9comments
Share conversation:
Share via:
 Susan Malavet Apr 22, 2013 05:14  |
Just wondering and I believe in organics and purchase sustainable clothing in the UK but will sustainability through consumerism actually help to change climate change?
If products we are creating for sustainability have a greater embodied energy than the good they will do on the environment, such as low energy bulbs and wind turbines, are we not causing more harm for our earths future rather than fixing the damage?
If industries all over the world do not share equally in environmental (and employee welfare) standards isn't sustainability through shopping sort of flawed?
Just wondering.
|
 Mark Hurych Jun 18, 2013 05:36 |
Community structures are the positive memes here. I feel that the means of spreading and scaling up good ideas is expressed well here.
A well-designed city, scaled up and accountable, might possibly have all the necessary ingredients for a sustainable future. Access and standard of living are not enough. Some means of confirming the sustainability of the plan needs to be in place.
Yes, a dense city plan with mass transit is wonderful and seems adaptable to thriving sustainability. Abundance of products and services is not the same as sustainability.
|
 2013reducing Consumptionjudges Jul 15, 2013 12:08  |
The activities proposed would no doubt be useful (and they may have been already), but it is heavily marketing and communication oriented. The proposal is also extremely ambitious and in places vague.
It is certainly necessary to sway the culture of China, and JUCCE seems to be already working on it, but can this project achieve cultural change on a massive scale?
It may be difficult for any organizations other than governments and extremely large and well-funded nonprofits to get traction with these type of solutions, and for China, government participation would likely be a must. So it would be useful to hear more about the extent to which the Chinese government is involved.
Also, the proposal would be more effective if there were additional details about the partnerships w/ ad agencies mentioned at the end.
|
 Peggy Liu Jul 17, 2013 02:44 | Proposal contributor
To the judges,
Additions have been made to the proposal which give greater details about our government training, and also other partnerships (we wish there was more character space to add more!).
The way that a social engineering effort such as China Dream takes place in China is necessarily different than in the West. The culture in mainland China is 180 degrees opposite from American culture. The state of development of China in constant, fast, and large scale change, and therefore the receptivity to change and new models of social norms is very positive in China. The governance model of centrally set targets but local experiments shapes some of the approach in this initiative in that policies, government leadership training, and new city models are very impactful. The rapidness of takeup in China to new models of living is much faster than in the West.
|
Peggy Liu Jul 17, 2013 03:55 | Proposal contributor
To deluge,
Thank you for your questions, sorry for the late response!
Just wondering and I believe in organics and purchase sustainable clothing in the UK but will sustainability through consumerism actually help to change climate change?
Absolutely, the carbon footprint from consumerism is huge and continuing to increase as the middle class around the world grows. Sustainable consumption is about reducing energy use through consuming and dealing with waste after consumption. By doing this, it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as other environmental problems, and so help prevent climate change.
If products we are creating for sustainability have a greater embodied energy than the good they will do on the environment, such as low energy bulbs and wind turbines, are we not causing more harm for our earths future rather than fixing the damage?
The reasons for sustainable products should be that they are either made with less energy, or during their use, use less energy- therefore doing less damage to the planet. In your case of low energy bulbs which you say have greater embodied energy than they will do good, the fact that they use less energy during their lifetime (and are often longer-lasting), means they are a more sustainable alternative to the typical lightbulb.
If industries all over the world do not share equally in environmental (and employee welfare) standards isn't sustainability through shopping sort of flawed?
Industries and countries will always have differing environmental and employee regulations, but globalisation is certainly beginning to push these in the right direction. We are not concerned specifically with standards, partly because of your reason, and partly because the environmental product standards in China are very often misunderstood or ignored. That is why we are focused on consumer behaviour towards purchasing sustainably, and if that can be done, companies will want to create more sustainable products to supply the demand.
|
2013reducing Consumptionjudges Jul 29, 2013 03:13 |
A tall order, and not enough in the way of specifics, but thoroughly filled out and on the right track.
|
 Chris Culbert Aug 6, 2013 10:28 |
Great Job!
|
Khanh Pham Aug 8, 2013 11:31 |
Greetings from Vietnam! I've been thinking along the same lines as this...Vietnam is also eagerly trying to "catch up" with the rest of the world in terms of what they view as development and progress. And we need to change the story of what "progress" and "modernity" look like. They're abandoning local farmer's markets for the big supermarkets, for example.
The China Dream also is smart to target govt officials, because they're the ones with the power to make critical urban development decisions, land use changes that convert farmland to urban development, etc. We need to change what city leaders view as "development" for their towns. Is attracting millions in new investment (at the cost of environmental and social health) progress and development?
I think you need to tackle fundamental assumptions like the idea that GDP is a good measurement for economic health. As long as city leaders are judged by GDP growth, climate resilience will be hard to achieve. The China Dream should embrace new metrics, like Gross Progress Indicators.
I also wonder about China's goal to move 250million rural residents to towns and cities. I truly don't know, which lifestyle is more sustainable and resilient to coming climate changes?
The China Dream needs to tackle government-level decisions about what "development" looks like, not just individual consumer decisions.
Anyways, you're on the right track. We in Vietnam will be watching carefully.
|
Stan Curtis Aug 19, 2013 10:20 |
Love the work! thanks. Geoffrey West and others (Pareto, Juran, Dunbar)..have confirmed the Inconvenient Truth: its about People & their Power Laws (of behavior change & adoption) that dominate. The China Dream is excellent framework for community incubation... better choices! glad to help... cheering
|
