Sustainable development is an
oxymoron. It is the idea that the economy can continue to grow without harming the environment. What is
economic development? My simplistic answer is that it is what happens when the economy grows. The central question to me is: can the economy grow without increasing
consumption? If the answer is yes then I'll shutup, but I believe the answer is "no" and this means that
development is necessarily unsustainable.
Sustainability
The next most important question is: what is sustainable? Or more specifically: what is a sustainable economy? It is a manner of making a living in which consumption of resources is equal to or below that which the land has the ability to produce. The end result is a situation in which the ability of the land to produce either remains the same over time or actually increases. This means that there exists a natural limit to consumption. Push the system to far and it collapses, as our history has shown time and time again.
This also implies that unless a particular landbase has a population lower than it's ability to sustain, there can be no exportation of resources. Sustainability is all about the local landbase. Can a given region provide for itself without requiring the importation of resources? If not, chances are someone or something is being exploited. An economy characterized by the importation of resources is called imperialist or sometimes colonial. Feeding a population which has outgrown the ability of it's landbase to feed requires this population to either decline or pursue a program of conquest. Hence, an empire and civilization itself has its beginnings in the degradation of the land and is unsustainable. Desert dogs the heels of civilization. As evidence I submit the history of civilizations which is incredibly unstable in which huge empires are created and then subsequently collapse.
The lesson is that there exists natural limits to population. While a given population can out pace the capacity of it's landbase to sustain for a time, it does so at its peril. As the long term ability of the land to support a population declines rapidly. The key process here is erosion. Intensive agriculture destroys the soil through plowing, monocultures which decrease biodiversity of the soil, and population pressures which push farming into marginal land such as hill slopes which erode rapidly.
In conclusion, in any conversation about sustainability what is key is: a self-sufficient local economy in which the land is enriched with each passing year and which is able to keep its population within the ability of it's landbase to sustain. What I believe is important is the discussion on how to get there from here. What is clear is that we need to see a dramatic reduction in consumption and consequently a dramatic decline in economic activity coupled with a decline in the human population of a given landbase. The easiest and most realistic prospect is also probably very shocking: intentional economic collapse. Please discuss.