UBCO forum on sustainability

[CRCP]

In an editorial on March 22, 2006 the Capital News suggests that we should defer to the opinion of the "experts" such as the Ontario planners that appeared on the panel on the talk on sustainability on March 20. The problem with doing that is that different experts have different viewpoints. Most members of the planel at the recent forum merely spouted the conventional wisdom in urban planning circles that growth is inevitable and we can't slow or stop it so we should just plan for it. But if that panel were to have included environmentalist and urban planner Eben Fodor of Eugene, Oregon, Professor Albert Bartlett from the University of Colorado or Dr. Gabor Zovanyi of Eastern Washington University, one would have heard some very different opinions. So if we are to heed the opinions of the "experts" we should also be cognizant of the fact that there are a differing viewpoints among them and be open to listening to some who are capable of thinking outside the box.

[John Zeger]

One such person who has shown an ability to think outside the box is Dr. Gabor Zovanyi of Eastern Washington University in Spokane. In a recent paper submitted to the the Society for Conservation Biology 2004 Annual Meeting, Dr. Zovanyi states.

"Current ecological realities dictate that the growth imperative driving current human behavior must be replaced with the imperative of ecological sustainability. There is an urgent need to base the quest for a sustainable future on the primacy of ecological sustainability....

At present the growth management movement...and its current manifestation in the form of the Smart Growth movement are impeding the essential transition from the growth imperative to an ecological imperative. Both growth management and Smart Growth advocates remain committed to the assumed wisdom of future growth. They argue that negative growth effects can be mitigated sufficiently to permit continued growth, in effect suggesting that ongoing growth can be transformed into a form of socially and environmentally benign expansion. They even condemn the idea that management activities might legitimately be directed at efforts to stop growth, asserting this would represent inefficient, unjust, and irresponsible behavior. ...

Mere management of ongoing growth must be acknowledged to be an insufficient response to the ecological realities of the early 21st century. The fact that even the present size of the human enterprise is degrading the ecosystems that sustain humankind and driving other species to extinction ought to be ample proof that further growth consititutes irresponsible behavior. Instead of conceding this fact , management proponents continue to defend the ideas of balanced growth, smart growth, and even sustainable growth at a time when growth-induced ecological problems increasingly demonstrate the irresponsible nature of ongoing growth accommodation practices. It is possible to think of this pro-growth stance in terms of a growth management delusion ... with the delusion that it will be possible to protect the environment under ongoing growth...

Neither traditional growth management nor current Smart Growth advocates have shown any willingness to address sustainability concerns in general or ecological sustainability considerations in particular, and have instead focused on what they consider to be responsible accommodation of inevitable growth. This myopic perspective allows them to advance the Smart Growth fallacy i.e., the false or mistaken idea of the possiblility of sustainable growth. Growth in demographic, economic, or urban terms does not represent sustainable behavior. No amount of wishful thinking or elaborate management practices will make growth sustainable in these terms. In the end, Smart Growth is just as unsustainable as dumb growth, and over time will eventually produce the same intolerable conditions."