Talk:Sustainability/History

Hoping not to give offence, but the "history" section doesn't work for me. Most of the section reads as a history of recent academic study of sustainability with a strong economic bias. The actual historical trends in sustainability/unsustainability aren't mentioned. Rachel Carson and the Club of Rome look like a leftover from a previous edit (they are at the centre of the story), prominent ecologists in the history of sustainability (Aldo Leopold) aren't there, and Agenda 21 doesn't get mentioned. The last sentence in the History section contracts the whole "development" argument to a couple of sentences so it becomes meangingless, also it has no references or links (Bina Agarwal?). There's nothing on urban sustainability (say Jaime Lerner, or Peter Newman). And it's too long, so jumping in and adding stuff is not the answer. I think a collective editing job is needed with an agenda as GT is proposing, I'm happy to participate but not confident to go making major changes to the page itself without discussion.--Travelplanner (talk) 09:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your views about the current state of the section. I think perhaps a starting point would be to organise the existing information as per the proposed outline here, with subsections determined as to best fit a timeline of sustainability history. Nick carson (talk) 11:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Here is a current copy of the History section of the article. Please transfer real time edits to article for general review, or make proposals here. If an improvement to the article can be made please update the article and this information here accordingly skip sievert (talk) 19:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Has this procedure been agreed by consensus? My preference would be to work collectively here until consensus and then to put up the the final agreed version. But thanks for putting it up Skip. Granitethighs (talk) 22:08, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

History

NOTE: go through ecology, agriculture, logging, environmentalism, economics, culture, everything, and read through their histories and see where sustainability is referenced, any significant concepts or advancements, and incorporate them here...

Further information: History of Sustainability, History of ecology, and Environmentalism

Long before modern humans evolved, the evolution of plant and animal species to adapt to their environments and their interactions with eachother, led life on Earth to develop a natural balance to ensure the simultaneous survival of various species of life, thus all life on Earth relies on other forms of life to exist. The capacity of any system to endure and grow depends, first and foremost, on the energy that is available to support its activity. Simple biological systems like bacterial colonies will multiply and grow until the energy (food) supply and/or critical nutrients become depleted, or until waste products inhibit growth.

In early human history the energy and resource demands of small bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers would have been very small although, even at this time, their use of fire and desire for specific foods may have influenced the existence and composition of living systems. Later, the success of settled agrarian communities would have depended largely on the skill with which they managed their land and trade: societies outgrowing their local food supply or depleting critical resources would have to move on or collapse. Mismanagement of finite natural resources by cultures such as the Maya, Anasazi and Easter Islanders eventually led to their demise by destroying their resource base [84] [85] , while other societies such as Indigenous Australians, evolved slowly over lengthy periods of time in balance with their surrounding environment.

These advancments in technology increased the overall population of human beings as they manipulated their surrounding environment without the comprehension of the future effects of an unsustainable existence, utilising their intelligence without understanding how to use it properly. Although the majority of the human population still do not comprehend their unsustainable lifestyles or understand the subsequent effects, the concept of sustianability has been increasingly collectivly understood by human beings since the late 20th century, becoming widely known, if not fully understood, by the turn of the century.

(Discussion)

I would like to offer the following as an alternative to the above. My thinking is that it introduces its themes in exactly the same way we did in the lead and definition - by passing clearly from general systems, to biological systems, to human systems, all the time speaking in broad generalities. At the same time it progressively introduces and juxtaposes the key concepts of sustainability, energy and food, resource use, growth and its limiting factors. It is very minimalist and "bones"-like because I am aware of space problems in this section: there is a lot still to say history-wise. If this effort or part of it is "consensused" then I can easily provide citations for all the assertions.

The capacity of any system to endure and grow depends, first and foremost, on the energy that is available to support its activity. Simple biological systems like bacterial colonies will multiply and grow until the energy (food) supply and/or critical nutrients become depleted, or until waste products inhibit growth. In early human history the energy and resource demands of small bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers would have been very small although, even at this time, their use of fire and desire for specific foods may have influenced the existence and composition of living systems. Later, the success of settled agrarian communities would have depended largely on the skill with which they managed their land and trade: societies outgrowing their local food supply or depleting critical resources would have to move on or collapse. Among civilisations thought to have brought about their own demise by poor management of energy and resources include the Mayans, Mesopotamians and Easter Islanders. Granitethighs (talk) 21:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I've incorporated the changes and added a sentence on the cultures/societies/people who have sustained their own existence at times in human history, such as Indigenous Australians for tens of thousands of years (they had laws in place that prevented the use of resources that had to recuperate before being utilised again) and I'm sure there have been others that I don't know of, perhaps smaller groups. Nick carson (talk) 00:55, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Early Concepts & Writings and the Industrial Revolutions

- first writings & concepts dealing with sustainability

Some of the first human beings to think and write about the way in which living organism interact with and relate to their surroundings included Aristotle and particularly his student, Theophrastus, both of whom had interest in many species of animals. Theophrastus described interrelationships between animals and their environment as early as the 4th century BC. However, these concepts remained explored by very few individuals and it wasn't until the 18th century that they were to be explored collectively in greater detail.

The Western industrial revolutions of the 17th to 19th centuries tapped into the vast energy potential of fossil fuels. Coal was used to power ever more efficient engines and later used to generate electricity. Modern medicine protected large populations from disease. The conditions facilitated a human population explosion and unprecedented industrial and scientific growth that has continued to this day. From 1650 to 1850 the global population doubled from around 500 million to 1 billion people.

Through this period concern about the environmental and social impacts of industry were expressed by some Enlightenment political economists and more generally through the Romantic movement of the 1800s. Overpopulation was discussed in a famous essay by Thomas Malthus (see Malthusian catastrophe), while John Stuart Mill hypothesized that the "stationary state" of an economy might be desirable, anticipating later insights of modern ecological economists. In the late 19th century, Eugenius Warming, heralded the scientific disipline of ecology as the scientific study of the distribution and abundance of life and the interactions between organisms and their natural environment; concepts that would later assist the interpretation of human interaction with and impact on the physical and natural environment.

(Discussion)

I would like to offer the following as an alternative to the above. My thinking is that it clearly continues themes established in the history lead but now more closely related to humans. IMO the huge environmental impact and environmental implications of the Industrial Revolution can never be overstated. It provided the means for humanity to dominate the planet and this needs to be said. Again, I can provide citations for all or part of this section. This section could have a little more on critical ideas of the period that relate to sustainability.

The Western industrial revolution of the 17th to 19th centuries tapped into the vast energy potential of fossil fuels. Coal was used to power ever more efficient engines and later used to generate electricity. Modern medicine protected large populations from disease. The conditions were now present for a human population explosion and unprecedented industrial growth that has continued to this day. From 1650 to 1850 the global population doubled from about 0.5 to 1 billion people.

Through this period concern about the environmental and social impacts of industry were expressed by some Enlightenment political economists and more generally through the Romantic movement of the 1800s. Factors controlling populations and their expansion were discussed in a famous essay by Thomas Malthus (see Malthusian catastrophe), while John Stuart Mill hypothesized that the "stationary state" of an economy might be desirable, anticipating later insights of modern ecological economists. In the late 19th century, Eugenius Warming, heralded the scientific disipline of ecology as the scientific study of the distribution and abundance of life and the interactions between organisms and their natural environment; concepts that would later assist the interpretation of human interaction with and impact on the physical and natural environment.

I've incorporated these changes too and added links to history of medicine, etc. Nick carson (talk) 01:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Early 20th century

- Hotelling's Rule, beginnings of the modern concepts of sustainability

By the turn of the 20th century, the industrial revolution had led to an unprecedented increase in the human consumption of resources, for many decades this was seen as a positive thing for humanity as it increased overall health and wealth and further increased population. In 1931, Harold Hotelling proposed Hotelling's rule, an economic model exploring non-renewable resource management. It showed that efficient exploitation of a nonrenewable resource would, under otherwise stable economic conditions, lead to a depletion of the resource. The rule stated that this would lead to a net price or "Hotelling rent" that reflected the increasing scarcity of the resource. Simmilarly, Hartwick's rule provided an important result about the sustainability of welfare in an economy that uses non-renewable resources.

By the early to mid twentieth century ecology had become an accepted scientific discipline bringing with it many ideas that are now fundamental to sustainability including; the interconnectedness of all living systems forming a single living planetary system, the biosphere; the importance of natural cycles (of water, nutrients and other chemicals, materials, waste); and the passage of energy through trophic levels of living systems.

(Discussion)

Suggested continuation from above into early twentieth century. I would like some of the formative economic ideas here after the ecology bit but with a simple explanation of what they say and why they are important for sustainability thinking.

By the early to mid twentieth century ecology had become an accepted mainstream scientific discipline bringing with it many ideas that are now fundamental to sustainability including: the interconnectedness of all things with (eco)systems all linked to form a single living planetary system, the biosphere; the importance of natural cycles (of water, nutrients and other chemicals, materials, waste); the passage of energy through trophic levels of living systems. Granitethighs (talk) 03:48, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The early 20th century section was a bit of a hole in my research, I think we should keep it there, perhaps add your proposed paragraph to that section? I might just do that now, let me know if your not happy with it. Nick carson (talk) 05:15, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Mid 20th century: Environmentalism

By the mid 20th century ecology was established as a scientific disipline; the foundation of the United States Wilderness Society in 1935 and work exemplified in A Sand County Almanac by Aldo Leopold in 1949, informed the growing environmental movement and a spread interest in ecology as a science. A Sand County Almanac was a combination of natural history, scene painting with words, and philosophy. It is perhaps best known for the following quote, which defines his land ethic: "A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise." The concept of a trophic cascade is put forth in the chapter 'Thinking Like a Mountain', wherein Leopold realizes that killing a predator wolf carries implications for the surrounding ecosystem.

In 1956, M. King Hubbert established the "Hubbert peak theory" which accurately predicted that United States oil production would peak between 1965 and 1970.. Then, in the 1960's, Environmentalism gained widespread attention after the release of many works, the most notable being Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, published in 1962. Many subsequent works followed into the 1970's including; Small Is Beautiful – A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, by E.F. Schumacher in 1973 and the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth in 1975, amongst many others. This increased attention was also aided in part by the acceptance of Environmentalism by various subcultures during a time of civil dissobedience and positive change.

(Discussion)

It is really difficult to sort out big picture (social and environmental trends, movements, ideas) and small picture (individual events, places and people) in this history section in general, it is also difficult sorting out the extent to which aspects of the environmental movement link to the story we want to tell about sustainability. I think we now have ecology covered in the previous sections and offer the following for discussion – for the period 1940 to 1980. As always – it is difficult but important to be brief. It would be great, at a later date, to follow up Nicks suggestion of a separate article on the history of sustainability.

Following the deprivations of the great depression and World War II the West entered a period of escalating growth. A gathering environmental movement pointed out that there were environmental costs associated with the many material benefits that were now being enjoyed. Innovations in technology were transforming society, they included: new plastics; the energy of nuclear power and fossil fuels, especially oil, for ever more efficient transport systems; modern industrial agriculture was born through the Green Revolution; and a host of new electronic devices were introduced including colour television and computers. There were concerns about pollution (Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring looked coldly at the ecological effects of a booming synthetic chemicals industry), the renewal of a population growth spiral, and the clever marketing of consumption beyond reasonable need. In 1975 the book Limits to Growth analyzed the implications of all these developments for the future of humanity. Granitethighs (talk) 23:03, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I get what your saying about sorting out the big and little pictures, so where I've talked about individual texts, etc, I've added something to the effect of "these progressions/trends/ideas/concepts/etc were represented/epitomised in book X, released in year Y" this explains to the reader that there was alot of people thinking and writing about the same stuff but perhaps only one or two publications that gained widespread noteriety or success and came to be used as yardsticks for their subject matter.

I've discussed the created of a separate "History of Sustainability" article below and suggested you keep any more detailed information that you've written in a sandbox or something so that once we've finished the rewrite of this article, anyone who wants to can tackle the creation of the "History of Sustaianbility" article. Nick carson (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Late 20th century

- more recent advancements in sustainability, to be further described in description

The combined effect of the popularisation of Environmentalism and peak oil production in the United States, led to a global increase in the awareness that human use of many of the Earth's resources was not sustainable and was escalating at a critical rate. The 1973 and 1979 energy crises served as valuable research material for future global peak oil scenarios and led to a further increase in public awareness of issues of sustainability, however these crises were averted when the United States increased their oil imports to meet demand.

The development of renewable sources of energy in the 1970's and 80's, primarily in wind turbines and photovoltaics, and increased use of hydro-electric, presented some of the first sustainable alternatives to fossil fuel and nuclear energy generation. These developments led to construction of many of the first large-scale solar and wind power plants during the 1980's and 90's. The 1990's saw the small-scale reintroduction of the electric car, exemplified in the General Motors EV1 and REVA and the popularisation of solar car racing. These factors combined with consistent yet minority, public pressure, facilitated further increase in the public awareness of issues of sustainability and many local and state governments began for the first time, to implement small-scale policies to deal with such issues.

21st century: Global Awareness

Since the turn of the century, more specific and detailed models and concepts have been proposed in an effort to transition human civilisation towards becomming sustainable. Important concepts that have arrisen include; the Car-free movement, in which urban environments are designed considering all aspects of the system, and the Cradle to Cradle concept, as defined in the 2002 publication Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things by Michael Braungart and William McDonough, in which toxic, synthetic and organic materials are separated into different life-cycles and models are proposed for the efficent use of materials in manufacturing and production.

Global oil production is generally accepted to have peaked in 2006, while many large corporations and energy organisation's predictions suggest this is yet to happen and will occur between 2010 and 2020, depending on the origin of the prediction. Regardless of when it has or will occur, peak oil production has severe implications, particularly for westernised countires which rely heavily on road freight and private automobiles, for the way people transport themselves, food prices and subsequent economic effects. The beginning of many such effects are already being felt, as represented by record high oil prices peaking during mid 2008.

The work of Bina Agarwal and Vandana Shiva amongst many others, has given South Asia and the Indian subcontinent a more international perspective of ecology and sustainability. In 2002, the United Nations passed a resolution for the declaration of the decade 2005-2014 to be known as the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development and began implementing international projects and programs to educate the human population on issues of sustainability.

The changes across all aspects of humanity, specifically the advancements in technology, over the last few decades is sometimes referred to as the beginning of the New Industrial Revolution, which would see the transition of economies, energy generation, water and waste management, towards sustainable practices, which may subsequently lead to a widespread collective realisation of the need for humanity to sustain its own existence.

(Discussion)

Suggested abbreviation of the above.There are many names I have not mentioned. It is difficult to know where to start. Its all space ...

It was now clear that environmental problems had become a matter of global concern. While the developed world was considering the problems of unchecked development the developing countries, faced with continued poverty and deprivation, regarded development as essential - to provide the necessities of food, clean water and shelter. In 1980 the International Union for the Conservation of Nature had published its influential World Conservation Strategy followed in 1982 by its World Charter for Nature which drew attention to the decline of the world’s ecosystems. Faced with the differing priorities of the developed and developing world the United Nation’s World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission) worked for two years to try and resolve the apparent conflict between the environment and development. The Commission concluded that development was acceptable but it must now be different: it must be sustainable development that was directed to meeting the needs of the poor in a way that no longer caused environmental problems but helped to solve them.

At more grass roots level there has been a slow and steady adoption of more sustainable living by increasing public awareness and adopting recycling, dematerialization, decarbonisation, renewable energies, and the use of soft technology. Granitethighs (talk) 03:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

We need to synthesise both of our versions, normally I would be doing it as I write this but I'm not in the right headspace right now. Nick carson (talk) 11:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Preliminaries

For simplicity I suggest the title be "History"
In the interests of article balance I suggest this section does not exceed ?300 words
In the interest of clarity I suggest that there be no overlap between this and the "Economic" part of the article.
Although "chattiness" is not appropriate for an encyclopaedia I feel the present text is "difficult": I feel it needs a simpler, more flowing style concentrating more on ideas than names.
Could we perhaps start from the current "Outline" ? Granitethighs (talk) 22:31, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I like the current version and do not think the information should be changed much. It already has been edited as to flow and direction and time aspect. Historic and modern framing of sustainability issues... gets at the substance of this section.. the title is fine. Balance should be given in favor of more info as opposed to less in this section. Right now it contains the very bare bones of the academic aspect of the history of the issue and its most important aspects. Economics in regard to sustainability is a very different aspect and the two should not be blended. Economics are a key part of the history of the thought of sustainability... they are interlaced. Right now the economic section in the article does not contain the history information and vice a versa... There is room for both of these aspects in the article... the pure academic issues and the tied in economic issues... so... these sections are very different. The present information is not difficult. It is full of article links and citation references for those that wish to delve further into issues presented. It is simple now. It also flows easily... and I disagree completely about concentrating on ideas instead of names... as these names came up with the ideas... and are studied by serious people because of that... and then people are connected with the serious and notable ideas... which are notable for a reason. skip sievert (talk) 22:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

GT is right, the title of this section should be "History". I think we need to stick to the subsections of "Early Writings", "Environmentalism", as without them it makes it difficult for the reader to read through and learn about the history of the concept of sustainability. I'll use this rewrite as a basis for my own and I'll try and place the current content into the appropriate subsections. To restate, it's not so much a content problem, content is 90% there, I'm just worried about how this section flows and how the information within it is organised; we should stick to the proposed outline. Nick carson (talk) 07:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Alright,... artful writing is nice.. but information is more important... people come for information. History as a title then. Right now the information goes according to a time line... and that is the axis of the presentation. This is not a bad way to do it... it shows mostly different things, when they have come up, or been thought out, and into focus in a time sense.skip sievert (talk) 03:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, if we stick to the subsections, maybe adding or subtracting one or two as per content, then the history section will flow well as a timeline, easy to read and succinct yet inclusive. Nick carson (talk) 12:32, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. Feel free to incorporate your changes also in real time on the article or close to real time. That way incremental change can happen with the larger picture in mind.. and the article will be improved with better focus and organization. skip sievert (talk) 16:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

One possible way of dealing with a large amount of content would be to list dates (or date ranges) and add content in note form. The History section in Sustainable living is rather like this. This would make editing easier, especially in the early development stages of this section, and it could be made more flowing at a later date when agreement over content settles down, if that is necessary. Skip could note the bits he is knowledgeable about. I could add some notes and dates etc. Just a thought. Granitethighs (talk) 04:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Outline for re-write

Thinking about the comments above and looking at ways the history of sustainability is approached, I came across this outline of some of the key events:

1972

• "The Limits to Growth" Report
• Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment UN

1979

• Berne Convention on Habitat Protection (Council of Europe)
• Geneva Convention on Air Pollution

1980

• World Conservation Strategy (IUCN)
• Global 2000 Report (USA)

1983

• Helsinki Protocol on Air Quality (UN)
• World Commission on Environment and Development (UN)

1987

• Montreal Protocol on Substances that deplete the Ozone Layer (UN)
• Our Common Future (Brundtland Commission on behalf of the UN)

1990

• Green Paper on the Urban Environment (EC)

1992

• Rio Summit Agreements (UN)
• Our Common Inheritance (UK)

1994

• European Environment Agency Established (EU)

1997

• Kyoto Conference on Global Warming [4]

Some other milestones: Developments in ecology such as the concepts of biosphere, ecosystem, and ecological succession which were building blocks that enabled thinking about natural cycles and limits. The technological advances of World War II led to the development of pesticides and synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, which made the so-called "Green Revolution" possible, for the first time pushing the human race beyond natural limits. In the 1960s, Rachel Carson and Paul Erlich sounded warnings about the perils of pesticides and overpopulation, respectively. The first pictures of the earth from space sent back by Apollo 8 (1968) and Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis in the early 1970s enabled humans to conceive of the Earth as a single organism. Ecological economics contributed to the evolution of theories of sustainability and aspects of its measurement. First thoughts. Sunray (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

We have a lot of material in this history section. There is a danger we can wander off down any number of environmental tracks and get caught up in detail. One task is to direct people to Wikipedia resources that can relieve this huge history section of its load of information. Here are some contenders please add more where it will help us redirect:
environmentalism, environmental economics, ecological economics, ecology movement, list of environmental agreements, sustainable development, industrial revolution, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment.

Another task is to focus the material we have accumulated by concentrating our thinking on sustainability itself. I like the idea of history as “its his-story, not my story”, its all a minefield. And the temptation is to make it a rambling polemic rather than an encyclopaedia account. But here is a thought for breaking up the information into historically significant periods The content need not be long. Sunray’s, Nick’s, TPs and Skip’s ideas would fit easily into a framework something like the following. Could I suggest people add and subtract from headings and content in the following - the intention being that this is a way to winnow out what we all think are key ideas? If these bones are established together then adding the flesh should be a lot easier.

• Preindustrial societies and sustainable living. (living in harmony with nature using local resources, ideas for sustainable living)

• Implications of the industrial revolution for human sustainability. (Malthus, Schumacher, Daly, JS Mill, other first (economic) writings on sustainability).

• Advent of ecology and ecological concepts in the early twentieth century, (natural cycles, populations and resource limits, ecosystem, biosphere, interconnectedness of everything)

• Post WW2 rapid escalation of population, industry and technology and its threat to human sustainability (industrial agriculture, chemicals, plastics, pollution)

• The environmental movement of the 60s-70s and its influential ideas on sustainability. (Rachel Carson, Paul Ehrlich, Limits to Growth, Gaia, simple living, ?antimaterialism and anti-consumption, pollution, population, more sophisticated economic analysis)

• International sustainable development movement of the 80s (global program of integrating developed and undeveloped worlds; combined social, economic, environmental methodology; economisation of ideas – natural capital, natural assets; humanity becomes collectively unsustainable in the mid 1980s; human wellbeing as a measure of success; measuring sustainability; CBD and Millennium Ecosystem Assessment)

Granitethighs (talk) 03:58, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I came across this problem too, there are alot of countries around the world who have within their various government sectors enacted policies or signed agreements and all sorts of things int he 2nd half of the 20th century and increasingly thus far in the 21st century. Hence, it wouldn't be wise of us to try and include all such information here nor would it be to determine which ones in particular were the most significant as it is the sum of all these actions that has brought us to where we are today, not a select 5 or 10 or 15 of them. There are alot of problems like this within this history section. I think we should put the content here into this talk page and begin to build on it. Nick carson (talk) 12:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Updated Information

I've reorganised and sythesised the various proposals of the history section and updated the version here. I've ordered the subsections so that the section follows a rough timeline which can be expanded and contracted as consensus sees fit in our goal to explain the evolution of human understanding of the concept of sustainability.

I recomend that a dedicated History of Sustainability article be created at some stage to provide extended summaries and act as a hub linking information pertaining to the histories of related disciplines; ecology, environmentalism, etc.

Something also of note and which I may recomend in the future... This is not a history of economics nor is it a history of ecology or environmentalism, rather, all these things have contributed to our understanding of sustainability over the years. Sustainable economics is not separate from regular Economics. Economics will need to inevitably be sustainable, just as with anything else (ecology, etc) and so sustainable economics is just the progression of regular economics, but it's still economics. Hope that makes sense. These current divisions (building/sustianable building, economics/sustainable economics) will decrease slowly until they merge with regular building and regular economics. Understand this and try to think ahead of our noses and inclusively.

One final thing to keep in mind as we all work to complete this section; Sustianability doesn't have a history in the strictest sense (which is a long and complicated explaination), it's a concept that has existed as long as there has been life interacting and relying on eachother, until we as human beings gave it a name and began understanding it. It is related directly to everything concerning the interactions of life on Earth. As such, this history section is a brief walkthrough of human understanding and developments in understanding this concept.

I'm not good with spelling and citations and wikifying and all the bits n' pieces so this is where those who are good at the type of stuff fire up and work together to complete it to our level of understanding as of today! Nick carson (talk) 06:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Nick I think the timeline idea is good and also directing people to extended information elsewhere. I also agree about the economics and environmental points you make - yes it does make sense. I understand what you mean about sustainability being around a long time but I think it is dangerous to make a concept pre-date humans - minor point. Looks good. I assume you have put the above up as a scratchpad for collective work. I have hopped into it - I hope you dont mind. Let me know if you want to know why I have done what I've done or if this method is unacceptable. It seems the best way to work towards consensus. The wikying etc. is minor stuff later. Thanks for getting things to this level. A couple of things though: as an encyclopaedic account we can't present information as though it were a talk - any statements making assertions must be back-upable with a reference. I'm bad at this so I sympathise. Also, biologists (I'm one) are taught to be careful of attributing purpose to things as though they had consciousness. That perhaps sounds over the top but nature is no more striving to find a balance than a raindrop is striving to reach the Earth. Nature might indeed find a balance but it is not its "purpose" to find a balance. It is only the words I am yaking on about the sentiments and points are fine. Granitethighs (talk) 06:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Life interacted and relied and sustained long before modern humans evolved, so we should at least refer to such facts. Someone could perhaps go through a find wikipedia articles such as the History of Ecology article to direct people to. Go right ahead! Nick carson (talk) 07:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, I'm being pedantic again. What I mean is that concepts are human things - they cannot pre-date humans. Sorry to be a pain - just ignore me on these things I'll try to adjust language to keep everyone happy. Yes we need some early stuff. Granitethighs (talk) 07:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Haha, nah I totally agree :] I've incorporated your proposals into the subsections, I reckon maybe start adding your citations. If you've got any queries as to how I incorporated them I reckon we should discuss them in the "discussion" sections I've created in each subsection. It's so much easier now that we've got a basic framework to work off. Nick carson (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Suggested image

Here's an image which I strongly associate with the history of sustainability--Travelplanner (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC):

CO2 concentrations are reflective of the net impact of humans on an important natural cycle, and give an indication of the scale and timing of human impacts on the environment.

I agree, I think we're going to discuss what images to use and where to use them when we view the article overall towards the end. Nick carson (talk) 01:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow, yes, I like it - and I know a good spot. But, as Nick says, lets hang on a tick. Granitethighs (talk) 21:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Does length matter?

I have put all my entries (joined up) below - not to persuade you to accept them but to indicate the length of my suggestions alone, and I have combined two of the suggested subsections . This is just a small part of the whole article. Granitethighs (talk) 03:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

The capacity of any system to endure and grow depends, first and foremost, on the energy that is available to support its activity. Simple biological systems like bacterial colonies will multiply and grow until the energy (food) supply and/or critical nutrients become depleted, or until waste products inhibit growth. In early human history the energy and resource demands of small bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers would have been very small although, even at this time, their use of fire and desire for specific foods may have influenced the existence and composition of living systems. Later, the success of settled agrarian communities would have depended largely on the skill with which they managed their land and trade: societies outgrowing their local food supply or depleting critical resources would have to move on or collapse. Among civilisations thought to have brought about their own demise by poor management of energy and resources include the Mayans, Mesopotamians and Easter Islanders.

The Western industrial revolution of the 17th to 19th centuries tapped into the vast energy potential of fossil fuels. Coal was used to power ever more efficient engines and later used to generate electricity. Modern medicine protected large populations from disease. The conditions were now present for a human population explosion and unprecedented industrial growth that has continued to this day. From 1650 to 1850 the global population doubled from about 0.5 to 1 billion people.

Through this period concern about the environmental and social impacts of industry were expressed by some Enlightenment political economists and more generally through the Romantic movement of the 1800s. Factors controlling populations and their expansion were discussed in a famous essay by Thomas Malthus (see Malthusian catastrophe), while John Stuart Mill hypothesized that the "stationary state" of an economy might be desirable, anticipating later insights of modern ecological economists. In the late 19th century, Eugenius Warming, heralded the scientific discipline of ecology as the scientific study of the distribution and abundance of life and the interactions between organisms and their natural environment; concepts that would later assist the interpretation of human interaction with and impact on the physical and natural environment.

By the early to mid twentieth century ecology had become an accepted mainstream scientific discipline bringing with it many ideas that are now fundamental to sustainability including: the interconnectedness of all things with (eco)systems all linked to form a single living planetary system, the biosphere; the importance of natural cycles (of water, nutrients and other chemicals, materials, waste); the passage of energy through trophic levels of living systems.

Following the deprivations of the great depression and World War II the West entered a period of escalating growth. A gathering environmental movement pointed out that there were environmental costs associated with the many material benefits that were now being enjoyed. Innovations in technology were transforming society, they included: new plastics; the energy of nuclear power and fossil fuels, especially oil, for ever more efficient transport systems; modern industrial agriculture was born through the Green Revolution; and a host of new electronic devices were introduced including colour television and computers. There were concerns about pollution (Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring looked coldly at the ecological effects of a booming synthetic chemicals industry), the renewal of a population growth spiral, and the clever marketing of consumption beyond reasonable need. In 1975 the book Limits to Growth analyzed the implications of all these developments for the future of humanity.

It was now clear that environmental problems had become a matter of global concern. While the developed world was considering the problems of unchecked development the developing countries, faced with continued poverty and deprivation, regarded development as essential - to provide the necessities of food, clean water and shelter. In 1980 the International Union for the Conservation of Nature had published its influential World Conservation Strategy[note 1] followed in 1982 by its World Charter for Nature[11] which drew attention to the decline of the world’s ecosystems. Faced with the differing priorities of the developed and developing world the United Nation’s World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission) worked for two years to try and resolve the apparent conflict between the environment and development. The Commission concluded that development was acceptable but it must now be different: it must be sustainable development that was directed to meeting the needs of the poor in a way that no longer caused environmental problems but helped to solve them.

At a more grass roots level there has been a slow and steady adoption of the principles of sustainable living by increasing public awareness and adoption of recycling, dematerialization, decarbonisation,renewable energies, and the use of soft technology. Granitethighs (talk) 03:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

At this point, I wouldn't worry too much about length (within reason). I can edit this down to whatever fraction of its current size we need. In the first paragraph you talk about civilizations that were not sustainable. We should also mention ones that were/are. One can see agrarian regions in China where the people have been farming continuously in the same place for hundreds of years. There are still a few hunter-gatherer and shifting cultivator societies that have not yet been wiped out and who live sustainably. Western civilization has tended to deprecate their practices and call such people "primitive" yet, we "invent" systems of sustainable agriculture, analog forestry and permaculture that mimic many of these ancient ways. I would like to present this perspective as well. Sunray (talk) 08:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Good point and good point - I'll add something to that effect. Granitethighs (talk) 09:43, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

It is likely that we have two separate entities emerging here. One is the history section for this article and another might become ahg "History of sustainability" article. Is it not time to pull things together? Perhaps because I've been less involved, I'm not clear on what is intended for the article at this point. Would someone be willing to pull together a consolidated version?

Also, there seems to be a great deal of what would be judged to a reviewer as original research. Would each of you be able to find references for what you have written? We will have to re-write or jettison unsourced text. Sunray (talk) 16:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I can provide citations for the assorted assertions and statements in the green text, but it is a tedious and time-consuming business typing in all the references. Could we decide broadly what the text will be first then add the references later? Granitethighs (talk) 00:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I have incorporated most of GT's proposals and changes into my own, so I think we're making good headway into the "History" section of the sustainability article, but I think we should in similarity with Sunray's comments create a "History of Sustainability" article in which we can incorporate GT's more detailed information (would you be willing to tackle such a project GT? I'm willing to help). But as for this "History" section, I think we just need to keep working at it, we're doing well thus far, keep it summarised, concise and clear, then we can be more detailed in the dedicated "History of Sustainability" article. Nick carson (talk) 11:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

It reads like a blog and once again it is over done in U.N. material. This is a problem in the article and is getting worse. It is chatty and full of baggage. It is better to stick with bare facts and links to information and try to present it a little creatively.

What happened to Vandana Shiva?, not to mention the other interesting information? As far as a good directory to the subject dealing in facts of the time line..??. this rewrite does not look good. I suggest the information in the article presently is better. Also the suggested picture by T.P. floated is really not appropriate to the section of history. Maybe it could go into another section. Co2 is also better explained by a link like this along with the picture. http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/research/themes/carbon/ which is already in the article. A picture of Malthus would be appropriate. skip sievert (talk) 04:29, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't find this comment at all helpful. Would you be able to be more constructive in your criticism, Skip? Sunray (talk) 06:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Try reading it again Skip. The UN gets 1 small sentence ... probably underdone if anything. We all need to be able to give and receive criticism (suggestions) but it helps if you are contributing at the same time. Where is the succinct contribution on environmental economics that this article needs from you please? Thanks for the useful suggestion about Malthus - we can discuss that when pics come up in the to do list. Granitethighs (talk) 05:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Question for Nick re editing

Nick: You have done great work on pulling together a first draft of the "History" section. Here are a couple of observations: 1) It is very long. It now clocks in at 10,700 bytes (six pages). This is more than twice the length (by my rough calculations) that we should have if we don't want to drastically exceed the guidelines for article size. 2) I think it is ready for editing. However, I wanted to check with you before I rip into it. It will be a fairly drastic edit and you may be somewhat unhappy if I cut up your baby. What are your views? Sunray (talk) 07:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, please advise if the text I have included below is the consolidated version you intended. If not, just substitute the version that you want to go forward. Sunray (talk) 07:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The text below is the consolidated version of my initial rewrite and GT's additions, alterations, etc (with the exception of the last subsection, into which we must incorporate GT's suggestions). In regards to your initial comments and questions... 1) It is indeed very long, I suggest we use our current content here as a basis for a dedicated "History of Sustainability" article, then we can summarise it's key points here, providing a like to the main article. Which brings me to... 2) I reckon it'd be best if we, GT, me or yourself did an overall edit of the section to summarise the content and reduce its size. Nick carson (talk) 14:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I will begin by focussing on what should go into this article. Sunray (talk) 16:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Consolidated version

Long before modern humans evolved, the evolution of plant and animal species to adapt to their environments and their interactions with eachother, led life on Earth to develop a natural balance to ensure the simultaneous survival of various species of life, thus all life on Earth relies on other forms of life to exist. The capacity of any system to endure and grow depends, first and foremost, on the energy that is available to support its activity. Simple biological systems like bacterial colonies will multiply and grow until the energy (food) supply and/or critical nutrients become depleted, or until waste products inhibit growth.

In early human history the energy and resource demands of small bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers would have been very were small, although . although, even at this time The, their use of fire and their desire for specific foods may have influenced localthe existence and composition growth plant and animal life. of living systems. Later, Beginning around 10,000 years ago, the emergence of success of settled agrarian communities would have depended largely on the skill with which they managed their land and trade: natural resources. Societies outgrowing their local food supply or depleting critical resources would have to move on or collapse. Mismanagement of finite natural resources by cultures such as Among Civilisations thought to have brought about their own demise by poor management of energy and resources include the Mayans, Anasazi and Easter Islanders. eventually led to their demise by destroying their resource base , while other societies such as Indigenous Australians, evolved slowly over lengthy periods of time in balance with their surrounding environment. On the other hand, there are cultures of shifting cultivators and horticulturalists that thrived in New Guinea and South America and larger agrarian communities <(for e.g., in China, India and elsewhere that have farmed in place for centuries.

These advancements in technology increased the overall human population of human beings as they manipulated their surrounding environment without the comprehension of the future effects of an unsustainable existence, utilising their intelligence without understanding how to use it properly. Although the majority of the human population still do not comprehend their unsustainable lifestyles or understand the subsequent effects, the concept of sustianability has been increasingly collectivly understood by human beings since the late 20th century, becoming widely known, if not fully understood, by the turn of the century.

Early Concepts & Writings and the Industrial Revolutions

Some of the first human beings to think and writeEarly philosophers, such as Aristotle, and particularly his student, Theophrastus, began to think and write about the way in which living organisms interact with and relate to their surroundings, both of whom had interest in many species of animals. Theophrastus described interrelationships between animals and their environment as early as the 4th century BC. However, these concepts remained explored by very few individuals and it wasn't until the 18th century that these concepts were to be explored collectively in greater detail.

Advancements in technology increased the overallhuman population of human beings as they manipulated their surrounding environment.The Western industrial revolution of the 17th to 19th centuries tapped into was made possible by the vast energy potential of fossil fuels. Coal was used to power ever more efficient engines and later used to generate electricity. Modern sanitation systems and advances in medicine protected large populations from disease. Such conditions facilitated led to a human population explosion and unprecedented industrial and scientific growth that has continued to this day. From 1650 to 1850 the global population doubled from around 500 million to 1 billion people.

Through this periodConcerns about the environmental and social impacts of industry were expressed by some Enlightenment political economists and more generally throughin the Romantic movement of the 1800s. Overpopulation was discussed in an famous essay by Thomas Malthus (see Malthusian catastrophe), while John Stuart Mill hypothesized that foresaw that a "stationary state" of an economy might be desirable, thus anticipating the modern discipline of ecological economics and the insights of modern ecological economists . In the late 19th century, Danish botanist, Eugenius Warming, was the first to study physiological relations between plants and their environment, heralding the scientific disipline of ecology. as the scientific study of the distribution and abundance of life and the interactions between organisms and their natural environment; concepts that would later assist the interpretation of human interaction with and impact on the physical and natural environment.[1]

Early 20th century

By the turn of the 20th century, the industrial revolution had led to an unprecedenteda steadyan exponential increase in the human consumption of resources. For several decades this was seen as a positive thing for humanity as it increased overall health and wealth and further increased population. In 1931, Harold Hotelling proposed Hotelling's rule, an economic model exploring of non-renewable resource management. It showed that efficient exploitation use of a nonrenewable resource would, under otherwise stable economic conditions, lead to a depletion of the resource, causing The rule stated that this would lead to a net price or "Hotelling rent" that reflected the increasing scarcity of the resource. Similarly, Hartwick's rule also provided insights into an important result about the sustainability of welfare in an economy that uses non-renewable resources.

ByIn the early to mid twentieth century, ecology had become an accepted gained acceptance as a scientific discipline bringing with it comprising many ideas that are now fundamental to sustainability. including; These include: the interconnectedness of all living systems forming in a single living planetary system, the biosphere; the importance of natural cycles (of water, nutrients and other chemicals, materials, waste); and the passage of energy through trophic levels of living systems.

Mid 20th century: environmentalism

By the mid 20th century ecology was established as a scientific disipline; the foundation of the United States Wilderness Society in 1935 and work exemplified in A Sand County Almanac by Aldo Leopold in 1949, informed the growing environmental movement and a spread interest in ecology as a science. A Sand County Almanac was a combination of natural history, scene painting with words, and philosophy. It is perhaps best known for the following quote, which defines his land ethic: "A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise." The concept of a trophic cascade is put forth in the chapter 'Thinking Like a Mountain', wherein Leopold realizes that killing a predator wolf carries implications for the surrounding ecosystem.[2] Several influential broad-ranging critiques looked at material and energy flows in the economy.

Following the deprivations of the great depression and World War II the West the developed world entered a period of escalating growth. A gathering environmental movement pointed out that there were environmental costs associated with the many material benefits that were now being enjoyed. Innovations in technology and the increasing use of fossil fuels, were transforming society. Modern industrial agriculture - the "Green Revolution" was born based on the development of synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides which had devastating consequences for rural wildlife, as documented in Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring., producing the so-called "Green Revolution."

In 1956, M. King Hubbert's peak oil theory established "Hubbert peak theory" which accurately predicted that United States the inevitable peak of oil production, would peak first in the United States (between 1965 and 1970), then in successive regions of the world, with a global peak early in the 21st Century. In the 1960's and 1970's, Environmentalism gained widespread attention after the release of many works, the most notable being Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, published in 1962. Many subsequent works followed into the 1970's, including; Small Is Beautiful – A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, by E.F. Schumacher in 1973 and the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth in 1975, amongst many others. This increased attention was also aided in part by the acceptance of Environmentalism by various subcultures during a time of civil dissobedience and positive change.

Late 20th century

The combined effect of the popularisation of Environmentalism and peak oil production in the United States, led to a global increase in thegrowing awareness that human use of many of the Earth's resources was not sustainable and was escalating at a critical rate. The 1973 and 1979 energy crises served as valuable research material for future global peak oil scenarios and led to a further increase in public awareness of issues of sustainability, however these crises were averted when the United States increased their oil imports to meet demand.

Increasingly environmental problems had become a matter of were of global concern. While the developed world was considering the problems of unchecked development the developing countries, faced with continued poverty and deprivation, regarded development as essential—to provide the necessities of food, clean water and shelter. In 1980 the International Union for the Conservation of Nature had published its influential World Conservation Strategy[note 1] followed in 1982 by its World Charter for Nature[11] which drew attention to the decline of the world’s ecosystems. Faced with the differing priorities of the developed and developing world the United Nation’s World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission) worked for two years to try and attempted to resolve the apparent conflict between the environment and development. The Commission concluded that development was acceptable but it must now be different: it must be sustainable development that was directed to meeting that would meet the needs of the poor in a way that no longer causedwhile solving, rather than adding to, environmental problems. but helped to solve them.

At a more grass roots level there has been a slow and steady adoption of the principles of sustainable living by increasing public awareness and adoption of recycling, dematerialization, decarbonisation,renewable energies, and the use of soft technology. The development of renewable sources of energy in the 1970's and 80's, primarily in wind turbines and photovoltaics, and increased use of hydro-electricity, presented some of the first sustainable alternatives to fossil fuel and nuclear energy generation. These developments led to construction of many of the first large-scale solar and wind power plants during the 1980's and 90's. The 1990's saw the small-scale reintroduction of the electric car exemplified in the General Motors (e.g., EV1 and REVA) and the popularisation of solar car racing. These factors combined with consistent, yet minority, public pressure, facilitated further increase in the raised public awareness of issues of sustainability, and many local and state governments began, for the first time, to implement small-scale policies to deal with such issues address them.

21st century: global awareness

Since the turn of the century, more specific and detailed initiatives models and concepts have been proposed in an effort to transition have moved human civilisation towards becoming greater sustainability. Some economists look towards a new "green economics" and "sustainability economics" as a more inclusive and ethical model for society than that presented by neoclassical economics. Important Emergent concepts that have arisen include; the Car-free movement, and Smart Growth, in which urban environments are designed considering all aspects of the system, and the Cradle to Cradle concept, as defined in the 2002 publication Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things by Michael Braungart and William McDonough, in which toxic, synthetic and organic materials are separated into different life-cycles and models are proposed for the efficent use of materials in manufacturing and production.

Global oil production is generally accepted to have peaked in 2006[8][9][12], while many large corporations and energy organisation's predictions suggest this is yet to happen and will occur between 2010 and 2020, depending on the origin of the prediction[10]. Regardless of when it has or will occur, peak oil production has severe implications, particularly for westernised countires which rely heavily on road freight and private automobiles, for the way people transport themselves, food prices and subsequent economic effects. The beginning of many such effects are already being felt, as represented by record high oil prices peaking during mid 2008.

The work of Bina Agarwal and Vandana Shiva amongst many others, has brought some of the cultural wisdom of traditional, sustainable agrarian societies into the academic discourse on sustainability.given South Asia and the Indian subcontinent a more international perspective of ecology and sustainability. Throughout this period, In 2002, the United Nations has had a central co-ordinating role, faciliting the understanding of sustainability issues at government and international levels.passed a resolution for the declaration of the decade 2005-2014 to be known as the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development and began implementing international projects and programs to educate the human population on issues of sustainability.

The changes across all aspects of humanity, specifically the advancements in technology, over the last few decades is sometimes referred to as the beginning of the New Industrial Revolution, which would seeRapidly advancing technologies mean it is now tecnically possible to achieve a transition of economies, energy generation, water and waste management, and food production towards sustainable practices. Whether humanity has the political will or economic flexibility to do so in time remains an open question., which may subsequently lead to a widespread collective realisation of the need for humanity to sustain its own existence.

Comments

• I've edited the first, second and third sections, eliminating the ahistorical or essay-like portions. What is left is fairly strong and we shouldn't have any trouble finding sources. Sunray (talk) 20:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

More Comments

My personal view is that the history section could be a lot better – especially big picture-wise. I would like to make a number of suggestions. This is essentially my feedback on the current edited section and to reduce editing agony I will try and make it my final offering for the history section (except to assist final word editing maybe). Take from my suggestions what you like.

Sunray's comments in blue Nick's comments in red

• Focus – I think we need to concentrate on the broad themes of sustainability and movements in history as much as possible, and less on fine detail. Among the broad themes would be: energy (food and industry), population and growth, resource use and its limits. Accordingly, specific suggestions:

• Aristotle and Theophrastus to go to separate article – history is littered with big names that can be added to the story, we need to be very selective.

Agreed.

How should we talk about the first humans discussing these concepts?

I think we've got most of the themes. Do they link from section to section? As to the first humans, I think we go with anthropological evidence. What we have there now still needs citations.

• I think the Australian aboriginals were classic nomadic hunter-gatherers but not without impact. Flannery has attributed the demise of Australia’s entire megafauna to aboriginal killing for food and the effects of fire-stick farming, though effectively providing a sustainable food supply, are believed to have had a big impact on the landscape in terms of its form and species composition. In other words I thing the Australian aboriginals are “covered” in the first sentence – the subsequent sentence is contentious and adds little. We could, however, mention the shifting agriculture (as practiced in New Guinea for example) that seems to have minimal impact long-term.

Yes, I too had the highland shifting cultivators of New Guinea and South America in mind. There are also good examples of sustainable agrarian communities in China. The ways of life of all of these peoples are currently under considerable stress and change.

I agree with all that.

• The sentences leading up to the paragraph on the industrial revolution add little.

I've been wondering what the best place to start would be. I like Nick's first paragraph to set the stage and the collapse of civilizations is a good cautionary theme to introduce at the beginning. I agree that examples in between that and the industrial revolution are problematic.

I agree with Sunray, if we then used brief references to the development of agriculture and basic resource use up until the industrial revolution, we'll be right

• There is unnecessary repetition of the word “resources” in the opening para.

Still needs copyediting.

• I do not think the formation of the US Wilderness Society ranks mention or the Sand County almanac and even the trophic cascade and its quote. Though I hugely support the sentiments I think all of this could be expressed in briefer, more direct, yet still appealing general terms.

Check.

Even though I wrote it, I tend to agree with you GT. I kept coming across it in my research and included it because it was one of, if not the first, example of the widescale protection of the natural environment to sustain its existence

• Though a great admirer of Aldo Leopold I am not sure that he fits into the core sustainability hall of fame (more the environment generally).

So perhaps we skip anyone in between the industrial revolution (which introduces the problematic for modern civilization) and the rise of ecology.

We can skip it as long as we at least make reference to the impact made by the industrial revolution

• Rachel Carson was a huge influence on environmentalists and therefore needs a mention but in terms of sustainability I think she fades into insignificance beside the Club of Rome (35 million copies) and Paul Ehrlich who were really into the business of quantifying and solving. There are still critical papers on sustainability based on the work of the latter two being produced including a detailed defence of the Club of Rome’s forecasts.

We've addressed Carson. I think we need to strengthen commentary on overpopulation.

• Again there is repetition in the Late 20th century section. Peak oil deserves a mention but it is IMO overweighted here and it gets mentions in other sections too.

Check.

I think peak oil should be mentioned as its a good and current example of the overuse of global resources, not just local or regional, could perhaps be more concise

• We talk at considerable length about the late 20th century developments (wind farms, hybrid cars etc.) but ignore the huge societal change that occurred after WW2, why? I had a sentence “Following the deprivations of the great depression and World War II the West entered a period of escalating growth. A gathering environmental movement pointed out that there were environmental costs associated with the many material benefits that were now being enjoyed. Innovations in technology were transforming society, they included: new plastics; the energy of nuclear power and fossil fuels, especially oil, for ever more efficient transport systems; modern industrial agriculture was born through the Green Revolution; and a host of new electronic devices were introduced including colour television and computers”. Consumption was booming at this time, the car essentially produced modern suburbia, and its ills. Why was the mention of modern marketing ignored (creating artificial needs)? And why was all this omitted?

I certainly didn't think we weren't going to include that and had also mentioned it above.

I don't know how I overlooked that, I'm a huge proponent of car-free movement, total brain failure

Has this been addressed adequately?.

• Above all, why have we ignored the proliferation of synthetic chemicals, the incredible expansion of global trade and global productivity; the effects of industrial agriculture and the Green Revolution; and the global population and its implications. There are core ideas for the future without a mention – ideas that are becoming mainstream rather than just buzz-words e.g. the adoption of the principles of sustainable living by increasing public awareness of lifestyles i.e. applying recycling, dematerialization, decarbonisation, carbon neutral, renewable energies, green design, soft technology; reducing resource intensity etc.

I had always assumed that we would be covering this. I was just editing Nick's version at the moment. You had mentioned stitching the two versions together, which I agree with.

Done.

• How can we not mention in a sentence or two the UNs program for Sustainable Development and the global situation that gave rise to its activities? This could also be linked to Agarwal and Shiva’s work which comes out of the blue currently. But it is difficult assessing one author against another - where to begin and end? What about Daly, Schumacher, Bookchin, Suzuki and a host of others?

The UN program is essential. As to who to include, it's a pretty tough call. The ones you've mentioned, plus Gore are essential, IMO.

I keeping with our summary goal, we could perhaps just explain that many people have written about particular things and go into further detail in the dedicated history of sustainability article?

Schumacher and Daly made the cut. I think we need to bring in Bookchin somewhere in the article

• The New Industrial Revolution is also called the Sustainability Transformation (or Transition), the First Generation Sustainability Transformation and no doubt many other things, I’ve run out of time.

We need to be cautious here or we will get into OR..

I agree with both of you, we should mention "an emerging global social, political, technological, etc, trend" but only briefly as it's still happening (or beginning?) just one sentence would be enough. That's why I've stated before something like: "the progression of society/etc to include/satisfy the concept of sustainability..." just to touch on it and explain that there are progressions occuring or beginning to occur

• We forget that environmental problems became truly and very obviously “global” with climate change (of course they were global before, but this marks a clear shift in emphasis). This is an important historical point that I mentioned but it was omitted, there are others.

Again, nothing has been omitted, as far as I'm concerned.

• There is a lot more but not enough space and time; most of this was in my stuff but not incorporated (?sour grapes).

Granitethighs (talk) 00:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

In sum, my idea was to edit both of your versions. I started with Nick's, but didn't mean to imply that we wouldn't include GT's material. Sunray (talk) 07:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm jumping the gun. I thought Nick had combined both versions. Either way we are making good headway. Granitethighs (talk) 08:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks good :] Yeah GT, we're going to create a separate History of Sustainability article which means that we're summarising the information in the "History" section of the sustainability article. Sunray's gone through the first few sections. When we're ready we can retrieve our previous information and begin writing the history of sustainability article. Nick carson (talk) 05:05, 17

December 2008 (UTC)

Sunray, that's good, really tightening it all up now thanks. If we could just adjust for the above suggestions we will be almost there. Nick, after we've done this article we'll get straight on to the history. You said earlier that this article is the "hub" for a lot of environmental material. I reckon that's right - so once we've done here we'll need to strengthen its major connecting and supporting articles - history being an important one of these; we've got a good lot of research material already ;-) Granitethighs (talk) 08:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, we need to deal with your points. I'm a bit slow on this at the moment. I've done some editing of the mid 20th century, but need to add more. I'm thinking that we should develop the theme of fossil fuels as the basis for transportation systems, the development of plastics and the green revolution. Then Hubbert Peak sets the stage for the early 21st century crunch. I should have more time in the next few days. Sunray (talk) 10:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Your fusion and editing is working really well thanks.Granitethighs (talk) 10:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

You may want to mention Hubbert also in the context of being a member here http://www.namebase.org/sources/TL.html Club of Rome. That way you can also in a context add a link to their information site, which I do not have handy to post here. http://www.namebase.org/xhoy/M-King-Hubbert.html skip sievert (talk) 16:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Thanks, Skip. Sunray (talk) 09:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Cool. His membership of Club of Rome might be useful in incorporating such information into the summarised sections. GT, totally agree with you, and we do indeed have alot of information on the history so far which should make the dedicated article easier. Keep working at it Sunray :] Nick carson (talk) 12:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Some confusion

Not quite sure where on this page the clean version is, and hence what I should comment on (or if I should hold comments to later?) My only comment so far is that the decade of education for sustainable development doesn't make the "history" list for me, if you rate the relevance of an initiative by whether someone working in a related field in a far-flung corner of the earth has noticed it.--Travel Planner (talk) 10:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

It is the "Consolidated version," above. Sunray (talk) 07:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

TP the Consolidated Version is currently being edited by Sunray who is fusing all the text, suggestions and comments from Nick & myself. When this is done we can add references and put it at the top of the page ready for a ?last (?brief) round of comments.

Sunray, I wonder if it is worth commenting in the article that the history section combines two elements 1) an account of the evolution of thinking about and contributions to the study of sustainability 2) a brief account of actual historical events that have a bearing on global human sustainability.Granite Thighs (talk) 11:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I reckon that'd be a good idea, even just one sentence as you've just said, to set the context of the history section, it'll make the section a lot easier to understand as you read through it if you'd never read through it before. We could then expand on this in the main history of sustainability article. Nick carson (talk) 12:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. Sunray (talk) 07:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Assuming I have put my edits in the right place, I have:

• Added India to China as an example of a sustainable agrarian society, which gives symmetry to the reference to Bina Agarwal and Vandana Shiva at the end - have reversed the sense of their contribution to recognise that their role is bringing the wisdom of Indian women into the academic sustainability debate, not spreading the word on sustainability from the West to India!
• Put sanitation ahead of medicine as pivotal in securing better human survival rates
• Put Rachel Carson into the story of the "Green Revolution" rather than "Environmental books of the 60's and 70's"
• Generalised the comment on United Nations, which has done many things not just launched the decade of education for sustainable development (where are you Skip?)
• Proposed what is really an alternative ending to the story, which I quite like, and which I suggest will be easier to find references for.

Things I'm still unhappy about (but not sure how to fix):

• Hotelling's rent - a lot of words on this, and "so what"? I think the point is, even priced via Hotelling's principles, an exploited nonrenewable resource pretty much runs out, which is fine for the shareholders who made money out of it and can go and invest that money elsewhere, but creates a pretty big mess for the people who used to depend on that resource (ever been to Nauru?)
• If you don't give Hotelling more than his due, then "early 20th century" looks pretty light, and could be merged with "mid 20th century"
• Agree with GT that there are too many words on peak oil, just not sure how to address this
• The "Hall of Fame" issue described above - so many names listed, so many great names still missing. My own view is, we are telling a story, if someone's name is part of the story, it goes in, if not I don't care who they are but including them is a distraction. --Travel Planner (talk) 10:36, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Rapidly advancing technologies mean it is now technically possible to achieve a transition of economies/ pointless commentary with no bearing to reality of subject except by some vague allusion?... to what?, energy generation, water and waste management, and food production towards sustainable practices./ Not true in the present configuration of population and the resource base... original research.... Whether humanity has the political will or economic flexibility to do so in time remains an open question./ Wikipedia is not a blog for original conclusions. What is meant by political will? or economic flexibility?. Why must an ominous tone be struck? Saying that political will is involved may destroy neutral phrasing.

Incorporating science measurement and knowledge is more accurate as to recourse. Political will is represented by people such as Bush or Obama. Why support either. Both are clones for corporate fascism... and that is all they are. --------------------------- Different area- The Wilderness Society deserves a place in the story here. skip sievert (talk) 21:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Was that you Skip? (unsigned post)??. At issue is the statement "Whether humanity has the political will or economic flexibility to do so in time remains an open question" My references for the statement are:

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Finding #4:

The challenge of reversing the degradation of ecosystems while meeting increasing demands for their services can be partially met under some scenarios that the Millenium Assessment considered, but these involve significant changes in policies, institutions, and practices that are not currently under way.

Or the concluding paragraph of the Stern Review executive summary:

There are ways to reduce the risks of climate change. With the right incentives, the private sector will respond and can deliver solutions. [...] Above all, reducing the risks of climate change requires collective action. It requires co-operation between countries, through international frameworks that support the achievement of shared goals. It requires a partnership between the public and private sector, working with civil society and with individuals. It is still possible to avoid the worst impacts of climate change; but it requires strong and urgent collective action. Delay would be costly and dangerous.

So it's certainly not an original conclusion. Perhaps the wording should be brought closer to that of the references (I went for brevity). But what, exactly, is your view on why this is not an appropriate conclusion and what are your references?--Travelplanner (talk) 19:53, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

PS I agree about the Wilderness Society - I was taught that Leopold was the founding thinker of environmental ethics, which deserves a link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Travelplanner (talk • contribs) 20:01, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually this person has more to do with it Benton MacKaye but a link to Wilderness society ultimately goes to him and Leopold as founders and a few others. As far as over using the ::Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Finding #4: or injecting that when ever a non specific back up is needed...?.. not a good idea. The article is already overweighted with material like that... and not every one appreciates related U.N. links... as they are seen as biased toward a certain political approach or approaches. Also how is it that people are writing things here and then looking for sources? This tells me that people are going only to information they think they know to back up their own thoughts. Is that a good way to write an article? Making something and then roaming around for sources? skip sievert (talk) 21:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Penultimate draft version

This brief account considers both the evolution of thinking about sustainability and the major historical events that have influenced human global sustainability.

Early civilizations

In early human history the energy and resource demands of small bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers was small. The use of fire and desire for specific foods may have altered the natural composition of influenced local plant and animal communitieslife. Around 10,000 years ago, the emergence of agrarian communities depended largely on the skill with which they managed their environment and the creation of a "structure of permanence." Societies outgrowing their local food supply or depleting critical resources either would have to moved on or faced collapse.

The city states of Sumer developed a trade and market economy based originally on the commodity money of the Shekel which was a certain weight measure of barley, while the Babylonians and their city state neighbors later developed the earliest system of economics using a metric of various commodities. The cities of Sumer were the first to practice intensive, year-round agriculture (from ca. 5300 BC). The surplus of storable food created by this economy allowed the population to settle in one place instead of migrating after crops and grazing land. It also allowed for a much greater population density, and in turn required an extensive labor force and division of labor. Eventually poorly drained irrigated soils, in an arid climate with high levels of evaporation, led to the buildup of dissolved salts in the soil, reducing agricultural yields severely. During the Akkadian and Ur III phases, there was a shift from the cultivation of wheat to the more salt-tolerant barley, but this was insufficient, and during the period from 2100 BC to 1700 BC, it is estimated that the population in this area declined by nearly 3/5ths.

Civilisations thought to have fallen because of brought about their own demise by poor management of energy and resources include thought to have brought about their own demise by poor management of energy and resources include the Mayans, Anasazi and Easter Islanders. Cultures of shifting cultivators and horticulturists have that existed in New Guinea and South America and larger agrarian communities in China, India and elsewhere that have farmed in the same localities for centuries.

Emergence of industrial societies

Technological advances over several millennia gave humans increasing control over the environment. But it was the Western industrial revolution of the 17th to 19th centuries that tapped into the vast growth potential of energy in fossil fuels. Coal was used to power ever more efficient engines and later to generate electricity. Modern sanitation systems and advances in medicine protected large populations from disease. Such conditions led to a human population explosion and unprecedented industrial,technological and scientific growth that has continued to this day. From 1650 to 1850 the global population doubled from around 500 million to 1 billion people.

Concerns about the environmental and social impacts of industry were expressed by some Enlightenment political economists and in the Romantic movement of the 1800s. Overpopulation was discussed in an essay by Thomas Malthus (see Malthusian catastrophe), while John Stuart Mill foresaw the desirability of a "stationary state" economy, thus anticipating concerns of the modern discipline of ecological economics. In the late 19th century, Danish botanist, Eugenius Warming, was the first to study physiological relations between plants and their environment, heralding the scientific discipline of ecology.

Early 20th century

By the turn of the 20th century, the industrial revolution had led to an exponential increase in the human consumption of resources. For several decades this was seen as a positive thing for humanity as it increased overall health and wealth and further increased population. In 1931, Harold Hotelling proposed Hotelling's rule, an economic model of non-renewable resource management. It showed that efficient use of a nonrenewable resource would, lead to a depletion of the resource, causing a net price or "Hotelling rent" that reflected the increasing scarcity of the resource. Hartwick's rule provided further insights into the sustainability of welfare in an economy that uses non-renewable resources.

In the early twentieth century, ecology gained acceptance as a scientific discipline comprising many concepts now fundamental to sustainability. These include: the interconnectedness of all living systems in a single living planetary system, the biosphere; the importance of natural cycles (of water, nutrients and other chemicals, materials, waste); and the passage of energy through trophic levels of living systems.

Mid 20th century: environmentalism

Following the deprivations of the great depression and World War II the developed world entered a period of escalating growth. A gathering environmental movement pointed out that there were environmental costs associated with the many material benefits that were now being enjoyed. Innovations in technology and the increasing use of fossil fuels, were transforming society. Modern industrial agriculture—the "Green Revolution" was based on the development of synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides which had devastating consequences for rural wildlife, as documented in Rachel Carson's Silent Spring (1962).

In 1956, M. King Hubbert's peak oil theory predicted the inevitable peak of oil production, first in the United States (between 1965 and 1970), then in successive regions of the world, with a global peak early in the 21st Century. In the 1970's, Environmentalism gained widespread attention after the release of Small Is Beautiful, by E.F. Schumacher, in 1973, and the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth, in 1975, amongst many others.

Late 20th century

The combined effect of the popularisation of Environmentalism and peak oil production in the United States, led to a growing awareness that human use of many of the Earth's resources was unsustainable and was escalating at a critical rate. The 1973 and 1979 energy crises served as valuable research material for future global peak oil scenarios and led to a further increase in public awareness of issues of sustainability, however these crises were averted when the United States increased their oil imports to meet demand.

Increasingly environmental problems were viewed as a global concern because of finite resources. While the developed world was considering the problems of unchecked development the developing countries, faced with continued poverty and deprivation, regarded development as essential as to providing the necessities of life. In 1980 the International Union for the Conservation of Nature had published its influential World Conservation Strategy,[note 1] followed in 1982 by its World Charter for Nature,[11] which drew attention to the decline of the world’s ecosystems. The United Nation's World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission) made suggestions in regard to the conflict between the environment and development. The Commission suggested that development was acceptable, but must be sustainable development that would meet the needs of the poor, and not worsen environmental problems.

At a more grass roots level there has been a slow and steady adoption of the principles of sustainable living by increasing public awareness and adoption of recycling, dematerialization, decarbonisation andrenewable energies. The development of renewable sources of energy in the 1970's and 80's, primarily in wind turbines and photovoltaics, and increased use of hydro-electricity, presented some of the first sustainable alternatives to fossil fuel and nuclear energy generation. These developments led to construction of many of the first large-scale solar and wind power plants during the 1980's and 90's. The 1990's saw the small-scale reintroduction of the electric car (e.g., EV1 and REVA), and the popularisation of solar car racing. These factors combined with consistent, yet minority, public pressure, further raised public awareness of issues of sustainability, and many local and state governments began, for the first time, to implement small-scale policies to address them.

21st century: global awareness

Since the turn of the century, more specific and detailed initiatives have moved human civilisation towards greater sustainability. Some economists look towards a new "green economics" and "sustainability economics" as a more inclusive and ethical model for society than that presented by neoclassical economics. Emergent concepts include; the Car-free movement, and Smart Growth, in which urban environments are designed considering all aspects of the system, and the Cradle to Cradle concept, in which toxic, synthetic and organic materials are separated into different life-cycles and models are proposed for the efficent use of materials in manufacturing and production.

The work of Bina Agarwal and Vandana Shiva amongst many others, has brought some of the cultural wisdom of traditional, sustainable agrarian societies into the academic discourse on sustainability, and also blended that with modern science principles. The United Nations organisation declared the decade 2005-2014 as the "United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development."

Rapidly advancing technologies mean it is now tecnically possible to achieve a transition of economies, energy generation, water and waste management, and food production towards sustainable practices.

Comments

• This version is still over 10KB in size. It seems pretty comprehensive. Do we want to: a) use it as the basis for the "History of Sustainability" article, and further condense it for the main article, or b) add it to the main article?
• We need several additional citations. Of the 36 listed, only 13 are from this section. I've also left markings such as "[1]" so we can transpose those citations. I will mark-up places where we need additional cites. Perhaps each of us could work on that?
• I've left the last paragraph (TP's version) though it wouldn't pass the review. I think it sounds an optimistic note (always a blessing at the end of a history!), but is unencyclopedic in its current form, IMO. I think that the best way to deal with it would be to find a citation that says something similar.

Comments? Sunray (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Extrapolated a little on Vandana Shiva the way she was portrayed was wrong. She is a very famous scientist... a physicist.. anti corporate advocate. and also involved in ecology and environ., to the max. Also removed the overly large section about oil... and peak oil. That is already discussed by the previous info in peak oil or Hubbert peak link.. further up in the article... so that is redundant. Also rephrased the mention of the U.N. as far as framing. This information should not be spot lighted and doted on and bent down to... because of obvious pov here.... and linking every un sourced idea in that direction does not say make for a good article. Also the end line of the history section was lecturing or hectoring... so removed that also. skip sievert (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

First comment is well done and thanks Sunray. This must surely be one of the most difficult sections of the article and it reads very well. As this is the first time we have all seen it in this condensed form I would like to suggest that we all have a final check for balance and emphasis - recognising as we do so that we cannot add more things without removing some (i.e. it cannot get longer; and in the interests of the article as a whole would probably be best getting smaller). For example, I agree with TP about Hotelling but might like to briefly add other things. With this section especially, there will be the temptation to never stop editing - but "one" more look is fair I think. Also that we mark our changes now with crossing-out etc. Granitethighs (talk) 22:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes indeed. And don't forget those citations! Sunray (talk) 22:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

While trying to reduce the repetition of "resources" in the first paragraph, I thought of introducing the notion of stewardship, which is, I think, close to what TP was mentioning on the main talk page. Sunray (talk) 23:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Added very brief mention of : The Wilderness Society,United States Wilderness Society is an environment and science based group established in 1935. - skip sievert (talk) 23:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I've removed that reference. Yes, it is an influential organization, but so is Greenpeace, the WWF and so many others that blazed trails in various aspects of conservation and environmental activism.

It is one of the original groups... and T.P. also suggested it be in. That is two against one right now. Because this group was a type of first it should be in the article in early 20th. century. It is more notable as being something that was a new concept at the time and set a precedent.

It is a venerable organization. It also was one of the first major conservation organizations. However, it is very U.S.-focussed and very political. The Sierra Club, by comparison, is much older and much more global in focus. I would also argue that Greenpeace, Nature Conservancy and WWF while younger organizations, have been much more effective globally. However, I don't make these decisions, so let's put it to the others. Sunray (talk) 03:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I see that most of the ref/citation links on this page go to references that can not be gone to... but can only be looked at. This is a mistake. It makes more sense to not have misc. ref links with no attached info... instead of information that people can click on and get more information in a web link... it also brings into question here the huge number of references that point to what could be obscure sources or books... many without isbn numbers.

Most of those types of refs/citations could be removed and quotes of the books or segments of the books or information could be used where the source can at least be looked at and judged, say on an external weblink or google book or website that is hosting the actual information. Now many of the references are useless here because of that and should be removed and better information put in their place.??.. as to books with I.S.B.N.'s at the very least... or links that can be clicked on and looked at for more information, not just someones opinion that a ref. is being made to something, which can not be corroborated. skip sievert (talk) 01:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

You make a good point. I think that we should try to find more online references. The list, as it appears now, looks pretty intimidating. However, there are actually only 14 citations for this section, not 38 (that is because the "reflist" template picks up all the references on the page, so all the ones for earlier versions are still there). Many are repeats and would be grouped together under one citation (a,b,c,d...) Because we are going for FA, they will want everything nailed down. They like to see citations for almost everything. Looking at recent FAs, I note that they do favour the footnote system we are using. So I think that we are committed to this course. Nevertheless, we can: a) group citations, b) find more online sources, and c) prune some of the ones we have now (though we have to add some before we can start on that). Also, bear in mind that the "History" section will naturally have more offline sources per square inch because of its nature (which is um... "historical"). Sunray (talk) 03:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Sunray, I can understand how editing has the potential to become a tedious and time-consuming word by word exercise. I have complete confidence in your editing ability. At this stage, so far as I am concerned, I will make whatever changes I think improve the article and leave the final decision up to you - I will not be offended if you reverse the changes I make (or if you re-edit them). Having said that a couple of suggestions! - I like the idea of environmental stewardship but it somehow sounds strange in the context of ancient cultures (even though it is true), also your reference looks a great one, I have not seen it. I worry that the "structure of permanence" may have clear meaning in the context of teh book but does not mean much to the reader; could it be re-expressed in more direct terms? An extra para seems to have crept in at the end? Finally, do we keep these headings in the article? I suppose it could be just a single text if space and words become critical? I dont mind either way. Granitethighs (talk) 01:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote of confidence. Confession: I did work professionally as an editor in another lifetime. I do see your point about stewardship. I was reacting to the phrase "management of resources," which we used in the last version. That struck my eye even harder. The concept of management was likely very foreign to Indigenous peoples. I was just reading an account by an ethnobotanist who used the term "planting" in referring to a forager culture that planted trees along the paths they travelled. One of the people took issue with the use of that word. He said that scattering wild seeds was not "planting," they only "planted" domestic species... Can we ever really understand this? Stewardship seemed to be the English word that best reflected the respect and Rangatiratanga that Indigenous peoples show for the land. But I'm open to other ideas.

Re: "Structure of permanence." In Clarke's article, he quotes Schumacher, who referred to the "economics of permanence:"

"From an economic point of view, the central concept of wisdom is permanence... The economics of permanence implies a profound reorientation of science and techology, which have to open their doors to wisdom and, in fact, have to incorporate wisdom into their very structure." — Small is Beautiful, pp. 26-27.

Your point is that the term "structure of permanence" is not transparent. I had thought that the following sentence brought the message home: "Societies outgrowing their local food supply or depleting critical resources either moved on or faced collapse." But, methinks I am too close to it. Perhaps a brief descriptor would work. Or we could eliminate the phrase altogether - though I am hesitant to do that, as it is a concept so central to Indigenous peoples (Clarke was writing about the Bomagai-Angoiang swidden farmers of New Guinea), but one that Western culture has all but lost. Sunray (talk) 04:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

This can be dickered with... but no history of Sustainability can not mention some aspects of Sumer... this was the invention of large scale farming. Notice I have put a link that actually goes to more information here also.... I am going to add more citations to this also... as to connected information. While it may be a little long... some very important points are made... at the very invention of civilization. Civilization was only invented once... and Sumer or Mesopotamia is the original reference for much of civil society... and contains the essence of economics... religion.. etc... that are currently in use. Here is the new area.

The city states of Sumer developed a trade and market economy based originally on the commodity money of the Shekel which was a certain weight measure of barley, while the Babylonians and their city state neighbors later developed the earliest system of economics using a metric of various commodities. The cities of Sumer were the first to practice intensive, year-round agriculture (from ca. 5300 BC). The surplus of storable food created by this economy allowed the population to settle in one place instead of migrating after crops and grazing land. It also allowed for a much greater population density, and in turn required an extensive labor force and division of labor. Eventually poorly drained irrigated soils, in an arid climate with high levels of evaporation, led to the buildup of dissolved salts in the soil, reducing agricultural yields severely. During the Akkadian and Ur III phases, there was a shift from the cultivation of wheat to the more salt-tolerant barley, but this was insufficient, and during the period from 2100 BC to 1700 BC, it is estimated that the population in this area declined by nearly 3/5ths. Thompson, William R. (2004). "Complexity, Diminishing Marginal Returns and Serial Mesopotamian Fragmentation" (pdf). Journal of World Systems Research.

Suggestion... Maybe the other copies of previous large scale edits should be taken off this page now so that the current footnotes can be seen clearly. In other words could an editor here remove all the current footnoted material above the current version Penultimate draft version so that the current most up to date footnotes can be looked at critically now. skip sievert (talk) 05:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)