Blog Task: Sustainability and Capitalism

Sustainability is  a inter and intra generational level in various spheres of society, such as economic or environmental. It is ideologically a communal concept according to Balser (2008). O'Riordan (1998) describes how sustainability is a process about 'coming to terms with sustainability in all its deeply rich ecological, social, ethical and economic dimensions'.

Capitalism is the operation of a laissez-faire economy, a free market, where the individual is free to pursue wealth accumulation for their benefit. Of course the vital fact here is that whatever one gains however, is at a loss to another. Capitalism constantly fails to create wealth globally therefore- it only allows places and people to succeed at the cost of others. Periodically it will demolish those successes to allow others to succeed too. Perhaps this is where capitalism starts to break that though, in that it always looks for new things to commodify. These are often labelled as 'opportunities' in today's society, but in reality it can be described as a crisis of capitalism. The creation of 'new markets' is one way in which people have tried to work with capitalism to achieve both economic and environmental sustainability, and this is discussed later in the analysis of emerging biofuel markets.

Because capitalism is always looking for ways to expand, it results in mass destruction by oligopolies. Look at the rainforests, where deforestation driven by the capitalist interests of companies like McDonald's occurs on a scale where an area the size of Wales is razed annually. Capitalism also locks those living under capitalist regimes into that system- and those who defy it find it difficult to succeed- at least in economic terms. But potentially this is one problem in itself as capitalism teaches us that increased wealth accumulation equals increased happiness.

The crises of capitalism can be embodied in the collapse of Northern Rock, where depositors had their money tied up into a risky capitalist system. Many people were on track to lose tens of thousands of pounds of their own money as a result, saved only by government intervention. Of course even this did not save the economy. Bail outs in the banks helped to part-secure some people's finances, but many people still lost out while the economy continued to shrink. This is a crises of capitalism- that our lives are essentially based on an unstable, risky system susceptible to boom and bust.

This translates into the places we live. During the boom of the late 90s and first part of the 00s, things were looking up for Bradford and regeneration looked to be arriving here as it had in Leeds. As 2007 came, the crises of capitalism became apparent as a major brownfield site was left undeveloped in the city- with no realistic chance of any proposal coming to fruition any time soon. The site is still empty and the proposed shopping centre looks no closer to being built. Many people claim their lives and their city has been ruined by capitalists.

The way the UK government justifies investment is based on 'value for money'; but value is defined by our government as delivering economic benefits. This is a complete failure of policy and a rejection of their role to protect society, not act as an economic safeguarding agency. It is necessary to move away from this idea to achieve sustainability- other EU states have more positive policy in this area and thus have better environmental records, with higher recycling rates, high speed rail and more public transport use and more efficient housing. Value for money must be considered, but in relation to environmental and social benefits as well as economic benefits if we are to move towards a more sustainable lifestyle.

There are some solutions to this crisis, although I find all of them debatable. Balser discusses bio-diesel, or bio-fuel. Branded as a renewable energy source, bio-diesel requires plants to be grown for the sole reason of producing fuel, and requires more plants to be grown. It is also more expensive than normal fuel, so would take a lot of persuading for it to take off in a capitalist system. Balser later mentions that the BIOX plant is at the sacrifice of social equality too, so its introduction could tarnish sustainability in social fields, even if improving it in others.

Sustainability is not compatible with capitalism because it requires the product to be a commodity for it to work- which while working in favour of one place, works against another place or person. Having said this, I can't see any other way in which sustainability can be encouraged in the world at the moment. It must make economic sense for it to be pursued, and only once sustainable schemes are in place on a wide scale could it be pursued against economic favour.