Development Crossing

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Sustainability

How Big Cities Become Vicious to Sustainable Development- Conservation Psychology

Growing Cities Are Vicious to Sustainable Development - Conservation Psychology

Conservation has a difficult relationship with growing population in big cities of today’s World on one hand; and desperate rural masses (custodians of natural resourses traditionaly) of the World and their growing need for basic demand for housing, water and food on the other hand.

Business organizations’ and Governments alike addicted to International funding on the pretext of sustainable development in reality have become defunct, and only provide lip service. Evidently, schemes and efforts to employ rural mass fall short, people scorch out to expanding urban areas pursuing life and alternative employment.

Crowded cities, higher living standards, modern lifestyles and technical skills push rural masses farther away from nature, traditional lifestyle and natural habitat. Reluctant Governments and Non Government Organizations struggle to provide life, liberty and justice to masses while putting conservation to deep sleep and contributing to eviornmental hazards.

Main environmental and social impacts of buildings and construction
Source Pg. 6 UNEP Industry and Environment April – September 2003
Raw material extraction and consumption; related resource depletion
Land use change, including clearing of existing flora
Noise pollution
Energy use and associated emissions of
Greenhouse gases
Other indoor and outdoor emissions
Aesthetic degradation
Water use and wastewater generation
Increased transport needs (depending on siting)
Various effects of transport of building materials,
Locally and globally
Waste generation
Opportunities for corruption
Disruption of communities, including through
Inappropriate design and materials
Health risks on worksites and for building occupants
Particularly the “Kyoto gases”: CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs,PFCs and SF6.

City life despite of inherent risk, decease, and dangers therefore has strong tendency to attract rural masses that contribute to over crowd, higher demand of space and cost of living and major environmental hazards.

Helplessly, Government and Non Government Organizations draw schemes for exploiting urban and rural resources for major industrial, infrastructural and scientific developments that further contribute to environmental pollution and exhaustion of natural resources.

Today's conservation adversely related to industrialization, urbanisation and globalization, some feel that slowingdown of economy and population only has the answers to conservation.

Views: 116

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'm afraid I don't totally understand why cities are horrible. You are evaluating cities in how we live in them today, but today, even the rural areas are unsustainable.
In a city:
You can walk everywhere you need to go.
Therefor, you don't need a car, to buy gas, and are reducing your carbon footprint.
You say it is more expensive, but the sky-scrapers take up less surface area on Earth than a suburban neighborhood.
A good city will have parks, natural land, and most likely have the money to keep them healthy.
A city can be surrounded by many organic farms. Thus, will have a lower carbon footprint when food is delivered to local grocery stores, AND the people of the city will be supporting local farming/economy.
Big cities are investing in renewable resources for our power, because they have the money and people to invest in it.
And people like being around people, hence why people are drawn to big cities.

How do rural areas covered by mono crop agriculture, green houses, cattle farms, or spread out suburban areas degredate the environment equally, if not more? Reduce existing flora? Pollute the water with pesticides? And deplete our resources?

I believe whether you live in a large city, on a farm, or in a suburb; if everyone stops pointing fingers at the other person, and start to live a simpler life with less consumption, we would all be better off and would bring a decrease to all of the negative impacts you have listed above.
I appreciate your remarks specially the one at the end that realising that only by living a simple life (I think especially people living in cities) and consuming less we can reduce the negative impacts. I don’t know if you have visited or lived in India before, if not, I invite you to India…particularly the rural India that’s changing pretty fast from its traditional nature and adding rapidly towards globalisation.
I am not very familiar with India, and unfortunately can't afford the trip, but! I will look into it :) Finding new places to research is always interesting, I am sorry to hear that India's natural lands are being degraded by growing cities. Of course, this is not what I mean when I say cities can be good.
I am a little familiar with India's enormous population, so perhaps the issue lies deeper than city vs. rural. When a country's population is growing, even though I believe India's fertility rate has decreased which is great, it is hard to decrease the impact we have on the environment.
Thanks suggesting me to look into the issue more, you had an interesting article!
Happy V-Day!
I thanks for your comments! You have keen perception about urban -rural lifestyle and issues that todays developing countries are facing...India is no exception. Thanks


© 2020   Created by Development Crossing.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service