Essay about the Environment We Live in

In the twenty-first century, where all the states in the global environment struggle to achieve primacy and supremacy over the other states, development in terms of economy and military might be crucial. Every state tries to gain as much military and economic power to influence others as it can based on the resources they have at hand. Lamentably, this development often comes with an environmental loss due to the uncontrolled extraction of natural resources, production, and consumption. This environmental loss is equally essential to consider when discussing development because it is directly associated with the state's survival. The consequent impacts that humans face are more gruesome than any other ailment existing on the Earth. Therefore, when discussing the development of the state, the incorporation of environmental conditions is also essential (Everett et al., 2010, 28).

In this regard, a question arises that if environmental damage is associated with economic development, then the development of a state itself is not possible without damaging the environment. Various schools of thought address this question, and each has its justified explanation. However, to better understand the underlying essence of the issue, it is imperative to define and explain development's meaning in its true sense.

Development is the rise in anything or anybody's pre-existing situation in the most specific words (Meyer, 1993, 20). When we talk about the development of a state, we must understand that a state does not only include the economic sector. Instead, it also incorporates society and the physical environment. In a state, proper development occurs not when the territory of the state is expanded, or the political rule is stabilized. It occurs when the population associated with that state experiences a change in its socioeconomic conditions positively. Hence, social rights include access to clean and fresh air, health care services, clean drinking water, access to education, and a sense of security. All these rights are fulfilled when the economic conditions are stabilized, and the GDP per individual is reasonable. This financial stability, in turn, is achieved by utilizing natural resources and conserving them for long-term use. As a result, the three sectors are entwined in an intricate web, and when we want to achieve development in a true sense, we ought to consider all three sectors in our planning and policy (Hens, 2019, 55).

Related to this is the concept of sustainable development, which explains the focused question and tells us that indeed a state can undergo development without damaging the environment in which the population lives and on which we are directly dependent on surviving. The concept of sustainable development states that the existing people on Earth do not own this planet. Instead, we borrow it from the future generation, and therefore, it is our responsibility to maintain it in the best-suited condition for future human beings (Hens, 2019, 57). For this purpose, the goal of sustainable development incorporates the three sectors described earlier to become interdependent. This interdependency makes it possible to undergo development in terms of the economy while preventing environmental and social damage. This way, sustainable development defines development as economically feasible, socially viable, and environmentally friendly. This means that an actual development would occur when the cost associated with it in terms of finance would be manageable, and the social integrity is maintained. The environment is conserved and preserved for a more extended period (Shah, 2008, 45). This point is also highlighted by Richard Price, Chief economist of DEFRA as follows:

“Economic and environmental performance must go hand in hand. The natural environment is central to economic activity and growth, providing the resources we need to produce goods and services, and absorbing and processing unwanted by-products in the form of pollution and waste. Environmental assets contribute to managing risks to economic and social activity, helping to regulate flood risks, regulating the local climate (both air quality and temperature), and maintaining the supply of clean water and other resources.” (Everett, et al, 2010, 5).

Although implementable, this concept is also faced with certain skepticism regarding its validity. In this regard, there are two different opinions on whether development is possible without degrading the environment. One of these is that of deep ecologists, and the other is related to the Promethean mindset.

The deep ecologists keep nature and its protection at the center of their attention and claim that being the most developed species, it is the responsibility of humans that they protect and preserve the natural life as well as the resources on earth. They believe that true development occurs only when we learn to incorporate nature to plan our actions and strive to conserve nature as much as we can. Being superior beings, we don't need to overlook their presence and extract uncontrollable benefits from them to the extent that results in their extinction and exhaustion. This way, we are not fully developed. If a state condones these acts and utilizes all the available resources, it will soon experience insufficiency and harsh conditions. In this regard, the example of some highly developed states is suitable to understand the consequences of development by harming nature (Saleem and Jose, 2019, 7). The states like the US, China, India, and Europe are high emitters of pollutants and carry a high consumption rate in terms of natural resources. Their actions indeed made them economically and politically superior. Still, they pose a serious threat to living beings by altering the planet's physical and biological mechanisms. The threat posed by climate change is so immense that it is now topping the list of the international system's security agendas. All the countries agree upon the consequences if this issue is not resolved or tackled in time. It threatens the existence of humans as well as other living species. The extraction of resources such as oil, natural gas, and coal to utilize them for economic development causes irreversible land and water degradation, ultimately impacting human health (Hens, 2019, 80).

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Moreover, the increasing events of smog, floods, extreme weather events, heatwaves, and wildfires are due to the growing temperature of the planet's growing temperature, which is directly caused by greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide. Therefore, it is evident that if we do not consider the environmental impacts of the development policies, then the economic well-being and power achieved would only be short-termed and would eventually result in loss of property and life. This means that without environmental consideration, there would be no development in the true sense (Gough and Smith, 2015, 73).

The Promethean mindset keeps humans at the center of focus and argues that nature knows the ways of mending environmental damage, and the resources are exclusively provided to us to utilize them in any manner to achieve development. They argue that true development cannot occur without degrading the environment, and because nature is well aware of this fact, it has devised a mechanism to correct the damage being done (Shah, 2008, 3). Promethean scholars argue that it is not possible to consider the concept of sustainable development in the highly competitive international environment. It is simply not feasible. The world is operating under the principles of realism, and every state operates in a manner that ensures its power development concerning the other states. These states work to attain power and influence because the system is not trustworthy, and each state should strive to ensure its security in this anarchic system. For this, the utilization of the resources is the key regardless of the manner of its consumption. They also argue that if one state considers environmental conservation and slows down its economic development, it would be at a loss because other states might not think like this (Hens, 2019, 33).

Moreover, they do not take social integrity as a separate component of development. It is generally believed that with immense economic prosperity, the services of healthcare, education and social integrity, and security would automatically be provided and would not cause any disruption. In terms of the environment, nature would swipe the footprints caused by human activities as it has always done, and if some gap persists, then with economic investment, it can be mended. In simple words, the Promethean school of thought promotes the idea that whatever resources are provided to us by nature, including the floral and faunal biodiversity, is for humans' well-being. Therefore, it is not our responsibility to worry about the needs of future generations. They believe that nature has a plan set for future species as well, and when the time comes, they will find ways of extracting the resources and ensuring their survival. The resources are sufficient for all the coming generations. It is just not fully discovered. They argue that for true development, it is essential that we enhance our economic capacity to learn more about these resources rather than being conservative and not fully utilizing our potential (Nick et al., 2020, 10). This was negated by a peace activist who belongs to the deep ecology school of thought in the following way:

“We can have environmental justice and positive economic development that generates jobs for communities, but at the same time fosters a cleaner environment. They are not mutually exclusive.” (Shah, 2008).

Although both schools of thought carry their justifications on the issue, it cannot be denied that development is possible without damaging the environment. As it is evident through current conditions that human activities have caused immense damage and continue to threaten the existence of human and natural systems, the states also believe in development without environmental harm because they have researched and developed alternatives to conventional ways. In the recent decade, the research and implementation of alternative energy sources have increased. They have displayed the potential to lead the world to a new era of development where environmental conservation is the focus. Such projects include harvesting solar and hydro powers to extract energy rather than mining coal and petroleum products from underground. The use of these energies on a large scale in industrial as well as domestic settings is increasing in various developed countries (Meyer, 1993, 16). An attempt is being made to develop ideas of building designs that are eco-friendly such as those that operate on natural ventilation and insulation systems and those that incorporate greenery in their plans.

Moreover, the use of waste to create energy is also in the research phase. The implementation of projects bioenergy is in the research phase and installed in specific small-scale settings. All these options are associated with the development of the states without causing damage to the environment. Other than alternative energy options, various treaties are also being implemented to eliminate weapons as a source of attaining power and ensuring development. It was observed that the use of chemical and nuclear weapons also posed a severe threat to the environment and that the development is not necessarily associated with their use (Saleem and Jose, 2019, 3; hens et al., 2019, 14). This concept of alternative approaches was also illustrated in the statement of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, “We can encourage more of our universities and municipalities, foundations, corporations, individuals and cultural institutions to cut their ties to the fossil fuel industry. To divest, and invest, instead, in renewable energy. To move their money out of the problem and into the solutions” (Tutu, 2014).

By considering the above arguments, it can be observed that in the past, due to a lack of knowledge and experience, it could be feasible to think that development is not possible without causing environmental damage. This would certainly justify the Promethean school of thought. Still, with the advent of technology and immense prospects of research, it is pretty evident that we can come up with a variety of ways to conserve the environment alongside economic and social development. The concept of sustainable development has comprehensively displayed how much we depend on the environment to survive. If it is damaged, then we can even survive, let alone the development. With the utilization of renewable energy resources, we can ensure development in the true sense. If we are harvesting the sun's energy and moving water, we are not posing any threat to the environment (Everett, 2010, 25). By implementing treaties that ensure mutual growth and development by peaceful means, we can eliminate the danger that chemical and nuclear weapons pose.

To ensure sustainable development, we must change our perspectives about the term development itself and understand that it can be achieved by liberal means. In this regard, the deep ecologists' view stands true because being the superior organisms, it becomes our foremost duty to provide an umbrella of protection to the other floral and faunal species. We must harness our capacities to ensure that the resources bestowed upon us are conserved and preserved. We do not utilize that beyond the threshold; otherwise, the natural ways of corrections and cleanliness would not function. Moreover, it is essential to understand that true development does not occur the social security and integrity are maintained, which is highly linked with the environment we live in (Gough and Smith, 2015, pp. 84; Everett, 2010, pp. 50).