5.1 Rethinking fundamental concepts

Earlier sections have described issues related to sustainable societies and work. Here these issues are brought together to explore how they relate to one another. As stated in the Introduction, the main question to be faced is "how to reconcile the imperative of environmental sustainability with the achievement of a society in which there is employment for all who need it?"   The "True-False" questions serve to focus some of the practical dilemmas touched on.

5.2 Dilemmas and paradoxes

A popularly perceived dilemma is that lack of jobs implies the desirability of economic growth even if this increases environmental disruption. The choice is posed as being between full employment and environmental sustainability, a dilemma aggravated by the recent phenomenon of "jobless growth". To discern whether this is a real contradiction, one can draw on some of the insights developed in preceding sections.

1. Clear distinction must be made between meaningful, sustainable work and (paid) employment (which can be either environmentally and socially sustainable or meaningless and unsustainable). Much necessary and sustainable work is not shared equitably (e.g., between women and men, geographic regions). If such work is shared more equitably, if some forms presently not remunerated is paid, if the work-week is shortened, and if all work is recognized and registered for its social and economic value, one could approach "employment for all who need it", both at national and global levels.
2. Poverty is often both a cause and a result of environmental degradation. Implementing a preferential option for the poor and the commitment made at the 1995 World Summit on Social Development to eradicate absolute poverty would be a step toward reversing the trend toward further environmental destruction.
3. Wage employment needs reorganization to take full account of environmental sustainability. Among other things, this implies:

1. Substantial "dematerialisation" of production and consumption. That is, given products or services will be made with (use up) drastically less materials, will use less depletable energy resources and will generate significantly less waste and pollution than at present. Such production will generate new and additional work in repair, reconditioning, re-use and recycling (such as the "loop economy"). Because such an approach is relatively labor-intensive, there is a positive link between environmental sustainability, work, and employment. [See Walter Stahel, Long product life and material recycling, Ministry of Environment, Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart, Vulkan Verlag, Essen, 1991/93, translated into English by USEPA, R&D office, Washington, D.C.]
2. Focus for science and technology which is less harmful to the environment and is more labor intensive. This development may follow from the previous point, encouraging technologies and products that which meet these aims.
3. Shift from consuming to accessing materials (consumption of services, access-to-use, rather than individualistic ownership patterns for goods). Accessing goods via services rather than consumption is both less damaging to the environment and more labor intensive.  [Stahel, Walter and Reday, Geneviève (1976/1981) Jobs for Tomorrow. Report to the Commission of the European Communities, Brussels / Vantage Press, NY and The Limits to Certainty. Stahel and Giarini, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Hingham Massachusetts, 1993.]
4. Increased demand for environmental management and restoration. The above mentioned developments may lead to the emergence of new sectors of economic activity which generate new employment. Economic growth defined in the traditional way may involve less employment; sustainable development can create work and jobs.
5. Redefinition of the concept of "productivity". Presupposing that society develops a sense of "enough" and new attitudes of satisfaction rather than of material consumption, and that wages and salaries in wealthy societies no longer follow the rise in material productivity (traditional definition) there would be increased wage employment in the care-sector, e.g., child care, services for senior citizens and persons with disabilities, health care, environmental management, education.

The kinds of developments listed above should be supported by government policy, for example, in shifting the tax base by reducing taxes and charges on labor while increasing taxes on environmentally and socially harmful production (described in the consultation report "Sustainable Growth -- a contradiction in terms?". See also Chapter  7 on new political culture).  Empirical evidence shows that such developments do not adversely affect macro-employment possibilities. Without overestimating the positive net employment effect, it is possible to have develop patterns of production and consumption that are environmentally more benign and which create more employment than is suppressed by moving from consumption to conservation patterns.

5.3 Practical dilemmas

Solving many of the ecological problems society faces may entail changes in the immediate livelihood and material welfare levels of people, whereas achieving sustainability in the broadest sense of the word, will generate benefits in the long run. In the transition period, moving in the direction of new equilibrium may lead to short-term frictional and sectoral unemployment. The dilemma is that the short term consequences may result in giving priority to urgent/immediate needs at the trade-off price of eventual benefits.

Chapter 5, page 1 of 1