Many seem oblivious to how their day-to-day actions contribute to the mountain of waste and drain on key resources
B Warren Fernandez, Straits Times 1 Jun 08;
I stood in line at the fancy bakery for what seemed like an age. The cashier appeared to be in no hurry. Dressed in a white apron and cap, she carefully put each bun bought by a customer into a little plastic bag, then proceeded to put all these into a bigger bag of bags.
Some people, I suppose, are impressed by such service. But I was tired and hungry. Growling stomachs turn minds angsty, and I began to mentally rail at the utter waste of precious resources, and how the bags would only end up creating more rubbish for landfills, not to mention the cost they added to the price of those little buns.
As I was leaving the building, I stopped by the loo. It was not my day. Workers were busy washing the place and had set up a mini barricade. Water was gushing all over. Someone had left the water running and it came streaming out of an unattended hosepipe.
Didn't these people grow up with those campaign ads from the 1970s - 'Don't be a water waster!' - ringing in their heads, I wondered.
The irony of it all was this: A few hours earlier, I had attended a high-level briefing on plans to hold two major summits on sustainable cities and water resources here in Singapore later this month.
What would the thousands of delegates heading here for the inaugural World Cities Summit and the International Water Week, make of these scenes of wanton waste?
Ministers, governors, officials and leaders of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) from around the world will attend the event, to be held at Suntec City from June 23 to 25, which is being billed as a Davos-style meeting with a green twist.
The focus of the sessions will be how cities around the world are grappling with the challenge of planning, building and maintaining systems which are economically and environmentally sound.
Pulling off these meetings will be a feat. After all, thousands of the world's political, business and community leaders travel to the little Swiss Alpine village of Davos, a three-hour road ride from Zurich, put up with the bitingly cold winters, traffic congestion and antiquated hotels in order to attend the renowned World Economic Forum meetings each year.
They go simply because everyone else who matters is, and the meetings are an efficient way to cram several days full of discussions in formal and informal settings alike.
Singapore, with its efficient infrastructure, compact city centre and many other attractions - it surely is no coincidence that the annual arts festival and shopping jamboree are being held at the same time - is ideally placed to host such an event.
And by zeroing in on the hot topic of global warming and sustainable development, the organisers appear to me to be on to a winner, provided they put on a show which wows the delegates.
The Republic has much to show those attending the event, given its commitment to striving to make this tiny island a sustainable city from the 1960s, long before such talk became fashionable.
Delegates will be able to see for themselves the progress made in securing Singapore's water independence through the use of an elaborate system of reservoirs, collection of run-off water, desalination and the making of Newater, that very Singaporean feat of turning resource adversity to advantage.
They might also take in the Pulau Semakau landfill, which foreign publications like the New Scientist have hailed as a model of how cities might manage their waste while protecting biodiversity and the environment.
Indeed, in order to extend the life of these landfills, efforts have been made to cut back on the waste generated here, such as through a voluntary agreement signed in June last year by businesses here to minimise waste in their packaging.
According to a report last year, the National Environment Agency estimated that the amount of solid waste disposed in Singapore jumped six times between 1970 and 2000, to 7,600 tonnes a day.
If this rate of increase were to continue, Singapore would need to build a new incineration plant every five to seven years and a new landfill the size of Sentosa every 25to 30 years.
Lamentably, however, many seem blissfully oblivious to how their day-to-day actions contribute to the growing mountain of waste and rundown of precious resources as my recent experience at the bakery and mall made plain.
Herein lies a crucial lesson to be learnt from Davos and other elite talkfests, where the great and the good - dubbed 'Davos man' by some - come together to ponder - some might say pontificate? - about the world's woes without quite connecting with the people whose lives and futures they are worrying about.
Similar meetings, such as those organised by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund or the G8 group of industrialised nations, have been afflicted by a similar 'Davos distraction', namely, failing to engage the public, from NGOs to local communities, giving rise to a disconnect between those within the debating halls and the protesters outside.
This is why it would be a pity indeed if officials organising the twin summits on cities and water fail to use the events to reinforce public understanding and support for the need to keep Singapore's growth sustainable.
They will need to find creative ways to take the issue to the heartland and bring the debates and policy initiatives alive for the man in the street, so that people see how and why sustainable development matters to them, and what they might get out of changing habits and lifestyles.
Mere exhortation will not be enough. Instead, a mix of public education, social pressure as well as economic incentives will be needed if the effort is to make a difference.
This is critical, not least since some recent global surveys have pointed to a cooling of public concern about climate change, amid more immediate woes, such as rising fuel and food prices as well as job losses arising from an economic slowdown.
A report in the Financial Times last week noted: 'At a time of falling house prices and rising household costs, people are telling pollsters that they are no longer quite so interested in saving the planet. Ipos Mori has found that environmental concerns reached a pinnacle in January 2007, when 19 per cent of people, unprompted, named the environment as one of the biggest issues facing Britain today, compared to just a few per cent several years earlier.
'But by January 2008, the figure had fallen to 8 per cent, while the economy was rated a top concern by one in five. One very senior member of the shadow Cabinet put it more strongly: 'People hate this green stuff.''
A report in yesterday's International Herald Tribune also noted that research into new clean coal technologies, often touted as a critical part of the solution to the world's energy needs and emission worries, had also run into funding and political problems.
Yet, the imperative for action on climate change is as urgent as ever.
Indeed, Lord Nicholas Stern, the British economist whose stark analysis on the dangers of global warming sparked calls for political action around the world, told the FT that he would have written an even more hard-hitting report if he had access to the latest, more troubling research.
Efforts to tackle the problem would, therefore, have to be kept up.
'We will go through many economic cycles on the way to solving this problem. It is a long- term issue,' he said.
The upshot is this: Even as world leaders meet to brainstorm how to shape policy initiatives to tackle rising global temperatures and falling water supplies, they should not neglect to find ways to engage the public, shape consensus and incentivise changes in mindsets and behaviour.
Ultimately, progress can be made only if the political will to tackle climate change is, well, sustainable.
