Mitchell, Helen
Cosmic Anthropology and Sustainable Development
by Helen Mitchell
How can the concerns of Applied Cosmic Anthropology concerns be integrated into the discussion of Sustainable Development?
Sustainable Development is a term which has been in use for some decades now. Its use implies a positive value or concept, it is hard to imagine either talking about or supporting un sustainable development However the positive connotations of the phase has also proved to be a weakness in that it has come to mean whatever the user would like it to mean.
Many organizations and reports across a broad spectrum – Governments, Non Governmental Organizations, Churches, and Multinational Corporations all profess themselves to be committed to the sustainable development of whatever… a country, a tribal group, a forest, a way of doing business. So sustainable development has come to mean…… what exactly?
The 1982 Brundtland Report is generally seen as the time the phrase entered into common usage with the definition
‘Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’[1]
This definition is widely accepted but the interpretations it has given rise to are not. It has been argued that in a world of limited resources, increasing populations and expanding economies that the terms ‘sustainable’ and ‘development’ are in direct contradiction to each other.[2]
Others have raised questions about whose view of development is to the fore in the common usage of the term sustainable development. It has been suggested that it is ‘generally a western ethnocentric view of progress’ and as such it presents only a linear view ‘clashing with other views which may view development as circular or spiral’.[3]
Like wise with the term sustainability – who decides what this means? A multi national corporation building a road through forest or rice fields in order to develop ‘sustainable’ livelihood for remote people or some of the people who wish to continue their traditional way of living and farming without the assistance of roads, 5 year plans and micro finance projects.
Experience suggests that the former has the marketing skills and ‘language’ of sustainable development while the latter has the lived experience of it and in the world of global communication, sound bite and instant headlines the former usually wins out.
An accepted thread in current discussions around the issue of sustainable development is the need for ‘balance’ between the environment, the community and the economy. However the fault line in this paradigm is the underlying assumption that it is the economy which sets the standards and pace for the other two components. Much use of the term sustainable development does not question the tension between the demands of managing the economy and managing the environment. The economy is seen as means to distribute and allocate resources and also as the ‘repairer; of the environment should any damage be caused in the ongoing ‘distribution’ of such resources. As an example of this kind of thinking one can look at the system in the European Union where countries can ‘buy’ carbon credits – allowing them to exceed the agreed pollution rates for their nation. Thus those with the biggest economies can buy their way out of polluting the environments while their governments can proclaim their commitment to sustainable development.[4]
There is no discussion as to whether it would be wiser to avoid damaging the environment and also local communities in the first instance as it is assumed that the economy can solve all problems. The thinking behind the paradigm of ‘balance’ is that of stewardship, and more recently manager of the environment as opposed to partnership with it. This thinking reveals a deeply held belief that environmental damage can somehow be paid for, this prevents serious discussion as to whether it would be better to act more responsibly towards the environment. Economic driven thinking about sustainable development has given rise to a false consciousness about the term sustainable – as in environmental damage can be ‘managed’ if we make it sustainable, thus we only chop down certain trees, catch certain types of fish etc. This model of approaching the question of both sustainability and development is preventing creative thinking about how we should be approaching the natural world as it vanishes before us.
Thus language which is a powerful shaper of how we view reality is confused, misused and used to cover a multitude of meanings when it comes to ‘sustainable development’.
This has resulted in a situation that as meetings at national and international levels go on to recommend further and better approaches to sustainable development (which may have as many meanings as those at the meeting) all the practical indications are that the present reality is in fact unsustainable.
This overview suggests a change in thinking, language and being is needed. I would like to suggest that the worldview suggested by cosmic anthropology offers one way forward.
Drawing on wisdom and knowledge from a wide range of disciplines cosmic anthropology offers a new model or paradigm for today’s situation. It gives a different vision which is holistic and system based as opposed to that based on antromorphic positions.
To think cosmically means we are invited to think beyond present boundaries and concerns. We are challenged to review our perspective and see ourselves within the universe as opposed to just on the earth and to see ourselves as one of many species as opposed to the species.
The approach of applied cosmic anthropology is holistic in many respects. It stresses interdependence as a value and applies this in a variety of ways. It draws on many disciplines, sociology, psychology, anthropology, biology, economics and chemistry to name just a few, it uses the best of the models they offer to mould a new way of viewing the world and our reality. In addition to drawing together disciplines which have been forced to develop separately and often in isolation from each other cosmic anthropology also draws differing mindsets or world views together and then moves beyond them stressing the interconnectedness of all.
Cosmic anthropology gives meaning to the idea that the personal is political. By inviting us to go inward to our indigenous mind, to our ancient wisdom while also challenging us to go outward and make linkages between the many ways of being and viewing reality it leads us to a slow but sure transformation in our relationships with each other, our world, our reality and the cosmos.
Cosmic anthropology is concerned with finding common values and shared goals. It is giving a language to those who are looking for an alternative vision for our future on this planet. It is also offering a frame work to assist with new ways of thinking about relationships among people and between people and the rest of the universe in ways that are life enhancing and ‘joined up’.
Among the frame works it is putting forward is one based on systems thought. This way of thinking incorporates length and breadth of vision. We are challenged to see our lives, our world as part of a much wider reality connected over space and time and located within a cosmic view. We are asked to recognize realities much larger than our own personal or geographical space/boundaries. A cosmic dimension to my thinking or consciousness links how I use my space on the planet with how this impacts on the space of others be they people, animals or plants.
There is a similar connection over time within this systems way of viewing life. Decisions which my great great grandparents made about the use of their land is still impacting on people today 5 generations later. Decisions town planners, architects and others made in the early 19th century have a profound effect on people’s lives today. Likewise decisions I make in my life will impact on future generations in ways I neither know nor can control.
Sustainable development advocates the necessity for taking a long term view, it also suggests that we move closer towards interdependence in thought and action, reminding us that:
‘The earth is one but the world is not. We all depend on the one biosphere for sustaining our lives. Yet each community, each country, strives for survival and prosperity with little regard for its impact on others.’[5]
To sustain life is a way which is meaningful for the cosmos policy and practice at all levels from the individual to the international needs to be examined. This sounds like, and indeed is a big task but we have some models. Applied cosmic anthropology is concerned with returning to sources, the stories and myths are there to ‘reintroduce’ us to what we already know but have forgotten, how to treat the cosmos, the earth and each other. As it becomes clearer that current thinking and planning for sustainable development is not sustainable for the earth and most of the people in it, that this is not just a technical issue but also an ethical and religious challenge the ‘applied’ in cosmic anthropology assumes a new importance in helping us move towards a model of being which is truly sustainable.
As more people come to see that our current paradigm represents an undesirable future a realization is growing that there is a need to produce differently, consume differently, organize differently – in short, live differently. This growing consciousness has been facilitated by developments in technology, thus campaigners on such apparently diverse issues as rainforest protection in Brazil and EU subsidies in France can ‘come together’ in virtual reality and discover common cause and issues. Likewise ‘there is a striking convergence of modern scientific knowledge with traditional knowledge and practices.’[6] Traditional ecological practices and knowledge of the natural world are gaining a new audience far beyond their place of origin. Thus there are many signs of growth towards a new way of thinking or being. The un sustainability (whether it be material, emotional, physical etc) of our current way of being could be said to be a moment of ‘original blessing’ in that we are being forced to re think and re connect with others in new ways. We are being moved to ask big questions and finding out that the answers are beyond one group, country, and planet, they need the input of others.
Applied cosmic anthropology is enabling us to see in a broad and non threatening way the lack in our current models of thought. It offers an original and life giving interpretation of sustainable development as a process. It is not something to be aimed for or achieved but rather an ongoing dynamic between people, for in an interdependent world who is to be developed and who is the developer. People linked over space and time help in the development of each other. Thinking cosmically and perhaps more importantly applying our insights should mean that sustainable development will come to mean something different. This will include quality of life for all and not just a few (rich) people, it will mean more humane farming practices and a new respect for the earth. A concern of sustainable development is with equity and fairness. Cosmically understood this applies to all life sources and not just human life. Sustainable development is also known to be concerned with the long term view, the wisdom unearthed for us by cosmic anthropology points to the traditional understanding of this as planning for the seventh generation. Contrast this view with the current one that long term planning means ‘development’ plans of 3-5 years.
The contribution of applied cosmic anthropology to discussions on sustainable development also gives a new perspective on ‘place’. It enables us to see our place in a much larger framework than we had previously imagined. It also allows us to see that people have gone before who had grappled with similar concerns and questions and to learn from their wisdom. We see our place as that of one among many different forms of life all with different contributions to make to the overall sustainability of the place/ the planet we call home.
In seeking to address contemporary issues using the best of ancient and modern thinking applied cosmic anthropology offers a world view which is all encompassing. It invites us to make a shift in our assumptions about ourselves and what it means to be human. It offers to us a new level of meaning but this is not cost free. To question long held assumptions about economics, science religion and society is to enter into new territory. It involves embracing change and new values. Long held truths are up for discussion and perhaps in their present form for dismissal.
Sustainable development in one such contemporary concern. As mentioned at the beginning of this paper it is a phrase which because of its many interpretations is almost meaningless. Applied cosmic anthropology challenges us to ‘reclaim’ this concept and to maximize its potential for good when understood and applied in a holistic sense. In looking at how the cosmos has been sustained forever, how ancient people made sense of their beginnings, how religion added another layer of meaning to their stories and how science has complemented natural forces we have been asked to think again about sustainable development can mean in such a changed world view.
It surely must mean understanding that we develop together or not at all, that we sustain each other and the universe or not at all. Viewed cosmically sustainable development needs to be seen as something which includes nature, earth, sky and seas. Viewed anthropologically it has to be seen as that which links all humanity but not exclusively so for our very sustainability depends on other differently able creatures. To apply the principles of sustainable development within a frame work of cosmic anthropology means to see life as a blessing for all, to feel it as a force for all and to live daily in a consciously interconnected way.
[1] Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford University Press, 1987, p.27
[2] Bender Sharon, The Nature of Sustainable Development Newham Press, Australia 1996, p106
[3] Brown Jeffrey, ‘The Mirage of Sustainable Development’ Futurist, Sept-Oct 1993, p144
[4] Mc Donagh Sean, The Death of Life, Claretian Publications, Philippines 2004, p67
[5] Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, Oxford University Press, 1987, p.27
[6] De Cuellar Perez Javier, Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO Publications 1999, p. 187.