Sustainability?

I unwittingly assumed that I would have a better understanding of the definition of sustainability after this class, but the more I know the less able I seem to be to define it. A catch-all term, sustainability is used by environmentalists, corporations, and governments to mean a variety of different things. These definitions often contradict one another, but everyone is kept happy by the word because they can use the definition which they like the most. In the Curren article, ten different types of sustainability are outlined, each with a modifying adjective that would seem to dictate the definition more so than the word it modifies.

Because it is so amorphous everyone has their own definition of sustainability, and so attempting to take into account all I’ve learned here is my best personal definition of sustainability. When I think of sustainability “reduce, reuse, recycle” still comes to mind immediately. But this is simply a way of life incorporating a mindset of sustainability. Sustainability is a much broader word, including not only a path and way of life, but also a goal. Even the goal of sustainability is somewhat amorphous. This goal is a continuous goal as one must continue the practices used to “achieve” this goal once it is reached. But I do feel like sustainability can be a goal, just one that continues to compound each time it is reached. As Zoë mentioned in her first blog, infinity is a fitting symbol when describing sustainability. Basically, to be truly sustainable, a process must be able continue infinitely. But then when describing sustainability in the world at this point, we cannot call anything truly sustainable. We would like to put all our hopes on technology, but even this has a cost. Thus, this definition of sustainability is a bit unrealistic and idealistic in practice. Yet, we do need something to aspire to and the cyclical feel of infinity is perfection. To me, the word sustainability will never include being one with the land. This is probably because I have been influenced by traditional views of sustainability and the way in which past and present governments define it. We can and should base models off of nature’s perfectly cyclical processes while trying to live more in harmony with the land, but as much as I wish sustainability could include that oneness with the land I do not feel like it does right now. That is one of the problems with the word sustainability, although to some people it does mean achieving a better state with the environment we are a part of, to most, sustainability is almost solely focused on humans and looks at the environment as a place of resources- renewable and nonrenewable. Due to this fact we may never reach the full meaning of the word sustainability because without that appreciation and connection to the Earth we will not be able to connect all the dots. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe there is hope for humanity and this beautiful Earth which we live on. But I also think it will take a lot for us to change, and I worry that if the bar is set too high people will feel as though it is unattainable and thus not worth attempting to achieve. Then we will never reach our goal of “sustainability” (however you define it).