Neoliberalism and its contribution in making the world unsustainable
Neoliberal policies have impacted environmental management significantly over the past 25 years. Neoliberalism was the outcome of poor economic growth because of government regulation, huge public spending, and high tariff barrier to international trade for both industrialized and developing countries. It worked on the principle of demand and supply, that the market is self-regulatory and every individual has freedom for his own economic upliftment. Rather than state-led solutions to social and environmental problems, it believed in the market. It led to the privatization of state-owned, unowned, or common property resources, cut in funds for environmental management, and transfer of environmental management to local or NGO institutions (Liverman, D.M. and Vilas, S. 2006).
It is believed that the market does not value enough about environmental quality or ecosystems. With free trade and an increase in the amount of trade, resource’s demand and pollution increased. To confront these environmental issues, intervention is required from national governments by implying regulations on pollution or ban or trade from unsustainable sources. However, it is not agreeable with neoliberal policy.
Neoliberalism persuades us to address climate change through money, rather than through politics and power. Eco-consumerism can purge our guilt, but we require mass movement to look into the climate crisis. If affordable mass transit is not available, we will commute by car. If cheap products are manufactured endlessly, we will buy and buy (Lukcas M. 2017).
Industrialization and mass production started taking off as people cannot match with production, which in turn lead to the ‘Great Depression’ due to recession and unemployment. To solve this, the concept of ‘Planned obsolescence’ emerged. Its purpose was to reduce the life span of products and force the consumers to purchase newer products, thus keeping up the production rate and employment. Maintaining growth is a challenge for producers and durable goods aggravate the problem. The longer a product lasts, the fewer repeat purchases take place (Bulow J. 1986).
Short-life products generate quantities of waste that are not recycled or reused. They are simply dumped. Millions of electronics are shipped to third world countries where people recover metal components in unregulated work environments, which lead to environmental damage and health hazards (Slade, G. 2006). The frequent the disposal of durable goods that could have lasted longer for what they were designed for, the more the environmental damage. Furthermore, the life cycle of products is not closed thus creating pollution from both the product and the packaging.
A recent example is the battery of smartphones. Many of these batteries are not removable, so it leads to obsolescence when the battery degrades as it becomes hard to replace it. Consumers are compelled to buy new phone hence. However, producers argue that non-removable batteries allow for the designing of thinner phones which are considered as the main buying option by consumers (Zallio, M. & Berry, D. 2017).
Not only obsolescence but also our culture of consumption has a negative effect on the environment. The current consumption level is already unsustainable. Consumers are more interested in improved performance as the technology advance and thus the product becomes out of date. The out-dated version loses its value in the market and is discarded which ultimately creates waste. These discarded products are often repairable but the repairing cost is higher than a new product. Examples of these include software and the fashion industry (Rivera, J. L., & Lallmahomed, A. 2015).
Another example is that of CDs and DVDs. Cassettes stop manufacturing and CDs replaced them. It is a kind of systemic obsolescence in which the system is altered by making the product difficult to use or by cutting up the maintenance service. With the discontinuing of the cassette, whole cassette player is left of no use and in turn is upgraded with a new version of video player, leaving cassettes and its player as waste (Singh, P. and Sandborn, P. 2006).
Single-use purpose products are also designed to favor obsolescence. These are often of low quality and break down easily. They are deliberately made of lower quality material so that they stop working after a predefined time. Examples include disposable cameras, watches, and plastic toys.
Plant breeding is also being controlled by planned obsolescence. Farmers used to save the seeds as plants are easy to replicate. But producers of genetic information wanted the farmers to have regular replacement purchases. The strategy manifests in increasing the yield while reducing the disease resistance capacity, thus forcing farmers to purchase new seeds every season. The life span of wheat in the UK has fallen from 13years (1960s) to 5.5 years (1990s) (Rangnekar 2002). Although these impart improved variety, it is unsustainable in long run.
The resources are finite but we contemplate infinite growth. Is this necessary to create new products? Can’t we save resources as well as keep our jobs? Can’t business and sustainability go hand in hand? This questions neoliberalism and its contribution in making the world unsustainable.
