I think they're doing pretty good on their own, at least with respect to finding unique uses for technology:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/ptech/1....ap/index.html

By the way, the African continent pretty much reached an uneasy equillibrium tens of thousands of years ago. The only thing that's upset the apple cart recently has been the introduction of technology. Where the new equillibrium point might be is anyone's guess. A lot of it depends on the technology.

You can get all of the nutrients that meat provides from non-meat sources - vegetarians do it all of the time. It does require a good knowledge of the various nutrients in food since you have to eat a wide variety of different things to get the nutrients that meat provides.

This Wikipedia article claims that a study of vegetarians found that they were not deficient in iron or calcium (most leafy green vegetables have calcium) but did have some deficiency in vitamin B-12 and zinc.

I have no problem with eating meat but I think as a society we eat meat too often and supplying that demand will not be sustainable in the long-term. A sustainable society would need to reduce meat consumption.

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

I think that removing meat altogether might be an end goal. Of course, it's not a good idea *AT THE MOMENT*, but anything can be worked towards. If you lowered meat consumption, and eventually got people used to the idea, people would be less and less rebellious at the idea of getting rid of meat. Especially if they get used to something like, say, soymeat.

As for any deficiencies, as well, I say that one answer is genetic engineering! It's a great boon for vegetable matter, and I can bet you that we will get to a point where genetic engineering of beneficial vegetables will be not only easy, but commonly done. Also, I have a feeling that eventually we'll be able to change the tastes of vegetables without changing the healthiness. Imagine chocolate that tasted like chocolate, smelled like chocolate, and had that nice chocolate crunch... but it was even healthier than a health bar?

Imagine of society consisted of a great amount of these things. In the end, you have healthiness, no longer the need to slaughter animals, and you don't detract from the "taste" or "texture" of that which you're leaving behind.

I mean, all of this would really pretty much take a while to work towards. It's unlikely we'll see an end result of such magnitude in a few decades. But in a few centuries, there would be nothing but benefit from working towards this concept. That's my view.

Also, Laminal - sorry, didn't get that you were joking Was a good one. However, as for "soy nuggets"... that's because this concept is in its infancy. Like I said, the REAL "food revolution" would take a long time to work towards, and there's a lot that the majority of people would fight against - especially men.

The stereotypical (not exactly the "real" typical) man is a red-meat eatin' deer-huntin' MAN of a MAN, that has no problem pickin' up a 30.06 hunting rifle and gettin' himself a deer steak. Then he slaughters a steer and gets himself a nice, bloody, steak.

Now, I like steak. But I'm really not this stereotypical man. However, a lot of people would be against being a "wussy vegetarian", and there would be a lot of loud (not /necessarily/ numerous) voices against such a policy. As well, no one likes to feel "forced" into anything, especially into giving up their good ol' meat. This is, as an end result, going to be something that anyone supporting such an agenda would have to fight against.

However, as time goes on, perceptions will change in the end. As-is, the "ideal male" image is starting to change, as it has been changing for almost a century now. I just hope it'll be for the better

__________________
"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." -- Thomas Paine

Being intelligent is not a felony. But most societies evaluate it as at least a misdemeanor. -- Heinlein

Creationists make it sound as though a "theory" is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. -- Isaac Asimov

Well, and colonialism, military dictatorships, and losing quite a lot of the strongest people to slavery. In fact, it's my understanding that the technology that hurt Africa the most was the technology which conquered it a few centuries past.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Actually, I didn't really talk about "sustainability" or specify a time limit on technology. I just said that we would eventually need to move to nuclear and solar power and, for the earth at least, eventually need to stabilize the population.

We're in a period of rapidly changing technology. It will continue to have both good and bad effects. There are some extreme technology wildcards, such as advanced nanotechnology, advanced genetic engineering and true AI that may come to nothing, or could change things so radically that we could barely recognize the results. We've barely started farming the oceans or used them in other reasonable ways, and haven't touched space resources yet. Even modest developments could make it relatively easy to extract resources from material that isn't practical today (iron and aluminum, for instance, are everywhere).

I don't know if things will turn out well or not, but I do know that technology will change radically. Talking about a "sustainable" society is assuming something that is essentially static. We're a very long way from a static society.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

mythical?
taks

__________________
goodbye richard pryor :(...

Why do you say that, Taks?

- Maha "?" Vailo

__________________
When you get down to it, Science answers how. Religion answers why. - hippietrekx

sustainability is a dream conjured up by socialists, particularly those in the UN.

taks

__________________
goodbye richard pryor :(...

Ah, yes, the old "It can't be done" idea. I don't like it.

There's all sorts of naysayers in everything. When people were complaining about not being able to feed the world, a single group stepped forward and ended up feeding one billion people throughout the world. They showed that it COULD be done, if you work for it.

I believe that utopia can be accomplished, and so can a sustainable society. I also believe that if you don't try, it won't work, and if you try to make immediate changes, it won't work on a mass scale. You can make a sudden swift change to a small group or a smaller community, but as you broaden it, any swift change would have a rather devastating impact overall, and can cause more and more unexpected changes.

Thus, anything worth having for a large community is worth working slowly towards. That's my belief.

__________________
"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." -- Thomas Paine

Being intelligent is not a felony. But most societies evaluate it as at least a misdemeanor. -- Heinlein

Creationists make it sound as though a "theory" is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night. -- Isaac Asimov

Well let crazy Monique start trouble...

I do not get time for read complete thread. I think that "sustainable society" difficult when some need latest ipod, others need food to eat. I think need for estimate of baseline "standard of living". Try for balance around baseline.

Before all Jump. I know maybe can not do. I think in cold war Communism lose, capitalism win. Is good, I do not think indicate capitalism best framework for human affairs. Capitalism say "harness human self-interest", is not complete answer. I do not know complete answer. If I have reason to be mathematician, I believe mathematics provide many tools to get answer.


Edit to Add:

I believe is noble dream. Sometime dreams occur after much toil, tears. Perhaps some day people make real.

I can't speak for Taks, but I suspect that you have a very different idea of what "sustainable society" means than I do. I'd be curious what you think it means? As we understand physics today, in the very long run nothing is sustainable: Eventually the sun will die, eventually the universe will cool. But humans don't operate on those time scales. From a resource standpoint, over human time scales, the one certain limit for the earth alone is that population can't increase forever. The rest is up for debate.

When I think "sustainable society" I am picturing a society that is essentially static, a socieity of limits, where technology and culture isn't changing in any significant way. That is not a utopia in my mind, but a dismal dead end. I hope that never happens. Instead, if humanity is to survive, I believe there will need to be many and changing cultures with ever changing technology, expanding into the solar system and eventually beyond. From a resource standpoint, such cultures could certainly be sustainable and more, but the societies would grow and decline and give way to other societies over time. There wouldn't be a monolithic "sustainable society."

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Dont you think there's any chance humans can move away from this earth in the future and live in the whole universe, with appropriate technology.... basicaly like in star wars might sound childish but isnt it possible at all.....

__________________
Alcohol... the creator and solution to all problems - Homer Simpson

That is not what sustainable development intiatives are trying to achieve. SD is more about initiatives, primarily environmental-based but also moving towards economics, where a society implements intiatives that are effective over the long-term without substantial harm to the environment or reliance on growth to sustain. Land and water use, population, use of non-renewable energy, economic diversity, these are all areas where countries are realizing that long-term strategies need to be put in place as things cannot continue in the long-term at their present rate of development. At the current rate of personal consumption does the US have the land & water resources available if the population reaches 400 million or more? Will Africa have the resources to give its people a reasonable standard of living if the population is doubling every 40 years? Can China deal with the increased pollution if 400 million of its citizens own cars? Does India have enough untapped resources to provide electrical power to its growing middle-class over the next 30 years?
These are things that sustainable development strategies have to look at. It is not about somehow freezing culture and not allowing anything to change but to recognize that many things in current society are not sustainable over the long-term.

Here are some links on documentation from the United Nations, the International Institute for Sustainable Development, and the UK Government.

Sustainable development is a big issue in Bermuda right now, a Commission is about to report to the Bermuda Governement on SD here.

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

no, the old "socialism doesn't work, as has been proven over and over and over and..." ad infinitum idea. sustainability requires socialism requires sustainability. sorry, it doesn't work. we, as a society, evolve and grow. we will consume resources at an increasing pace. the latter cannot be limited (the requirement of sustainability) without socialist control over resources and labor. therefore, it cannot happen.

uh, i must be missing something but which single group is feeding a billion people?

believe all you want, but the concept of "utopia" is nothing more than an ideal social/political/economic system. it looks great on paper but cannot work in practice for many reasons, not the least of which is free will (which implies differing wills among men).

but that does not mean the reverse is true.

define "worth having" and then put that in the context of my belief. just because you want it does not mean it is good for everyone else.

taks

__________________
goodbye richard pryor :(...

I am reminded of the Deep Space Nine episode where you had a bunch of unabomber types who swore off technology to live in harmony in nature--whatever that means.

As the heros transported away, we were left with a depressing scene.

Two small children wearing rags, living in dirt.

The US Government under George Bush have been involved in sustainable development initiatives for years. Here are a couple of articles from the White House: article 1, article 2

I think this thread is running into a problem of just how posters are defining SD. I don't see it as such an extensive process that it automatically requires a socialist state to run properly. Even deciding to let market forces dictate the use of resources is a possible SD plan provided the issues have been looked at carefully.

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

How does this relate to SD?

__________________
Now while I might be amused by Cthulhians, I don't necessarily distrust them to carry out the functions of government. -- JayUtah

What's it like being a skeptic in the Middle East? Check out my blog.

TringleMan, very good shots at #43 and 46. I could have said it myself.

__________________
"Shut up and calculate" R. Feynman