The survival of our planet depends on what and how we eat, how we treat human beings, fauna and flora, the air we breathe, how we treat others, and everything around us. We must also reassess the role of our economy system as a whole, of our political system, driven by the incentives of intrinsically individual, material and financial growth at all costs.
In 1992 scientists implored that we cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and phase out fossil fuels, reduce deforestation, and reverse the trend of collapsing biodiversity.
Today, we have to reevaluate the role of an economy based in more financial assets, we need to reduce greenhouse gases, promote renewable energy, protect habitat, restore ecosystems, curb pollution, halt deforestation, because humanity has not taken the urgent steps needed to safeguard our endangered biosphere.
To prevent widespread misery and catastrophic biodiversity loss, humanity must practice a more environmentally sustainable alternative to business as usual. This prescription was well articulated by the world's leading scientists 25 years ago, but in most respects, we have not understood their warning. Soon it will be too late and time is running out. We must recognize, in our day-to-day lives and in our governing institutions, our Earth with all its life and joy.
Examples of diverse and effective steps humanity can take to transition to sustainability include the following, such as reducing food waste through education and better infrastructure; promoting dietary shifts towards mostly plant-based foods;
The rapid global decline in ozone-depleting substances shows that we can make positive change when we act decisively. We have also made advancements in reducing extreme poverty and hunger .
If there has been progress in the rapid decline in fertility rates in many regions attributable to investments in girls’ and women's education, the promising decline in the rate of deforestation in some regions, and the rapid growth in the renewable-energy sector, the scientific community is making a second dire warning concerning climate change.
If we revise our economy to reduce wealth inequality and ensure that prices, taxation, and incentive systems, if we consider the real costs which consumption patterns impose on our environment, we will progress towards saving our planet, societies and environment.
The needs of all human beings—especially for food—imply that projected population growth will undermine protection of the natural world. Numerous solutions have been proposed to boost food production while protecting biodiversity, but alone these proposals are unlikely to staunch biodiversity loss. An important approach to sustaining biodiversity and human well-being is through actions that can slow and eventually reverse population growth: stop food waste, eat less meat, invest in universal access to reproductive health services and contraceptive technologies, advancing women’s education.
The adverse impact of livestock on the biosphere has been extensively documented. Many people in the developed world could eat fewer animal products, and advocacy on that front is valuable, but for the foreseeable future the trends point toward increasing consumption of meat, fish, dairy, and eggs, especially in the developing world. At the same time, so-called “landless” livestock operations (concentrated animal feeding operations) are not a solution. Most cereal croplands in the developed world are devoted to feed production, whereas the livestock facilities themselves are resource-intensive (especially in water use); polluting of air, groundwater, and waterways; vulnerable to diseases and epidemics; and ethically unjust in the treatment of farm animals
International climate negotiators can take steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from livestock as well as from the burning of fossil fuels. So far, global climate policy instruments have mainly focused on engineering improved industrial processes, energy efficiency and investments in alternative energy generation technologies, because sustainability has been predominantly interpreted as technological progress rather than changed patterns of human behavior. Continued growth of ruminant meat consumption will represent a major obstacle for reaching ambitious climate change targets. P. R.
Comments