What Does “Sustainability” Really Mean?
Every month or so I have a good reason to go to the San Francisco Bay Area, normally for a conference on renewable energy, or perhaps a few meetings with clean energy entrepreneurs or investors. Because I live in the northern part of Santa Barbara County, driving is by far my best option, and my favorite part of this is that the drive provides me with a long period of time (about four hours) to listen to radio programming that I otherwise would have missed.
During my trip up north a couple of weeks back I enjoyed a terrific hour-long conversation on sustainable seafood, in which a panel of three or four experts discussed the matter, then took calls. Here are a few highlights:
What do we mean when we say that a certain set of practices is sustainable? Merely that those practices will guarantee an equivalent amount of biomass of that species year after year? Perhaps, but let’s think about what that means. What if those practices accidentally (but methodically) wind up killing a large number of seals? What if fishermen burn millions of gallons of fuel to get their boats into and back out of the fishing grounds, that, year by year, get farther from land?
What about regulators who “just say no” to catching even 1% of the biomass of fish like the incredibly desirable rock cod that lives in the bays of Northern California. Anything under 5% would sustain that species, and do so with a minimum of other consequences. But the result of this policy is that local restaurateurs can’t get locally caught rock cod, and are forced to ship in the species their customers want from places 8,000 miles from here, in Asia, where, in many places, they have zero regard for sustainable fishing. The politicians in California boast about what they’re doing for the environment, and voters here don’t know the difference; many uninformed people think that all fishing must be bad for the environment.
For me, depressing as this whole thing was, the highlight of the hour was the discussion surrounding a call that came in near the end of the show. Some guy asked, “So are you saying that the word ‘sustainability’ has no real meaning?” I winced when I heard one member of the panel sheepishly agree: “Sure, I guess—all meaning of the word has been lost.”
Immediately after, though, another panel member jumped in, and presented the precise viewpoint I share. He explained that, while the exact variables associated with sustainable rock cod (or sustainable transportation, apparel, etc.) can be debated, we need to keep in mind that honest and decent people regard the concept of sustainability more or less exactly the same. Obviously, killing seals and creating air pollution should carry negative “points” with respect to sustainability. Of course it takes some work to nail down exactly what we mean when we say our processes surrounding catching rock cod are “sustainable,” but that doesn’t mean the term is meaningless. All of us understand in our hearts that we have a responsibility to identify the elements of our lifestyles that harm our environment, and to reduce that damage insofar as we are able. To the degree to which we do that, we’re promoting the concept of sustainability.
Fabulous response. A+. Bravissimo.
