Hult Business Magazine

Live in the present, or

think about the
future?

Monthly Newsletter
Living in a globalized era leads to complex and dynamic
problems: "Even if there were no future population
growth, consumption patterns cannot go on escalating on
a finite Earth. There are three problems: over-population,
over-consumption, and under distribution (Holmes,
2003)." Most of us simply forget about under distribution
and only consider the first two as the main issues.

Written by: Camila Panizzi Luz

The act of consumption is to acquire what is necessary and
indispensable to societys subsistence, whilst the act of
consuming luxury items is known as consumerism.
To fulfill societys consumption, we end up interfering
deeply with the environment. Mostly because what men
develop comes from natural resources. Through
workforce, men transform intact nature into transformed
nature. It is nature that provides all of our raw materials,
for example: soil, water, climate, energy, minerals,
amongst other things that are necessary to industries.
The capitalist model of development that is based on
technological innovation in pursuit of profit and the
continuous increase in consumption levels needs to be
replaced by another model that takes into account the
tolerable limits in nature and life itself.

Companies that rule our globalized world. Source: Guille3691

Recent decades have shown that there has been a

significant increase in consumption worldwide. This
consumption has been caused by population growth, the
capital accumulation of companies that were able to
expand, offering us an amazing variety of products, along
with their advertising that leads to constant and
unnecessary consumption.

The planet is already showing signs of exhaustion,

examples of this are shortages of water and oil, which are
non-renewable resources. Our land is not getting any
bigger, tall skyscrapers in metropolitan cities are being
built to accommodate more people as human population
continues to grow. Medical research and health
development help people to live longer. Humans consume
renewable and non-renewable resources, as well as
industrialized goods frenetically. Companies develop
continuous marketing strategies to get people to buy more
and more.
We buy and consume much more then we really need, and
if we can afford it, why not? We do not think about the
consequences. Most of us want to have children, and some
already do, but we do not think about the world that we are
going to leave for them.

October Issue 2014

Consumerism is what makes the economy go round. Most

things we buy have life cycles of one to five years
maximum. Thirty years ago, this was not the case.
Everything can be updated, there is always a newer
version that we cannot live without. It ends up also being
cheaper to buy something new than to fix something that
is broken and we accept this.
Consumption ends up altering the concept of citizenship
or a community. As consuming is the capacity of having
things and citizenship is the capacity of being on behalf of
political exercise and institutional representation. By
adhering to this definition, we end up substituting our
identities and differences by our capacity to consume and
to buy. However, consumption cannot be seen as
something irrational and motivated by ignorance of our
human will, as it comes from economic rationality, and it
is a part of a productive chain, a management strategy.
These three issues deal with many factors, two of them
being happiness and equality. What makes us happy? Will
an iPhone 6 make us happy? Is the world fair? Is it ok to
walk 20 kilometers to get potable water? We do not ask
ourselves these questions, simply because we do not think
about these things. If we as humans do not think about this
and the consequences, why should companies? We always
expect companies to recycle and to be sustainable, but that
is a bit ironic if we do not put it into practice ourselves.
According to the United Nations, the population in 2050
is expected to be nine billion. That is a very scary number,
as we are not able to feed all of the population that already
exists.

Busy market in India. Source: telegraph.co.uk

To some, over-population is viewed as a blessing, since

there will be more people to try to solve the worlds issues.
Albert Einstein once said, Over-population in various
countries has become a serious threat to the health of
people and a grave obstacle to any attempt to organize
peace on this planet.
To me, the world is not over-populated YET; there are
over-populated areas and countries, whilst there are areas
where nature is still intact. Yes, it is true that near these
over-populated areas, we need more space for cultivation
and grazing, or we just need to come up with ways to
effectively reuse these lands and secure the intact ones.
Some areas of the world still have increasing population
growth, usually in African and Asian countries. In spite of
this, overall population growth has decreased over the
years. This is due to education, higher living standards,
better family planning and contraceptive methods, as well
as more rights for women.
One of the biggest problems that comes from overpopulation are food, water and non-renewable shortages,
climate change and environmental damage. What is
unacceptable is that most of these problems arise from
over-consumption as well. In the future, it is obvious that
these problems will get worse if we do not stabilize these
situations. I believe that governments should step along
with private companies to help provide more funds to
voluntary family planning and reproductive health care
programs. Population will take many years to decrease, so
we need to take action now. Some people are not properly
educated or informed in these matters, as they do not
realize how fast things are happening, some believe that
religion will provide the answer, while others believe
technology is the best solution. Some may argue that overpopulation is not the main concern and rather overconsumption is what causes most problems, leading to
inequality, hunger, poverty, amongst others.
In January 2011, The Economist reported that "The richest
one per cent of adults control 43 per cent of the world's
assets; the wealthiest ten per cent have 83 per cent. The
bottom 50 per cent have only two per cent." In analysis to
this, it is obvious there is a massive gap between the ones
that have and the ones that have not. Critics believe
that if the wealthiest would reduce their overconsumption, there would be enough natural and financial
resources for the world population to lead a decent
lifestyle.

October Issue 2014

I believe it is more than just over-consumption that is the

cause of the societal gap between the haves and have
nots. I believe that what started the over-consumption is
globalization, brand marketing and a general lack of social
awareness. Nowadays, gladly we find some consumers
that are more conscious; fortunately, this has been
increasing in the last few years. Individuals worldwide
are becoming increasingly savvy about the environment,
and basing their purchasing decisions on a products
environmental attributes (Darnall, 2008a; Perrini,
Castaldo, Misani& Tencati, 2009).

Steps to sustainability. Source: Conserve-energy-future

If global businesses take no action, they will be missing a

lot of growth potential. Consumers are becoming more
aware, green consumerism is on the rise and if companies
embrace this, many opportunities may come. Currently,
some companies are already getting certificates, which
regulates the management and control of environmental
impacts caused by economic activity. These certificates
are issued by organizations in various countries, filled by
the International Organization for Standardization.
Companies that get these certificates following production
rules that do not cause harm to the environment, save
energy, prevent pollution and accidents, among other
favorable attitudes to the environment and people.
The planet is coming to an even more critical point as
each day goes by. We can observe that this constant
consumerism cannot be maintained, as there are already
big impacts on the ecological and environmental sphere.
In terms of water resources, the earth has three quarters
of its surface covered by water. This abundance leads
many to think that water is an inexhaustible resource;
however, this is not true.

The increasing pollution of freshwater sources by urban

and rural water activities, as well as the continuous
increase in consumption because of population growth
and the expansion of economic activities, are causing
many parts of the world to be replenished of this precious
liquid, and making it increasingly scarcer to find.
Waste has also become a matter of global interest, and
the problems are the same from all sides of the globe.
Produced at all stages of human activities, such waste in
terms of both composition and volume vary depending
on consumption practices and production methods used.
The main concerns are focused on the impact that may
have on human health and the environment (soil, water,
air and landscapes).
Garbage is today a major threat to life on the planet for
two basic reasons: its quantity and its toxic hazards.
Everywhere in the world, the media encourages people to
purchase various products and to replace older ones with
a more modern version. This fact has led to the large
volume of waste production, as well as lack of
information on how to dispose of these items.
Although waste is considered a major threat to the
environment (if wrongly disposed), it turns out that it is
possible to minimize their impacts by adopting
preventive measures, abandoning practices of
overconsumption or, educating the population about
different ways of recycling the waste that is generated.
These practices not only reduce the volume of waste
produced daily, but also allow the exercise of reuse,
resulting in better management of waste. These are
simple and feasible actions that can be incorporated in
order to protect the air, soil and water, bringing better
conditions to human and environmental health and a
higher quality of life.
What makes these points so controversial is that they are
complex issues but that can be resolved if we decide to
change, to consume wisely and to have less children.
Environmental problems differ in relation to rich and poor
countries. It is known that most of the population that are
responsible for generating large amounts of pollution are
the wealthiest and have high consumption levels. Another
large majority of the world does not have efficient
sanitation, lacks access to safe water, and does not have
adequate housing as well as issues that arise from
malnourishment, such as low immunity and possible
health hazards. We need to stop blaming each other for
what is happening and start taking action because it affects
us all.
October Issue 2014

The Western governments need to stop blaming the

Southern countries for having too many children. The
Southern governments need to stop blaming the Western
countries for consuming too much. The consequences for
these issues are all interlinked, but we simply ignore it all.

In retrospect, sustainability has been around since 1987:

"concept sustainable development, that of the Brundtland
Commission of the United Nations on March 20, 1987:
sustainable development is development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs.

What we tend to see is that the rich countries mostly worry

about economic problems and development, while the
poor countries worry about social development;
meanwhile none of them worry about the bigger issues
that are right in front of them.
Freedom also plays a role in all of this. Governments will
not simply force their population to stop having children,
or decrease the number of children per couple. We are
waiting for a voluntary decision from people to consume
less, but this will surely take a very long time to happen.
This all goes against the capitalist model. This is what also
makes it so complex, because the possibility of fixing
limits will cause political problems worldwide.
Governments should prioritize a set of actions toward
structuring a repertoire of integrated public policies that
adopt clean technologies, promote awareness campaigns
about the factors that cause environmental
unsustainability, encourage non-polluting activities and
effective implementation of urban socio-environmental
policies, with emphasis on selective collection, and
encouraging recycling and reducing waste in the public
and private activities.
So now, I come back to the initial question: should we live
in the present or think about the future? It is concerning
how people tell us to live life to the fullest, to live today
like there is no tomorrow and live as if it was our last day.
I think that we have to rethink our philosophies. Yes, I
agree that it is good to live in the present and to enjoy life,
but we must look back at our past mistakes (in this case,
historys teachings) and try to build a future that will be
better. The world is in our hands, all we need to do is know
how to use our resources in our benefit, as well as
distributing these resources where needed. We're never
going to scare people into living more sustainably! We
have to be able to demonstrate just how dynamic and
aspirational such a world could be - and that we've still got
time to deliver it - Jonathon Porritt ('The World We
Made', 2013).

World as a stopwatch. Source: Joiofmusic

This came about through the growing concerns of the

planet as whole, and the discovery that consumerism has
actually taken over our need for sustenance (basic living
needs) and made space for development (growth of needs
into a higher capacity). This is concerning because
sustainability today is measured by companies into
profitable schemes, as opposed to its benefits for the
environment. While it is cheaper to create a new sheet of
paper from a new tree, it is less comfortable/profitable to
outsource a collection of the old/discarded material. Our
concerns have shifted from a global consciousness to an
economic view of what is necessary. Think about
consumerism today, in comparison to Maslow's hierarchy
of needs.

October Issue 2014

REFERENCES
Books:
Darnall N. (2008). What the Federal Government Can
Do to Encourage Green Production. Washington, DC:
IBM Centerfor the Business of Government, Presidential
Transition Series.
Holmes Rolston III (2003). Environmental ethics.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Porrit, J. (2013). The World We Made. 1st ed. Phaidon.
Reports:
Source: Maslows Hierarchy of Needs Pyramid
If we were to consider these needs today, the Internet
would be high up at the top, however, one cannot forget
that we have been evolving into a society that care more
about economic growth above values. That choice has an
enormous effect on the population that we are producing
today. It is true that most of the wealthy countries hold
valuable resources; however, one cannot forget that these
have been collected through colonization and an
exploitation of human rights. These resources if
redistributed could make an enormous difference. If the
most important resource, which is education/information,
could also be distributed, the poor countries would not be
poor anymore.

United Nations, (1987). Brundtland Report.

Websites:
Arsenault, C. (2011). Are we facing a crisis of
overpopulation?. [online] Al Jazeera English. Available
at:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/10/2011
107161744294439.html [Accessed 01 Oct. 2014].

This is a solution, but not a viable one, seeing that

education has never been a problem, the problem is
money, because if education were free, people would see
the injustices today, and probably rise up against them. It
is easy to keep a population under control by telling them
what they need, and what they should be thinking, what
they should be working for so they can continue to
consume to keep the economy of the country afloat. An
occupation was never meant to be a permanent job, it
was meant to keep you "occupied" until you had enough
capital to be sustainable, but we have changed the
meaning of the word appropriately to fit our needs today,
that are that nothing is sufficient. It is our inability to find
information that leads us to buy a new product as
opposed to fixing an old one. If we changed our point of
view from economic to practical, and to isolate our actual
needs, there would be a change in perception that an
individual is not an "I" but truly a "We" in this planet. If
we can fulfill those needs in Maslow's pyramid then we
could become concerned with our environment firstly,
and then in economic advancement lastly.
October Issue 2014