It took the human species about one million years to reach a population of one billion. Nowadays, we add another billion at the rate of every 14 years.
Whereas a century ago, only 10% of the population lived in cities, by 2050 it will be closer to 75%. Tens of thousands of people migrate to cities every day. New megacities are sprouting, many of them on coastlines. Yet we know the sea is rising, thanks to the greenhouse effect, sometimes accompanied by devastatingly big waves. Does the image of the lemming not spring to mind?
South Africa is no exception to these global trends. Our cities continue to bulge with people from the countryside, desperately seeking work and an escape from poverty — and putting infrastructure and public services under increased pressure.
This country’s dependence on coal as a source of energy, combined with poor standards in the industrial sector and a growing number of cars on the roads, serves to increase the level of emissions, making South Africa the largest carbon footprinter on the continent.
It is a cause for concern. What to do? There is a growing global consensus on climate change and the need for concerted, prompt action, but are we part of it? What are the politics?
The phrase ”sustainable development” is certainly conspicuous in government policy-speak — search the government website for the phrase and tens of thousands of citations appear. But I am far from convinced that the state has worked out where this catch-all phrase fits into its list of priorities, and how it should involve citizens in this discussion.
There are inherent dilemmas to resolve. In Parliament in June, Minister for Environmental Affairs and Tourism Martinus van Schalkwyk announced the government’s roadmap towards a long-term national climate policy, which it hopes to publish by 2009. Although, by most accounts, Van Schalkwyk is an energetic and diligent minister, there are doubts, for obvious reasons, about whether he has the political stature within the ANC to drive a more prominent policy message.
It’s horribly confusing: overall, the world needs people to fly less — because of the carbon emissions of commercial airplanes — but we need them to fly here more because we need the jobs that tourists create.
But, according to some estimates, if the world continues to warm, much of South Africa could be reduced to a barren desert by 2050, and, if climate change is not checked by 2050, then Ghana’s main industry, coffee, could be extinct.
Yet although the social degradation is acute, Africa has the largest quantity of untapped natural resources, and by developing new models of extraction and processing, the opportunity to set new standards — provided it is not simply pillaged by ruthless and rapacious outsiders, whether they are Western multinationals or newcomers from China.
All of which goes to the geopolitics of sustainable development. India and especially China are now among the major drivers of environmental harm, yet the world economy has become hugely dependent on their cheap, exported goods — the fruits of vast new economies that, staggeringly in China’s case, double every five and a half years.
Some companies are adapting fast. SABMiller is developing new business models for different markets and supply chains in Africa — making an inexpensive yet safe sorghum-based beer, for instance. Backsberg in the Western Cape is now the first carbon neutral wine farm in South Africa and, in response to what it rightly perceives to be a shift in consumer attitudes in European markets, will proudly be able to label its bottles accordingly.
Others are putting their heads in the sand, metaphorically drinking martinis in the bar of the Titanic, living life to the full in the face of imminent disaster. Smarter companies, on the other hand, are recognising that by slaughtering sacred cows and innovating you can do the right thing and still make money.
Now that there is a consensus around the science, there is also growing recognition that, in the arena of climate change, the challenge is so severe and the need for immediate action so urgent that there is no alternative to increased — and increasingly firm — government regulation.
More than ever, the problems are all intertwined. We can’t seriously tackle poverty without having a clear, integrated vision for sustainable development. And, as the political trade-offs are so intense and the kaleidoscopic pressure of change so great, visionary leadership is needed.