Sustainability has become a hot word among cities and counties across the nation.
While the concept has been around for a while, it really gained vogue with local governments, and increasingly with private businesses, following the success of the film “An Inconvenient Truth.”
Several Puget Sound area cities and counties have recently adopted sustainability plans. Here in Federal Way, our own city has even begun nibbling at the issue.
Because of its buzzword status, sustainability means different things to different people (all of whom are, of course, in favor of it). The most recognized definition, and the one that suits our needs, comes from the 1989 United Nations Brundtland Commission, which expressed sustainability as meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
Sounds good, right? We go about our lives in a way that meets our needs, while preserving the ability of our children and their children to do the same. That’s kind of like the old camping rule of leaving your campground no worse than the way you found it. Basic stuff.
And aren’t businesses (well, except the WaMus and AIGs of the world) supposed to focus on balancing expenses, investments and profits so they’re still in business down the road?
That’s sustainability! Again, not terrifically radical. The rub comes from the task of integrating the sustainability of the economic, environmental and social spheres.
A quick look around shows that we haven’t done a great job at integrating economic and environmental sustainability (I’m going to leave out social issues due to space considerations). Puget Sound is in critical shape because it’s been treated as a cheap dumping ground for our stormwater. The Evergreen State has lost 1.2 million acres of forestland since the 1970s.
And here in Federal Way, the rapid, unplanned growth in the 1980s did incalculable harm to the Hylebos Creek system (and left us with some of the ugliest architecture for miles around).
So, how do we get from here to there? How do we create a sustainable Federal Way?
What I do know is that figuring that out is a conversation worth having. Personally, I think it’s worth having because of the moral implications of sustainability. I want to live in a city that operates in a way that, on balance, improves the future generations’ prospects, not diminishes them. I want Federal Way to be part of healing Puget Sound. I want it to contribute to solving global warming — not making it worse.
There’s another reason for having that conversation that may be a more powerful, immediate argument: It’s good business.
Integrating environmental sustainability into business practices was once seen as an expensive, even frivolous practice. No more. Let’s look at a few examples.
In the mid-1990s, the DuPont Corporation adopted an aggressive policy to maximize energy efficiency and reduce energy consumption. In a decade, the company reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 72 percent and saved itself more than $3 billion.
In Portland, Ore., a combination of land use and transportation policies that emphasize compact, mixed-use developed combined with user-friendly mass transit saves Portlanders $1.1 billion annually in reduced transportation expenses — and another $1.5 billion saved in time not lost commuting and/or stuck in traffic.
Since the 1970s, California has emphasized energy efficiency and renewable energy, spurring cost savings for consumers and job creation in leading-edge technologies. The Golden State now captures nearly 60 percent of the nation’s green tech venture capital. Guess which state is best poised to create “green collar” jobs for the new economy?
Make no mistakes. Strengthening the local economy is our city’s number one job. We need to foster a thriving business environment with family wage jobs. However, the old ways of thinking are clearly no longer applicable.
What could sustainability mean for Federal Way? That’s a great question.
