| |
|
|
|
|
|
Saturday, June 25, 2011
The 2011 Sustainability Congress attracted as many as 400 participants, from such diverse sectors as business, government, academia, NGOs and local residents, including youth, to discuss the challenging path to sustainability.
"It speaks volumes about the commitment the people of Metro Vancouver have that so many people volunteered their time on a summer Saturday morning to help us plot the way forward,” Chair Jackson said. “This is just the kind of collaboration we need.”
Participants were asked to discuss five current and future global uncertainties - food, climate change, energy, dematerialization and security – in a series of break-out sessions and to provide direction on two core questions: where must we focus time and resources in order to arrive at the future we want, and who should lead the charge? Voting later occurred in the closing Plenary on the priorities for action and whether it should be local, national or international agencies to lead the charge.
The voting results indicated that most of the participants believed that Metro Vancouver should play a central role in addressing each of the global uncertainties that were presented. “My take on that is the participants recognized that we need more collaborative action in these areas and people have come to see Metro Vancouver as the most capable and appropriate agency to bring about that collaborative process.” said Congress Moderator and Metro Vancouver Commissioner and Chief Administrative Officer Johnny Carline.
 Congress Voting Results
COMMENT CARDS
Discussion during the break-out sessions focussed on the five conference themes (food, climate change, energy, dematerialization, security), however, participants were also encouraged to provide any additional thoughts or ideas on the conference themes or other sustainability topics on comment cards provided at the conference. The comments provide valuable input to the Congress; all comments have been faithfully transcribed and attached.
 Comment Cards |
|
WATCH THE CONGRESS
The Congress was live streamed and will be broadcast on Shaw TV Sunday July 10 at 9pm. Repeating at Saturday July 16 at 4pm, Sunday July 17at 3pm and Saturday July 23 at 9am
Watch the Full Congress Video
|
|
Report to Metro Vancouver Board of Directors
On July 15, 2011, the 2011 Sustainability Congress outcomes were reported to the Metro Vancouver Board of Directors.
 View the full Board Report
|
|
DISCUSSION FORUM
Share your thoughts and continue the conversation. |
|
|
 | | | I think we should find a way to encourage businesses to turn off the office light when the last person lock up the door. Every time I drive downtown at night and I look up while stopping at red light, I can see empty offices with lights on. | | | | | | Okay, so I learned a lot more than what dematerialization is — and it’s not when someone on Star Trek vaporizes, then reappears in regular form. It is the process of directing more activities “to achieve an improved quality of life that is not based on increased consumption of materials, will allow continued economic growth, and help redress the imbalance in resource consumption between industrialized and industrially less developed countries” ... http://www.heatherconnblogs.com/category/environment/ | | | | | | “Sustainability is the process, not justthe product”- Lois Jackson.
Jackson, Chairof the Metro Van Board of Directors, started off the day with this powerfulphrase that was the continuous theme throughout this year’s Metro VancouverSustainability Congress. It was inspiring to see so many adults and citizensinterested in voicing their opinion about the route that Metro Van should taketowards sustainability, and the huge turn out showed that it is an importantissue. Following listening to a led panel discussion, there were round tablediscussions in small groups about the five themes: food, climate change,energy, dematerialization and security. Although at times intimidating, havingan open discussion on topics around sustainability with adults, instead of theusual, fellow teens, was not only educational but also extremely interesting tolisten to, especially with the variety in point of views. Having thisdiscussion stressed the importance of “Sustainability being a process”, andshowed how such a huge variety of citizens- from a teenager to a retiredarchitect to a businessman- are all a part of that unique and continuousprocess. Although there were five different topics, many of them tie intogether and rely on each other. Through the voting, it was clear that for themajority, Metro Vancouver should lead the charge, and that all of these issuesare local priorities. It’s interesting though, because whether Metro Vancouverleads the charge, or if it’s a “local agency” or the provincial or federalgovernment, it is always, always going to come back to the citizens. It isimpossible for any of these forces to make a change without the citizensputting effort into not only accepting the change but being a part of it. As a youthwho is interested in sustainability and who wants to be a part of this shiftand change, I think that a priority apart from the five topics is awareness.It’s important for everyone to be entirely aware about these issues, and Iwould love to see all of these issues be put more into the curriculum atschools. If at the grass roots level, people were educated on these issues,then any sort of change would become immensely easier. So a question is, how dowe make sure that everyone becomes a part of this change? Especially becauseour entire region is very multicultural, how do we reach to all cultures andall people, and how do we make sure that sustainability becomes important ineveryone’s lives? How do we make sure that everyone becomes a part of the processof sustainability? | | | | | |
And here is a link to the U.K. Sustainable Development Commission's 2009 report, Prosperity without Growth:
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications.php?id=914
| | | | | | Here is a video of the TED talk in which Tim Jackson discusses the issues address by the Sustainable Development Commission's 2009 report, Prosperity without Growth
http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_jackson_s_economic_reality_check.html
| | | | | | Tim Jackson discussed dematerialization in Prosperity without Growth. "The idea," he argued, "is still essentially an appeal to decoupling [of resource consumption from GDP growth]." "The fundamental question," Jackson asked, "is this: can you really make enough money from these activities to keep an economy going. And the truth is we just don't know. We have never at any point in history lived in such an economy."
In other words, the chief selling point of dematerialization is precisely that it is so vague and unknown that it can mean whatever people want it to mean. By contrast, working less and consuming less seem to have clear, unambiguous meanings that many people mistake for "doing without" without realizing that many of the things they would have to do without are things they don't really want anyway and that diminish, rather than enhance their quality of life.
The big contradiction here is reflected in the Congress program's assertion that dematerialization "will allow continued economic growth." So, what do we need growth for? In a word: jobs. Economists have argued since the 1940s that because of gains in the productivity of labour, the only way to maintain full employment is through economic growth.
Is there another way to create jobs? Yes there is, by sharing work instead of creating ever more of it. In fact, work sharing would itself be a type of dematerialization of the economy. But mention work sharing in many venues and the reaction will be swift and brutal. "That's a fallacy!" "It will ruin the economy." In short, "dematerialization" will only be accepted by some people as long as it means business-as-usual and business-as-usual means consuming ever more resources, along with their environmental impacts.
Yes, it would be possible to "redefine" economic growth so that it means something completely different. Then we could have "growth" that was environmentally sustainable. But that would be like getting a dog and naming it "Cat" if you were allergic to cats. Sure, you would then have a Cat -- that is to say a dog named Cat -- but you still wouldn't have a cat.
| | | | | Triage, my friend, air first!
| | |
| | | | "Three billion more people are going to be on this planet [by 2050],"
says Stuart Orr, manager of the Freshwater Footprint Project for the
World Wildlife Fund. "Somehow, we're going to have to use
the same amount of water we use today"
This is a scary thought. Water conservation is an important issue that affects every aspect of life. In Canada, we are second only to the United States in water consumption per capitia. There is a pervading feeling that we have an endless supply of water as we are seemingly surrounded by it. Of all the water on earth only 1% is actually drinkable.
Water is an issue that influences all five of the congresses global uncertainties. After all, water is life, and the rest is just details!!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | If fossil fuel subsidies are distorting price signals than it must also be true that the same argument can be applied to renewables.. | | | | | One of the biggest problems with fossil fuels is that the price does not reflect the external costs (in global warming, pollution, etc.). | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | I am a little perplexed and tad bit dissapointed that all of the summits' 'silos' dance around the issue of ecolgical health and natural capital but there is no space given to it on its own on the day. All of what we are talking about is dependent on maintaining a healthy, resilient biosphere, maintaining biodversity and ecological goods and services. If we cannot sustain and preserve these systems and be more visionary and strategic about our species relatiosnhip to the rest (which we depend upon for all of our resources), it's all moot isn't it?!
| | | | | | | | | | | In recruiting panellists for our Congress, Metro Vancouver sought to ensure an appropriate balance. Our initial panel included two women – Tamara Vrooman and Wendy Grant-John. Unfortunately Ms. Grant-John, and more recently Ms. Vrooman, needed to withdraw. Participants who are registered for the Congress, and will have the opportunity to contribute to its outcomes, reflect the gender and ethnic diversity of the region.
Metro Vancouver | | |
| | | |
- Sustainability is not sufficient; resilience is required. We must reform our practices and restore our environment.
- Our regional behaviour will have little direct impact at the macro scale on our biosphere. However, we can both improve our quality of life in innumerable small ways by local planning and action, and can model best practices at a global scale.
- Climate change is the existential march of folly of the ages as we knowingly, brazenly approach the precipice. Impacts of increasing extreme weather events are devastating urban and rural areas. Poverty amplifies the impacts as the poor are relegated to flood plains, broken shorelines and unstable hillsides with inadequate infrastructure and food scarcity.
- Reaction to September 11/01 continues to threaten civil liberties; consider the global quarantine that would attend a 50 mil death pandemic.
- Pluralism and intercultural communication can illuminate the positive interdependence of differences necessary to share common ground. Our region is well constituted to demonstrate this opportunity.
- Green energy cost does not exceed that of the conventional when all negative externalities are internalized, life cycle operational cost savings of new technologies are capitalized, and subsidies for dirty energy are replaced with penalties. Former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern positively compared the economic cost of reducing GHG emissions to failing to do so.
- Dematerializing the economy. "Throughout our economy, skills, intelligence and creativity are replacing mass and money--which is why, in the past 50 years, the value of our economy has tripled, while physical weight of our economy as a whole has barely increased at all." Al Gore, 1999.
- Research universities, through integrating sustainability principles into their full range of courses, linking academic research to campus operations, partnering with public and private financial and technology interests, and having the ability to plan and manage the use of their academic lands can become living labs to inform broader interests.
I look forward to joining you all for the Congress.
Stephen Owen, QC, PC
Vice President, External, Legal and Community Relations
The University of British Columbia | | | | | | At the Beyond Growth conference in Berlin, May 20-22, there was a
penetrating discussion of the relationship between the idea of the
commons and the ecological and social justice dilemmas posed by growth. Silke Helfrich was a speaker at a panel discussion on "Market, Plan and Solidarity Economy" at has presented a valuable and concise summary of some of the main themes for that discussion at her CommonsBlog.
http://commonsblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/03/commons-beyond-growth/
I will copy the first few sections below:
Summary
- Commons reduce money-induced growth because they make us more
independent of money. The more we produce commons, the less we or the
state has to pay for goods.
- Commons reduce population-induced growth because they are associated with a multiplicity of sufficiency strategies which create prosperity by sharing.
- Commons escape the growth compulsion, because all those things that
are produced as commons, do not have to be made artificially scarce. And
there is no incentive for artificial scarcity because commons are not
produced as goods to be exchanged but they foster and maintain social
relationships, satisfy needs and solve problems. Directly.
Thus far the vision of the future – but we have not got there yet. In
the here and now a lot more must be thought through, discussed and
fought for. Therefore, in what follows I will briefly give my reasoning.
„The truth is that there is as yet no credible, socially-just,
ecologically sustainable scenario of continually growing incomes for a
world of nine billion people.“ according to economist Tim Jackson (Jackson 2011: 98) who recently
created stir with his book „Prosperity without Growth“. Jackson works
through calculations which demonstrate why the idea that we can continue
to grow as we have before is an impossibility.
What does the immediate problem consist of?
The capitalist market economy has achieved some things but failed in important respects. I just want to mention three of these
1. It cannot succeed in satisfying the basic material needs of many people, nor can it meet the immaterial needs of all people.
2. It is inefficient and ineffective in preserving natural resources.
3. It systematically destroys jobs.
There is a connection between these problems. In general, paid
employment is the single means people have to access money. Money is, in
turn, to an increasing extent the only means to get what we need in
order to acquire the basic provisions of life. Or, to put it more
precisely, in the current economic system it is the only valued means.
That’s the reason it is customary to regard ourselves as needing above
all paid employment even though what we actually want is to be alive,
active, creative. We want simply to satisfy our needs. Many describe
what we seek for as contentedness. Others go at it more strongly and
call it „happiness“.
For decades political thinking of every kind has thus been fixated on
job creation. This has narrowed viewpoints, blunted analysis and
truncated the argument. In fact the job creation argument has pretty
much destroyed meaningful thinking and practical, creative steps towards
a “good life”. This does not lack a certain irony, but it lacks logic,
because if the economy grows so too do real wages and salaries (at least
they should), which in turn encourages companies to invest in
technologies that make workers redundant. Work productivity therefore
rises faster than resource use productivity. (1) In short, to remain
competitive companies must save: jobs! Do you remember and we return to
mentioning problem number 3? The capitalist market economy
systematically destroys jobs.
This way of running the economy can only fail to solve the
above-mentioned long term and structural problems. However, in the short
term it can grow, grow, grow.
| | | | | Could you please give a brief description and some examples of what "commons" are? thanks. | | | | | A commons is a shared resource and the rules and institutions that enable that sharing. Elinor Ostrom, who won the Swedish Bank Prize in honor of Alfred Nobel in Economics in 2009 gives many case study examples of common resource management. They often deal with collective management forests, fisheries or water supplies. Such collective management may be sanctioned by government, but the government is not the enforcer of the commons regulation.
| | | | | | Here is a video that explains the commons concept:
http://vimeo.com/25486271
| | |
|
| | | | "Efficiency" looms large in any discussion of the energy future along with "renewables". There are crucial difficulties with each of these solution paths. In the case of efficiency, the rebound effect, or Jevons paradox, raises questions about whether relative decoupling of GDP growth from energy consumption can ever lead to absolute decoupling, which is what is necessary to deal with both climate change and peak oil. In the case of renewables, they only remain renewable at some defined scale. You cannot simply increase the consumption of renewables <i>ad infinitum</i>.
Economists will point out, correctly, that the extent of the rebound effect is an empirical question, not an a priori theoretical one. What they overlook though is the linkage of the rebound effect to the familiar principle in economics whereby increases in the productivity of labour through the introduction of labour saving technology ultimately results in an expansion of employment rather than a contraction. The generality of the latter principle is also an empirical question. Unfortunately, the evidence is that there is over time a secular increase in the amount of energy required to employ each person in the labour force. When people talk optimistically about the decreasing energy intensity of GDP, they are ignoring the elephant in the room: the INCREASING energy intensity of employment.
| | | | | | Given the major part that gas/diesel powered vehicles play in contributing to air & noise pollution, I would like to see incentives for the use of EVs (electric vehicles). These could be offered by all three levels of government but at the regional level they could be offered in the form of building codes requiring the provision of electric charge points in new buildings, dedicated car parking spaces, free/reduced parking fees, reduced sales tax, etc. I look forward to further discussion on these possibilities. | | | | | Hybrid vehicles are a step in the right direction as well, so if there are any incentives for electric vehicles offered, it would be encouraging to also have hybrid vehicles included.
And incentives for those who have already purchased/leased electric or hybrid vehicles (they are ahead of the game and should be 'incented' just as much as those just getting into the game).
We do need to keep in mind, though, that electric vehicles are not as fantastic a solution as first thought - as what form of energy is being used to produce that electricity (run of river? building of dams? coal? other?) | | | | | Electric vehicles could be a HUGE benefit in that they can be recharged overnight, thereby serving as a giant collective battery - currently we 'spill' power and water from our hydro electric generation, during off peak (night time) hours - recharging electric vehicles between 1am and 5am would help 'stabilize' electricity use and perhaps even stabilize demand so that bringing on new sources (solar, tidal, wind) would be more manageable. | | | | | | I think the gov't should give indivdual or business a bigger incentive/rebate to use hybrid vehicles and a higher carbon tax for using traditional gasoline vehicle. So many people avoid to purchase hybrid vehicles because the purchase price is usually a few thousands more than regular cars. If hybrid vehicles can be bought at the same price as regular cars, or even cheaper, then the majority of the population would rather buy hybrid cars. | | |
| | | | If the average electric vehicle or hybrid contains 200 - 400 lbs of copper then how realistic is it to assume that there be a sustainable supply of copper at the price point needed to support the mass manufacture of these vehicles, including adding the external environmental cost of all the new mines? | | |
| | | |
One of the key factors in maintaining a healthy Metro Vancouver is to ensure we can produce the food we need here in the region. High fuel costs drive up the cost of food that must be shipped here from around the world. In addition, climate change is affecting the quality and quantity of crops in many areas making certain food items very expense if they can even be found in some markets.
We are fortunate to have excellent farm land and farmers right here in our backyards. In addition to being able to farm a wide variety of fruits, vegetables and herbs, we also have a number of local producers such as bakers, wineries, cheese makers, as well as beef, pork and chicken/egg farmers.
Commercial food production is extremely important and we should all be supporting local growers and producers but there is a growing movement in Metro Vancouver towards urban farming -- this type of food production takes place in backyards, community gardens and even on unused public green space.
At Vancity, we feel so strongly about local food production that we have made it one of our focus areas. We invest in members that produce, process, distribute and promote local and organic food and that reach local consumers by selling or serving this food. Not only do we want these members to have successful businesses, but we want to support a food system based on local and organic foods that contribute to:
- a sustainable and healthier environment by protecting the diversity of both plants and animals, sustaining agricultural lands, reducing our carbon footprint and avoiding damage to our natural resources
- improving our individual health through increasing access to better quality, safer and more nutritious food for all residents
- building a stronger and more resilient local economy that is less reliant on foreign markets for our food
By Tamara Vrooman, CEO Vancity | | | | | With regard to backyard urban farming I think we need to discuss the disease threat posed by the handling and disposal of animal wastes and bedding materials, as well as measures to control invasive species | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share this page
Add bookmark to google
Add to yahoo.com
Add to del.icio.us tags
Share in facebook
Add to digg.com
Add bookmark to simpy
Add bookmark to technorati
Add bookmark to newsvine
What are social bookmarks