Andrea Hicks, Office of Sustainability

FACULTY | STAFF IMPACT

From the Desk of Andrea Hicks

A monthly column from Andrea Hicks, director of sustainability education and research, an associate professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and the Hanson Family Fellow in Sustainability

Why do we need sustainability?

At one point in the not too distant past, environmental degradation was seen as the cost of doing business — at times, it was even celebrated because it meant a thriving economy. The Cuyahoga River in Ohio, which regularly caught fire, is one example among many. Now we are dealing with yesterday’s solutions to yesterday’s problems which have caused today’s problems. DDT is another famous example; it was used as an insecticide to prevent malaria, the problem of the day, starting in the 1940s. But DDT was itself an environmental pollutant that could impact both animal and human health, and its widespread use brought about Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring and the beginning of the environmental movement. The Haber Bosch process, developed in the early 1900s, allowed for the fixation of atmospheric nitrogen, solving the problem of the day of feeding a growing world population by generating inexpensive synthetic fertilizer. Unfortunately, this solution worked too well and has led to issues such as the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico due to an overabundance of limiting nutrients.

Sustainability allows us to examine how we solve today’s pressing problems without inadvertently creating other problems for future generations to solve. And we have plenty of problems right now: a global pandemic, climate changes, and plastic pollution, to name a few. How we approach these problems today will set the course for future generations.

As we strive for solutions, it’s critical to consider how we can mitigate not just environmental or economic impacts, but societal ones. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, often called the Magna Carta of federal environmental laws, recognized anthropogenic impacts of humans on their environment and stated that the policy of the federal government was “to use all practicable means and measures ... to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations.” Similarly, the Brundtland Commission’s 1987 definition of sustainable development articulated a holistic understanding of the concept: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

This is a crucial expansion of how we address “environmental” issues like pollution and scarcity because it points toward how we can create a society where everyone — not just the privileged few — can participate in solutions and reap the benefits. After all, it is hard for a person to think about stewarding environmental resources in a steadfast manner for the future when they do not have enough to eat or monetary resources to care for their family and themselves. It is not possible for a society to be sustainable without adequately considering all three of the paradigms of sustainability: environment, economy, and society.

Although working towards a more sustainable world may seem hopeless at times, this is my charge to all of you: to not sit idly by and watch the world as it burns, although that would be easier. Take the harder road less traveled and fight the good fight. Because isn’t our world worth saving?