By Ranil Senanayake –
Dr. Ranil Senanayake
We have come a long way as a nation. Once, the person accredited as the ‘father of the nation’ Hon DS Senanayake in 1944 stated that, one critical measure of development must be, the ‘larder of the poorest of our households’. Today, the measure has changed, now it is the buffet tables of the grand hotels, that signify, our state of development. The time of transition from social wealth passed onto capital wealth as a national goal, was rapid, it was brought about by changing the national psyche, to move from contentment to desire. The process was illustrated clearly in 1922, AM Hocart the commissioner of archeology, observed that there were politicians appealing for help in disturbing “thepathetic contentment” of Asiatic peasants, and ready to pillory as an inhuman wretch anyone who may wish them to remain contented. Contentment had become a crime, because it did not open up markets for goods or for doctrines. Woe to the man who does not want more fish, more art, more science, more education, more speed. Trade has no use for him; politics and science abhor him. What though he throw to the wind the old-nfashioned restraints, the time honoured virtues? What though he stoop to cringing or insolence, to falsehood, even to corruption? He noted that, such a person is hailed as a creative artist, because he has created desire.’
In the current rush for ‘Development’ have any of us questioned its intent? Does it just mean ‘progress’ in the manner referred to by Ananda Coomaraswamy when he published the comment that “we who call art significant not knowing of what, are also proud to progress, not knowing wither”? Wandering aimlessly, with success measured only by an increase in industry and consumerism. The current vision of development certainly could not refer to cultural or philosophical development. So exactly what type of development are we referring to in Sri Lanka when we have various public figures exhorting us towards ‘development’?
It would seem bizarre indeed if it transpired that we have been developing for the past 40 odd years manly in a western consumerist perspective. One of the standard answers to the question of what is development? is that it means economic growth. On this point Prof. Dudley Seers notes, “in fact, it looks as if economic growth may not merely fail to address social and political problems, certain types of growth can actually cause them”. Economic growth, measured by such indices as GDP, is fundamentally dependent on consumption. The more one consumes the better. To consume more, one must crave more, but to us in a Buddhist society the consequences of such action should be obvious. As the Ven. Bengamuwe Nalaka Thera noted: Buddhism clearly states that the cause of suffering is craving. “The first sermon of the Buddha states as follows:” “O! Bhikkhus, what is the cause of suffering? It is this craving that leads to repeated becoming, delighting now here, now there, namely craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence and craving for non-existence”
Sri Lanka, is ‘the canary in the coalmine’ of fossil powered economic growth, that promises ‘development’. The pain of withdrawal will be felt from the cooking fires of its homes, to the national energy grids. But will those profiting from the trade in fossil energy, allow any movement to cease this addiction to fossil fuels and choose a new paradigm for growth and development. The support that the government provides for non-fossil energy will indicate its commitment to the Sustainable Development of the nation.
It is not only the pain of withdrawal from fossil energy, it is also the awful reality of what we have done the environment that supports us, chasing the myth of ‘development’ based the consumption of fossil fuels. I remember the taste of the water in the well from which I would drink go from sweet, to bitter. The bitter taste, from the effluent runoff of a new factory was a forerunner of the foul chemicals that eventually made this well undrinkable.
There is a paradigm shift needed but what is it? Can we look at this world in a different way, so that we can slow this rolling tsunami of hunger, disease and violence? We are constantly being made aware that there is a crisis in food, in water, in health and now in energy, the indicators of the coming tsunami. In proposing a new paradigm, we must define the existing one first, so that the new can be evaluated. Today, humanity has defined consumerist led growth measured by indicators such as the GDP as ‘development’. Its operation has seen a rapid decline of the indicators of sustainable living, indicators such as water quality, oil quality, health quality and biodiversity. It looks to create transactions as the final goal. Often, these do not pay a real price and the cost of environmental services loss is externalized, so that it becomes a public liability. Further most of the transactions are made on non-living materials, value being relegated by rarity and demand.
In moving to a new paradigm the most obvious effect will be in the slowing down and hopefully reversing the current rapid decline of the indicators of sustainable living, indicators such as water quality, air quality, health quality and biodiversity. The concept of consumerist growth must be measured by a host of other indicators and not merely transactions. These ‘indicators of sustainable living’ can provide the weighting factors for the computation of established economic indicators such as the GDP. The real value of the ‘Global Commons’ formalized and value given for environmental services, especially those that provide positive externalities.
Just as the power of fossil energy manifested the old paradigm it is the power of radiant energy that must manifest the new. Radiant energy or light empowers us in two fundamental ways. The first is by maintaining the life support system of the planet the second is by providing electricity to power technological advances that are becoming social norms. The supply of electricity from sources of energy other than fossil is exemplified by using water (hydro) trees (dendro), wind or radiation (solar). The technology to supply the marketplace is slowed by vested market interests (fossil lobby) and further slowed down by official lethargy.
The other aspect of radiant energy is the phenomenon of primary production, by which the entire living world is maintained. Primary production or the capture of light energy to make biomass, is possible only through the action of photosynthesis, by which Carbon Dioxide from the atmosphere is fused with water to provide the two essentials for life oxygen and biomass, the substance that provides the green colour of vegetation.
It is the action of this material, photosynthetic biomass, that makes life sustainable on this planet. The tragedy is, that under the current paradigm, no value is given to this critical substance, value is given only to its products of its action, such as timber or grain. As a consequence, the volume of photosynthetic biomass has begun to decrease dramatically planet-wide.
A fundamental consideration of photosynthetic biomass is that it retains value only as long as it is living. Unlike products such as timber, fruit, spices or grains which is valued after ‘harvest’ and is dead, it has no value in a dead state. The moment it is ‘harvested’ and ceases its activity, it loses its value. So, what is photosynthetic biomass? It is the ‘green substance’ of all plants. On land, it is mostly the leaves of plants, in the sea it is the blooms of algae and phytoplankton. Photosynthetic biomass captures solar energy using atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and water to produce all the foodstuff for animal life of the planet. In addition it produces Oxygen to maintain an air that we can breathe. It also provokes water transformation or the cleansing of groundwater and the creation of rain, i.e. all actions essential for the sustainability of the life support system of the planet. Yet currently, it is only the product of photosynthetic biomass, as sequestered carbon, usually represented by wood/timber, fruits a grain etc. that has been recognized as having commercial value.
Can the recognition of the value of Primary Ecosystem Services contribute towards changing the paradigm? A primary contribution would be to reverse the damage wrought to the planetary life support systems by making it profitable to restore and enhance the degraded environmental services. If economic and policy decisions create a climate conducive to placing a value on photosynthetic biomass, many critical activities to slow the current trend can be developed and implemented.
The greatest resource to implement these goals of restoration is the rural population. It is only the day-to-day attention to new plantings in the field and an increasing knowledge on the theory and practice of restoration that will produce the healed environments of tomorrow.
Consideration of the rural populace as key players in land restoration is important because it is the rural person who will often be responsible for the acts that destroy or develop both biomass and biodiversity. Rural out-migration is often a consequence of an inability to make a decent living on the land. Recognizing the value of photosynthetic biomass, could be the key to unlock the new paradigm and restore our damaged lands.
