire and its 19 million citizens remains a controversial topic of debate. Theories range from alien invasion to peasant revolt. In Jared Diamond’s 2005 book Collapse, it was proposed that environmental change caused drought followed by deforestation. This theory is backed up by archaeological evidence and scientific data.

Easter Island

Around 1200 AD, Polynesians arrived at Easter Island to find the island heavily wooded. Over the next generations, the island underwent a period of deforestation. In his book Collapse, Jared Diamond describes it as the “clearest example of a society that destroyed itself by over exploiting its own resources.” When Captain James Cook visited the island in 1774, he encountered about 700 islanders whose canoes were made from fragments of driftwood.

In Collapse, Jared Diamond listed the most serious environmental problems facing past societies as:

• Loss of habitat or ecosystem services.
• Overfishing.
• Loss of biodiversity.
• Soil erosion and degradation.
• Climate change.
• Population growth.
• Human consumption levels.

Although these past civilisations were more sensitive to environmental factors, the cause of their demise applies as much to modern humans as they applied to the Egyptians, the Romans, Mayans and the inhabitants of Easter Island. The reality is that we are not immune to the effects of the world around us. Our modern lives have exposed us to the same risks as these lost civilisations, and in many instances, have made us more vulnerable.