Living Pathways (2014/Pictorial Book)

Making Sense of Sustainable Development a) Capitalism and Commodification: The emergence of industrial capitalism brought into our midst the ‘culture of commodities’ and the process of commodification. This complex transformation process saw the encroachment of commodification into all aspects of our daily life. Everything came to be thought of in terms of profit – material and/or non-material. Relationships were forged on the basis of profit-motive. Nature was turned into an object of exploitation for the benefit of entrepreneurs. After conquering nature externally, biotechnology provided us the power to control its inner being as well, via its germplasm. The commodification process has become all-pervasive, from the interiors of our being to the vast expanse of outer space. b) Instrumentalisation of our Relationship with Nature: The transformation of our relationship with nature into an exclusively instrumental one implies a belief that nature has no intrinsic value, that its worth is wholly dependent upon us. This sort of thinking exemplifies a species-wide anthropocentric aggressiveness. Nature is thus exploited by us without a conscience, without a concern for any values. Such a relationship in the context of ‘progress’ has led to the sustained degradation and destruction of nature, presenting us with what we have come to understand as environmental problems – resource depletion, destruction of habitats, extinction, pollution, health and general environmental risks. Because capitalism is global in nature, environmental problems have become global as well. c) The Birth of Environmentalism: For the most part, responses to environmental problems addressed the consequences of the capitalist development process rather than the problems inherent within capitalism itself. This consequence-based movement came to be called environmentalism. To a large extent, environmentalism did not question the basic structure of (capitalist) production. It added an environmental dimension to the development path but did not allow that dimension to radically change the path (the ‘radical environmentalists’ who sought to do this were a marginal group). Eco-efficiency became the ‘in’ thing, instead of real change on a wider scale. d) Beginning in the 1970s, a number of changes took place in the world of production and the dominant West that resulted in a significant shift in environmental/ecological consciousness. (i) The period of modernity was coming to an end in Western societies around the 1970s. (ii) The social structure of the Western world (and the advanced among the developing world) began changing from a modern society to a post-modern one. (iii) The post-modern society saw the growing importance of information and knowledge (not as wisdom but as data) and their growing differentiation from previous eras. (iv) The dominant form of technology changed from industrial to information technology or, more broadly, Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). (v) With the rise of the ‘information society’, there was a movement away from Fordism to Post-Fordism to ‘Murdochism’. 120

(vi) As the world globalised, a few groups on the margins of Murdoch culture became better sensitised to cultural localities. (This meant the production of knowledge became a local issue for some, sensitive to particular contexts of cultural life. The importance of knowledge produced by experts began to be questioned.) These changes slowly brought about paradigmatic changes in the responses of individuals and organisations to environmental problems, including a new social dimension. e) A new stage of ecological consciousness and activism came into being. There was a shift from environmentalism to sustainable development (see Table 1 below). But this sustainable development must be seen not as a technical but as a moral-emancipatory project. It demands a moral regulation of our relationship with nature, our fellow beings and the future generations. Although the UN definition of sustainable development falls short when it comes to the spiritual level of environmental awareness, they are correct in saying that it truly must be a ‘development which aims at providing for the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of the future generations to take care of their needs.’ f) During the next stage of moving towards an ecological consciousness, we must work to move past the UN definition of sustainability. The UN definition is only helpful on an organisational level, promoting environmental awareness of businesses, governments and nonprofits. It has not escaped the prison of the productivist mindset. In order to see true change in our collective global mindset, we must approach sustainability on a more intuitive level, past productivism and towards a lifestyle where ‘having’ is less important than ‘being’. If the UN definition could be likened to ‘religion’, then the sustainability we’re after could be likened to ‘spirituality’. In the end, sustainability begins and ends with our selves, our minds and our commitment to see the world as dependent and interrelated: to see time as a continuum between past, present and future, in which each era has the potential to benefit the other or to harm the other. Stages Ecological Consciousness and Activism Lower Environmentalism Higher Sustainable Developmentalism Table 1: Stages of Ecological Consciousness and Activism 121

Some Concepts to Think Through on Sustainable Development To help us think about sustainable development, let me present three concepts: Species Contextualisation, Value Focus and Imaginitive Orientation. a) Species Contextualisation Three conditions constitute species contextualisation, which relates to ecological niche creation or the formation of cultural life. These are: the existential condition (specific natural space), the relational condition (specific social space) and the temporal condition (time space) – see Figure 1 below for a visual clarification. While these concepts can be applied in a modified form for all species, here they are used to understand human beings. Temporal Context Relational Existential Context Context Figure 1: Species (Individual/Community/Species) Contextualisation b) Value Focus The three contexts produce three symbolic objects endowed with meaning and value and help produce three value focuses that serve as a guide for our evaluation, choice and decision-making processes in both our private and public lives (see Figure 2 below). Future Generations Equity and Ecology Equality (Nature) Figure 2: Value Focus 122

c) Imaginative Orientation The Orientation Principle presents an interpretational-navigational device, a device that helps in the interpretation of a situation. It helps us make choices and decisions in order to navigate in a socio-cultural context in the direction of sustainability. The orientations provide a philosophical-moral-practical basis for our everyday life. Generational Imagination Socialistic Deep Ecological Imagination Imagination Figure 3: Three Imaginative Orientations Thus with the three value focuses as the basis, we arrive at three imaginative orientations (Figure 3 above). The three imaginative orientations will help us focus on development with reference to future generations, equity and equality (intra- and inter-generational), and nature (the ecological context). I would like to suggest that a development process that is guided by the three imaginative orientations be termed sustainable development. Components of Sustainable Development and the Democratic Media Based on the discussion above, it is not difficult to see that sustainable development goes beyond the confines of traditional environmental concerns. To achieve sustainable development, the effort must include sustainability at various levels. That is, we need to locate environmental sustainability in the contexts of economic, political, social and cultural sustainability. Table 2 on page 140 offers a view of these various types of sustainability and their main concerns. It also locates the concern of ‘democratic media’. How do we make more critical sense of this location and type of media? 123

Environmental/ Economic Political Social Cultural Ecological Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability • Biological • Appropriate • Human rights; • Improved • General diversity economic reduced risk income sensitivity • Population policies; environment distribution to cultural management; demateriali- with reduced factors; resource use sing the income enlightened planning for economy; • Democratic differential localism present, market development; both locally • Cultural future and alternatives; multi-cultural and globally diversity and other species; appropriate citizenship; • Gender equity dialogical space use technologies multi- transactions management; stakeholder and equality; • Values private to participation equity and contributing public • Efficient equality for to non- • Inter-species resource indigenous anthropo- equity; deep allocation; • Good folks and morphism/ ecology footprint governance people with dematerialisa- concerns management; (corporate disabilities use/waste and • Social tion management government); investment in • Long term accountabi- basic, time sense lity; preventive and holism • More transparency; health and equitable trust education; access to social resources for investment all (all genders, in the family indigenous people, people with disabilities, etc.); inter- generational • Emphasis and intra- on people generational participation equity • Glocalism Democratic Media Table 2: Types of Sustainability and Their Concerns 124

Making Sense of the Media in Relation to Sustainable Development a) To begin with, what is the media all about? I like to think of the media as a ‘technology of (narrativised) representation’. And by representation, I mean the individual and collective, the conceptual and practical activities of naming, meaning making, classification, orientation, negotiation and navigation in the natural, cultural, and now, cyber worlds. Let me link this understanding to sustainable development with the aid of Figures 4 and 5 below. Vision Direction Representation Media Media Technology Content Communication Values Figure 4: Values-Vision Relationship and the Location of the Media b) Media is the interface between the need to communicate and the practice of representation (of what is to be communicated). Communication involves representation through understandable narratives (‘stories’). The key questions to be asked about communication and representation are: what/who influences these representations? Are these influences democratic, or are they produced under hegemonic circumstances? c) The values one holds and the vision one has about society (Figure 4) directly characterise communication and the practice of representation. Thus, if society is influenced by the commodity culture in a general sense, the representations made by the media (largely the ‘commercial media’ – see Table 3 below) will be a type that will rationalise and legitimise the society that supports commodification. If the vision is one of sustainable society and the values are non-anthropocentric, dematerialised and democratic, then the representation by the media of society, the people and their concerns will be different. d) Figure 5 locates communication in relation to media and representation (as indicated in Figure 4) within a sustainable development framework. Here, ‘media’ plays an integral role in the general process of democratic mediation. 125

e) Human activity today is generally taking us in the direction of unsustainability: environmentally, politically, socially and culturally. Thus in Figure 5 below, the ‘C’ trajectory is where we currently find ourselves. If we continue along our road of growth-related activity, with no regard for sustainability or the preservation of precious resources, we will inevitably find ourselves crossing the line into the ‘Zone of Irreversibility’. Once we reach that line there is no turning back, and we will be forced to reap all of the unsustainable seeds we have sown. But we still have time to change our direction. Social criticism and media are represented as line ‘B’ in the Figure below. Social criticism often takes place through democratic media. The media has the power to introduce into our representations of the world a critical message: that change is both necessary and possible. As we integrate these forms of criticism into our worldview, our trajectory slowly shifts upward, towards a more sustainable future. Once ‘B’ is firmly a part of our society, trajectory ‘A’ will follow. ‘A’ represents the various learning loops that allow us to unlearn bad habits and customs and relearn sustainable truths. These learning loops are predicated upon the role of the media, but their implementation lies outside the media’s scope. The discourses generated by social criticism are captured and institutionalised, formally or informally, in our educational institutions and civil society organisations. On this path, we begin to re- educate ourselves in a way that promotes the protection of our earth, our children’s futures and our spiritual lives. Changing our trajectory is still possible, but it is up to us to make it happen. H u Time/Sustainability m a n B A A Social Learning Loops Social Criticism c & Media t i v C Growth-related i Human Actitivity t y Zone of Irreversibility Adapted from Anil Agarwal (ed.), The Challenge of the Balance: Environmental Economics (New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment, 1997), p. 13. Figure 5: Media, Social Criticisms and Social Learning Loops f) What does this mean? A sustainable society is only possible when three conditions prevail: (i) a general democratic environment; (ii) active self-consciousness at a societal level; and (iii) a free, responsible democratic media. 126

g) Keeping in mind the important role communication plays in helping form individual attitudes and mindsets, the responsibility of media activism is much larger than what it is made out to be. The way to connect media activism to this larger responsibility can be achieved by placing media within the framework of sustainable developmentalism. h) The reference to democratic media above implies other forms. Table 3 below provides details of the different types of media. These are sort of ‘ideal types’. There are transactions between these types and there are of course certainly hybrid types. For example, the commercial media transforms people into ‘demand’ and ‘market’. However, people are not merely ‘demand variables’ but have the capability of taking action to deal with the market hegemonic situation. i) Thus, the democratisation of the media needs to include not only a reform in the technological and content creation aspects of the mediation process but also an active contribution to the reformation of our society towards a sustainable model (Figure 6). j) This framework not only contributes to an internal democratisation process of the media and its institutions but also allows media activists to build networks with other movements. Representing the generic property of communication, which is unavoidable in all relationships, media activism can naturally insert itself into any movement that is animated by the sustainable development agenda. Sector Private Government Civil Society Media Type Commercial Media State Media Democratic Media Audience ‘People’ as ‘People’ as ‘People’ as Actors Market, Market Passive Citizens, and Participants, Co- Creators/Co-Owners Hegemony Recipients of of Media Content and Media Content Media Institutions Bottom-line Profit Motive/ Political Individual/ Community Class Hegemony Hegemony/ Identity Building and Development/Self- Survival Realisation Table 3: Sector and Media Type Vision: Sustainable Society Direction Representation Democratic Media Communication Values (Non-anthropocentric, dematerialised, democratic) Figure 6: Media Reforms for a Sustainable Society 127

128

Antecedent Roots 2* Financial or Multi-Dimensional Crisis? Going Down ‘Private equity company Blackstone Group LP (BX.N) CEO Stephen Schwarzman said on Tuesday that up to 45 percent of the world’s wealth has been destroyed by the global credit crisis. “Between 40 and 45 percent of the world’s wealth has been destroyed in little less than a year and a half”, Schwarzman told an audience at the Japan Society. “This is absolutely unprecedented in our lifetime.”’ (Reuters, 12 March 2009) Permanently in Crisis The very poor communities across the globe are in a ‘permanent crisis’ from a class perspective, because that is the way the mainstream global economic structure and process works. Even for many analysts and academics, there will never be a situation when we will not have the poor among us. They insist that there will always be poor among us, that there will always be suffering communities with no permanent shelter, no food security, no regular contractual jobs and no fixed future. And they act like this isn’t problematic! Somehow their suffering is never seen as the crisis that it is. Instead, it is a given part of the system, and we are hardly shaken by it. Those communities faced with this reality are never a focus of the mainstream media. For the poor, crisis is the way life is, and they handle it for themselves and their families on a day-to-day basis. It is estimated that more than 1 billion people are chronically hungry across the world. For millions of people, there is no food security. Even in the supposedly wealthy US, it is estimated that about 35 million Americans do not know where their next meal will come from! Not that there is not enough food to provide for the hungry people of the world – it is just that they do not qualify for the food as they are not part of the quantified ‘demand’ charged with consuming the available ‘supply’! * Antecedent Roots 2 was originally published in two parts under the same name on the online newspaper, Malaysiakini, in April 2009. This version has been minimally corrected. 129

Perhaps from such an angle, the internationally critically-acclaimed but locally-criticised (in India) Hollywood-Bollywood film Slumdog Millionaire is a soft critique of mainstream economics and a celebration (and to a good extent, romanticism) of the spirit of poor people who are always in the state of ‘permanent crisis’ but are trying to deal with it creatively. Of course it does not offer a solution as much as it depicts a dream or fantasy. The Periodic Crisis For those who have been gainfully employed, the middle classes, financial wizards, bankers, entre- preneurs, etc., the present economic downturn is a damning crisis. It is not the way they imagine their life should be. Furthermore, the mainstream media is bent on presenting this crisis in all its drama. News on this hot topic certainly sells. The crisis has created painful consequences for the above-mentioned groups facing the financial crunch. For instance, economic crisis-related suicides have increased across the globe. Japan, which has the highest number of suicides in the developed world, has recorded in excess of 30,000 suicides in 2008: that amounts to over 20 suicides per 100,000 persons. There is a general increase in suicides in Asia, just as in the 1997 Asian financial crisis. In countries like Australia and the US, the situation is becoming serious. Special units and suicide hotlines are being set up to deal with depression and suicidal tendencies caused by the economic crisis. In Australia, between October and December 2008, there was a 34 percent rise in suicide-related calls for help because of financial pressures related to the crisis. Millions of people have lost their jobs across the world. Millions more are expected to lose their liveli- hoods. According to an International Labour Organisation (ILO) report, the labour market projections for 2009 show definite deterioration in the global labour markets for both women and men. Two scenarios are given. In the best-case scenario, 18 million jobs will be lost, which would amount to a global unem- ployment rate of 6.1 percent. In the worst-case scenario, there will be a loss of more than 50 million jobs, which would equate to a rate of 7.1 percent. Of this, about 21 million would be women. If the worst-case scenario happens, the number of poor working people (those unable to earn enough to lift themselves and their families above the poverty line $2 USD per person per day) may rise to 1.4 billion. This is nearly half of the entire world’s employed. Further, some 200 million workers earning $1.25 USD or less a day, mostly in developing economies, could be pushed into extreme poverty. The periodic crisis makes it even more difficult for those permanently in crisis. And Now, Finding the Cause of the Crisis The economic crisis has now offered the world a new intellectual enterprise, and it is gaining strength. From across the political spectrum, analyses of the causes of the present financial crisis and economic downturn are being offered and, in the same breath, solutions are being presented. As can be expected, some of these solutions, particularly from the right, are being sold as yet another product. For many, the economic crisis offers business opportunities! 130

The Chinese term for crisis contains both the notion of ‘danger’ and of ‘opportunity’. The intellectual response to crisis has also provided both these elements. The only difference is the way the opportunity is perceived. Just walk into any popular book store and you will see a range of books from across the political spec- trum – from the ‘free market’ theorists to the ‘new imperialism’ ones – that not only attempt to understand the crisis but also attempt to address it, both immediately and in the long term. Authors of every ilk, from radicals to Nobel laureates to pop management gurus, all generously offer their thoughts and solutions. There is a resurgence of Marxist/socialist theories. If one has been following the intellectual output during the various crises from the distant and/or recent past, they’ll find rehashed arguments and solutions just as much as they’ll find new arguments from writers who have been consistent in tracing and monitoring these crises and predicting future ones. For instance, one group may attempt to explain the present crisis by using the sub-prime mortgage crisis in the US as a starting point, suggesting this was what began the whole problem for the US, European and global economies. They want to re-examine financial regulation nationally and globally, tighten it, do more tinkering to the present system and move on. It is business as usual, with some tweaking here and there. To them, a crisis is seen as a portal to more economic opportunities. The other group, looking at the problem more historically, wants to go beyond the current crisis. They look at sub-prime mortgages as only one of the many consequences to inherent structural problems of a global economy rooted in the profit-only bottom line. For many among this reformist group, the present problem has its roots in the period after the end of the Second World War, beginning with the post-war economic reconstruction of Japan and Germany/Europe. They want us to re-examine and fundamentally change the way we organise our economy and manage our society. Perhaps a revealing analysis is the fact that from post-World War II onwards, there has been progres- sive degeneration of the ‘real economy’ and progressive growth of the ‘finance economy’. Real wages, pro- ductivity and demand have fallen or shrunk. With many new locations of increased production and capacity, we are also now faced with the problem of overproduction. Long term structural economic problems have given rise to a myriad of consequences over the last decades: the dot-com bubble, the global war on communism then and terrorism now, the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars and their reconstruction efforts, and the huge sub-prime mortgages in the US. Political, industrial and financial leaders have tried many times to deal with these problems, looking for ways to prop up eco- nomic activity any way they could. The US acted as a leader in all of the above consequences and issues, and a transnational group of entrepreneurs from across the globe benefited. But only now, in the wake of the sub-prime mortgage crisis in the US, have we awoken to the reality of the disaster ahead of us. Real productive enterprises provide goods and services that improve on what existed previously, creat- ing jobs and increasing productivity and overall efficiency. Economic growth and progress in the real world takes place because of ‘product entrepreneurs’, from which businesses make profit and the labouring community earns wages. Entrepreneurs invest these earnings in creating new products or enterprises, and consumers continue to buy them. But this chain of activity is now in crisis. The real economy, which supports real people, their wages, production of real goods and creation of value, is in bad shape. Stagnation in the real economy has resulted in investors promoting the ‘financialisation of the economy’, a strategy to make 131

money ‘out of nothing’ through some sort of economic voodoo! Trillions of dollars have been created out of speculation and there is a huge financial world out there that operates solely on it. It is just an empty world that runs on the rise and fall of trends within paper-money markets. If that amount were really available and justly distributed in the real economy, we would not have poor people going to bed hungry. Financial entrepreneurship has become more dominant in the national and global economies. As many creative minds are absorbed by the war economy to support conflicts, entrepreneurial creative minds are being tapped by financial institutions to create various financial instruments such as complex derivatives, collateralised loan obligations and mortgage-backed securities and bonds. These are strategies to create profits, not value. Competition in the financial economy is often a zero-sum contest. For every investor or speculator who wins, there’s another who loses. It builds a ‘fictitious world’. In contrast, competition in the real economy generates creativity, better products and consumers. Instead of creating a zero-sum game, this real econ- omy affects everyone, the entrepreneur as well as the consumer, positively. Unfortunately, we have all con- sciously or unconsciously participated in creating the fictitious world. But today, the fiction is finally breaking apart, revealing deeply dangerous truths about what our future may look like in the not-too-distant future. Aren’t We Facing a Deep Cultural Crisis? The present economic philosophy is gearing the world towards its slow destruction. The central ten- dency that drives us is profit and, closely associated with it, greed. Making a profit is the highest value. This destructive philosophy has become the basis of social life, and it influences every aspect of our everyday life expression. Our notions of progress, performance, success and achievement are also influenced by it. Even within this profit-bottom-line economic framework, instead of paying attention to the real econo- my, we have allowed the financial entrepreneurs to lead. This has not only affected the real economy entre- preneurs who have been held prisoners by the results for the ‘quarter’, but it has also heightened the drive to achieve profit from ‘nothing’. Now, we are all floating on fictitious capital and building fantasy worlds on a foundation of ‘nothingness’ generated by the vacuous values of speculated futures. These issues have gone on for years, deeply affecting the Earth and all lives. Without paying serious attention to ‘deep sustainability’ in an all-round sense (not just in an ecological sense but in terms of socio- cultural life, politics, economics and technology), we will continue to move ourselves closer and closer towards ‘multi-dimensional crises’. The lack of real attention paid to sustainability by people engaged in mainstream economic activity and contemporary entrepreneurship has caused Earth and human societies great harm, and continues quite unabated. Indiscriminate consumption without any sense of limits has pushed us towards an ecological crisis. The darker truth of the ‘American Dream’, which is based on consumption and more consumption, is that we would require resources of about six more Earths to match American consumption levels for the whole world. We are already living on the resources of the future generations! The present unsustainable global economic activity is also based on the benefits of a ‘permanent war economy’. Wars, which directly depend on labour and creativity for the production of weapons, and on 132

sound strategies for killing human life, will continue to be invented and reinvented. The environment suffers with each episode of violence these wars permit. The US ‘war on terror’ could cost about $2.4 trillion by 2017 and many entrepreneurs see it as an investment in American security. This could progressively mean more ‘wars of independence’ within nations or regions being re-designated by media and foreign policy as ‘wars of terrorism’ so that we can ‘invest’ in them. In addition, the present economic structuring of society contributes to the inequality between the haves and have-nots, which exposes huge sections of the human population, including children, to the permanent crisis spoken of above and to many more periodic cycles of economic and financial crises. According to a 1999 United Nations report, ‘the income gap between the fifth of the world’s people living in the richest countries and the fifth in the poorest doubled from 1960 to 1990, from 30 to 1 to 60 to 1. By 1998, it had jumped again, with the gap widening to an astonishing 78 to 1.’ A growing critique of the dominant economic development paradigm by the indigenous people’s movement is that we have lost touch with older, more holistic cosmologies and replaced them with the pres- ent ‘capital-centric’ one. While the former created a culture and mentality based on the close relationship between Nature and Society, the latter separated them, to the detriment of both. While the former created a deeper sense of ‘inter-being’ marked by mindful awareness of the interconnectedness of all creation, the latter fashioned us into islands, working from a premise that our species deserves to dominate all living and non-living Nature and play God. The dominance and arrogance of the capital-centric culture are certainly the basis of all economic/ financial crises. But today this crisis must be seen together with all other crises we have brought upon ourselves: the ecological crisis, a crisis in legitimacy and democracy and the socio-cultural crisis. This is a period when we have to come to terms with ‘multi-dimensional crises’. By design or default, a vast majority of us have chosen to ignore a deeper solution to the multiple crises-prone economic systems we live within. A deeper solution would result in dismantling the basis of economic and political power; re-organising production, ownership and distribution of wealth; and re-structuring legitimacy and leadership for a global society based on the principles of authentic justice, equality and freedom. Unfortunately, our governments simply do not have the will to change. Even with the growth of all kinds of philanthropy, including corporate philanthropy, global multiple-bottom-line initiatives and social codes of conduct, the hand that grabs and takes refuses to become a hand that nurtures, protects and gives. That requires a massive cultural shift. ‘Going Down’ as Part of the Script of a Global Human Drama As the history of economic and financial crises continues to recycle itself, we will eventually come back to where we are today, maybe in another 10 to 15 years. The crisis may not be as serious as it is today, or it may be more so. Either way, if we refuse to act while we can, it will emerge as yet another episode with its own specificities in a global human drama series that seems to continuously deny itself an all-together new season with a more helpful set of producers, authors, cast and crew. It is like watching a Hollywood or Bol- lywood film: we know what is going to happen, but we still watch, don’t we? 133

134

135

136

Bibliography and References “20% of Japan’s Population over 65.” Editorial. The Japan Times, 3 June 2006. Alatas, Syed Farid, Alternative Discourses in Asian Social Science: Responses to Eurocentrism (New Delhi: Sage Publication, 2006). Abdul-Matin, Ibrahim, and Keith Ellison, Green Deen: What Islam Teaches about Protecting the Planet (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 2010). Ayres, Ed, God’s Last Offer: Negotiating for a Sustainable Future (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 1999). Blum, William, Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000). Bookchin, Murray, The Philosophy of Social Ecology: Essays in Dialectical Naturalism (Jaipur, India: Rawat Publications, 1996). Brown, Lester R., Plan 3.0: Mobilising to Save Civilisation (New York: Earth Policy Institute, 2008). Bushman, Margie, and Michael G. Smith, “Earth Building in Thailand: An Interview with Jon Jandai and Janell Kapoor” (Sustainable Architecture, Building and Culture. www.sustainableabc.com). Castro, Carlos J., “Sustainable Development: Mainstream and Critical Perspectives”, Organisations & Environment, Vol. 17 (2), 2004: 196. Comte-Sponville, André, The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality (New York: Penguin Books, 2008). Curry, George N., “Moving Beyond Postdevelopment: Facilitating Indigenous Alternatives for ‘Development’”, Economic Geography, Vol. 79 (4), 2003: 405–423. Dankelman, Irene, “Culture and Cosmovision: Roots of Natural Resource Management” in James Oglethorpe (ed.), Adaptive Management: From Theory to Practice (Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, 2002): 41–52. de Botton, Alain, Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believer’s Guide to the Uses of Religion (New York: Random House, 2012). de Guia, Katrin, Kapwa: The Self in the Other: Worldviews and Lifestyles of Filipino Culture-Bearers (Pasig City, Philippines: Anvil Publishing, 2005). de Mesa, José M., “Making Salvation Concrete and Jesus Real: Trends in Asian Christology” (SE- DOS Research and Documentation Centre. SEDOSmission.org, 1 Nov. 2001). Originally published in Journal of Missiological and Ecumenical Research. 137

138

Dolan, Ronald E. and Robert L. Worden (ed.), “The Rise of the Militarists” in Japan: A Country Study (Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1994). Dutta, Ananya, “Basu and Mother Teresa: A Special Association” The Hindu, 19 January 2010. Fanon, Frantz, The Wretched of the Earth (New York: Grove Press, 2004). Foreman, Dave, “The Pleistocene-Holocene Event: The Sixth Great Extinction” (The Rewilding Insti- tute. Rewilding.org). Originally published in Rewilding North America. (Washington D.C.: Island, 2004). Fukuoka, Masanobu, The One-Straw Revolution: An Introduction to Natural Farming, edited by Larry Kohn (New York: New York Review Books, 1978). Galeota, Julia, “Cultural Imperialism: An American Tradition”, The Humanist: “Humanist Essay Contest Winners”, June 2004. Gare, Arran, “Creating an Ecological Socialist Future”, Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, Vol. 11 (2), 2000: 30. Gleick, James, Faster: The Acceleration of Just About Everything (New York: Vintage Books, 1999). Goldstein, Julien, “A World of Hunger amid Plenty” (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. ifrc.org, 22 Sept. 2011). Gramsci, Antonio, Prison Notebooks (New York: International Publishers, 1971). Grünewald, François, Béatrice Boyer, Dr. Hugues Maury, and Peggy Pascal, “Indian Ocean Tsunami 2004: 10 Lessons Learnt from the Humanitarian Response” (funded by the French State). Rep. Trans. Annabel Green-Lavielle. France Diplomatie, 2006. Gwyn, Richard, “‘American Dream’ Turning Into a Nightmare” (Common Dreams. commondreams. org, 27 June 2006.) Originally published in The Toronto Star. Habermas, Jürgen, The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Fundamentalist Reason. Translated by Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1987). Hood, Made Mantle, Triguna: A Hindu-Balinese Philosophy for Gamelan Gong Gede Music (Berlin: Lit Verlag, 2010). Hugo, Graeme. “Urbanisation in Asia: An Overview”. Rep. N.p.: University of Adelaide, 2003. Web. 10 June 2013. Paper originally prepared for the Conference on African Migration in Comparative Perspective, Johannesburg, South Africa, 4–7 June, 2003. Ichiyo, Muto, “Ecological Perspectives on Alternative Development: The Rainbow Plan”, Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, Vol. 9 (1), 1998. 139

140

Inayatullah, Sohail, “Spirituality as the Fourth Bottom Line”, (Metafuture.org). Kuhnt-Saptodewo, Sri, Volker Grabowsky and Martin Grobheim (eds.), Nationalism and Cultural Revival in Southeast Asia: Perspectives from the Centre and the Region (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1977). Kudoh, Youki, “Who Killed Our Culture? We Did.” Time Magazine, 3 May 1999. Lama, Dalai, Ethics for the New Millennium (New York: Riverhead Books, 1999). Laszlo, Ervin, Global Shift in the World Mind: From Global Breakdown to Global Breakthrough (Mumbai: Jaico, 2009). Layard, Richard, John Helliwell and Jeffrey Sachs, “World Happiness Report” (The Earth Institute, Colombia University, 2012). Macpherson C.B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962). Marjaya, I Made, “Tri Hita Karana: A Conception In Conducting Balinese Arts” (Institut Seni Indone- sia Denpasar. http://www.isi-dps.ac.id, 10 Jan. 2010). Marx, Karl, Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844. Translated by Martin Milligan (New York: Prometheus Books, 1988). Mehta, Gita, Karma Cola: Marketing the Mystic East (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979). Mies, Maria and Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen, The Subsistence Perspective: Beyond the Globalised Economy. Translated by Patrick Camiller, Maria Mies, and Gerd Weih (London: Zed Books, 1999). Nadarajah M., Another Malaysia Is Possible and Other Essays: Writings on Culture and Politics for a Sustainable World (Kuala Lumpur: National Office for Human Development, 2004). ---------------- Culture, Gender and Ecology: Beyond Workerism (New Delhi: Rawat Publishers, 1999). ---------------- “Financial or Multi-Dimensional Crisis?” (Parts 1 and 2) (Malaysiakini. http://www. malaysiakini.com/opinions/102397, 15 April 2009). ---------------- Pathways to Critical Media Education and Beyond: Deliberations on Media Reforms and the Manila Initiative (Kuala Lumpur: Cahayasuara Communications Centre, 2003): 23–34. ---------------- “The Amoral Beast” (Malaysiakini. http://www.malaysiakini.com/opinions/22121, 31 March 2003). Nadarajah M. and Ann Tomoko Yamamoto (eds.), Urban Crisis: Culture and the Sustainability of Cities (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2007). 141

142

Ollman, Bertell (ed.), Market Socialism: The Debate among Socialists (New York: Routledge, 1998). Odora Hoppers, Catherine A., “Indigenous Knowledge and the Integration of Knowledge Systems: Towards a Conception and Methodological Framework”, in Catherine A. Odora Hoppers (ed.), Indigenous Knowledge and the Integration of Knowledge Systems: Towards a Philosophy of Articulation (Claremont, South Africa: New Africa Books, 2002). Picard, Michel, Bali: Cultural Tourism and Touristic Culture (Singapore: Archipelago Press, 1992). Picard, Michel and Robert E. Wood (eds.), Tourism, Ethnicity, and the State in Asia and Pacific Societies (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1997). Priesner, Stefan, “Gross National Happiness”: The Dimensions of Bhutan’s Unique Approach to Development (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1996). Ritzer, George, The McDonaldization of Society: An Investigation Into the Changing Character of Contemporary Social Life (Newbury Park: Sage Publications/Pine Forge Press, 2007). Rose, Deborah, “An Indigenous Philosophical Ecology: Situating the Human”, Australian Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 16 (3), 2005: 294–305. Sarkar, Saral, Eco-Socialism or Eco-Capitalism: A Critical Analysis of Humanity’s Fundamental Choices (London and New York: Zed Books, 1999). Seetharam, Kallidaikurichi and Belinda Yuen (ed.), Developing Living Cities: From Analysis to Action (Singapore: World Scientific, 2010): 1–4. Singh, Gurmit, Beyond Me & Mine (Shah Alam, Malaysia: Marshall Cavendish, 2008). Shawcross, William, The Quality of Mercy: Cambodia, Holocaust and Modern Conscience (Riverside, New Jersey: Simon & Schuster, 1984). Sivaraksa, Sulak, The Wisdom of Sustainability: Buddhist Economics for the 21st Century (Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 2009). Speth, Gus, “What Is the American Dream? Dueling Dualities in the American Tradition” (grist.com, 24 June 2011). Sugirtharajah R.S. (ed.), Vernacular Hermeneutics (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999). Tanizaki, Junichiro, In Praise of Shadows (London: Vintage Classics, 2001). Taylor, Paul, Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2011). Thianvihan, Fr. Niphot, “Indigenous Peoples and Human Development in Thai Context” (slideshare.net). 143

144

“The Internet Is Killing the Planet.” Earth Day Infographic: The Internet Is Killing the Planet (Wordstream.com, 22 Apr. 2011). Thich Nhat Hanh, Interbeing: Fourteen Guidelines for Engaged Buddhism, edited by Fred Eppsteiner (New Delhi: Full Circle, 1997). Tilford, Dave, “Why Consumption Matters” (Sustainable Consumption. Sierraclub.org, 2000). Tiyavanich, Kamala, Forest Recollections: Wandering Monks in Twentieth-Century Thailand (Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 1997). Tolle, Eckhart, A New Earth: Create a Better Life (London: Penguin Books, 2006). Visvanathan, Shiv, “Between Pilgrimage and Citizenship: The Possibilities of Self-restraint in Science”, in Catherine A. Odora Hoppers (ed.), Indigenous Knowledge and the Integration of Knowledge Systems: Towards a Philosophy of Articulation (Claremont, South Africa: New Africa Books, 2002). Wackernagel, Mathis and William Rees, Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth (Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers, 1996). Weber, Max, “Science as a Vocation.” Lecture. Wissenschaft als Beruf. Munich University, Munich. 1918. Gesammlte etc. Munich: Duncker and Humboldt, 1919. Williams, Colin C. and Andrew C. Millington, “The Diverse and Contested Meanings of Sustainable Development”, The Geographical Journal, Vol. 170 (2), 2004: 99–104. Wojtan, Linda S., “Exploring Contemporary Japanese Society” (Stanford Program on International and Cross-cultural Education (SPICE). http://www.stanford.edu, Nov. 2000). World Commission on Environment and Development, comp. “Our Common Future” (The Brundtland Report). (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987). Wright, Tom and Mizuno Katsuhiko, Zen Gardens: Kyoto’s Nature Enclosed (Kyoto: Suiko Books, 1990). Yoshimi, Shunya, “Consuming ‘America’: From Symbol to System” in Chua Beng-Huat (ed.), Consumption in Asia: Lifestyles and Identities (London: Routledge, 2000). Yunus, Muhammad, Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism (New York: PublicAffairs, 2007). 145

146

Index unsustainable practices of 47, 61, 71, 130 Western impact on 41-43, 57, 59, 101–103 A (Also see ‘American Dream’) academic self 25, 113 Asian College of Journalism 5 Ainu 25, 67 Asian Public Intellectuals: 1 API fellows 75, 95 American Dream: 35, 41 author’s experience with 9–10, 67 the underside of 37, 41–43, 59, 132 Ateneo de Manila University 67 Americanisation: 41 of the world 37, 41 B the harms of 43–45 balance: 79, 103 Americanism: 35 as a challenge in development 126 unsustainability of 36 as a spiritual principle 83, 91 in relation to Asia 41–45 (Also see ‘Asia’) in Balinese tradition 87, 89 in Islamic tradition 95 animism 8 necessity of 31, 95 Anwar Fazal 67 Bali: author’s travels to 11, 67, 75 Asia: tourism of 73 author’s study of xvii, 1, 29–31, 107, 113 Asian scholarship 53–55, 109 Balinese: 91 cosmologies within 73–75, 87, 99 (Also see temples of 89 (Also see ‘pura’ and ‘candi ‘cosmology’) bentar’) cultures of 11, 17 traditions of 67, 73, 75, 87 development in 19–21, 47, 63, 103 generational issues of 31, 35 being: 13, 51, 95 future of 27, 51 identity of 33–35, 95,101 and mainstream culture 27 in relation to consumption 45, 49, 59 as opposed to ‘having’ 7, 10, 25, 87, 121 marginalisation of 61, 75 complications of 15, 77 pasts of 53 fellow beings 13, 49, 121 reformation of 119 indigenous notions of 99 spiritual core of 75 inter-being 13, 15, 25, 73, 87, 91–95, 133 spiritual traditions of 37, 78, 87, 91–93, 109 (Also see ‘Buddhism’) (Also see ‘spirituality’) levels of 83 suggestions for 113–115 sustainability and 63, 121 sustainable pathways of 25, 49, 67, 79–81 transcendental Being 79 (Also see ‘sustainability’) transformation of 91 urbanisation of 9, 29, 41, 45 (Also see ‘urbanism’) 147

biocentric egalitarianism 67 commodification of 21 crisis of 21, 59, 103 Brundtland Commission: xvii, 81 in relation to business 19 Brundtland Report 5, 87 (Also see ‘“Our in relation to sustainability 25, 83 Common Future”’) consumerism: Buddhism: 79, 95 consumer emporiums 27 and sustainability 95 consumer goods 87 as related to inter-being 93–95 (Also see consumer movement 1–5 ‘inter-being’) consumer-driven culture 25, 61 Buddhist culture in Thailand 27, 75 Consumerist Utopia 13, 21 Buddhist methodology 25 consumers 3, 131–132 Buddhist response to urbanism 87 in relation to Americanism 35, 41(Also see Zen Buddhism 29 ‘Americanism’) C Consumers International 5–9 candi bentar 89–91 consumption: and transubstantiation 37 capitalism: 5–7, 120 and unsustainability 19–21, 27–31, 43–45, capital-centric discourse 63, 133 63, 69 capitalist development 1–5, 19, 21, 63, 81 circularity of consumption 99 capitalistic transformation of Asia 43 commodities and 55 complications of 23, 51 consumption orientation 97 corporate capitalism 33–35 in indigenous communities 95, 99 in relation to the American Dream 41 (Also indiscriminate consumption 5, 7, 132 see ‘American Dream’) nutrition and 59 (Also see ‘hunger’) spatial-discursive system of contemporary sustainable consumption 7 global capitalism 43 corporate culture: Catholicism: corporate agenda 19 reorientation of 37, 77 corporate America 43, 59 Catholic interviewees 27, 33 corporate capitalism 33, 35 Catholic response to urbanism 87 corporate self-image 37 corporate social responsibility 21, 124, 133 Centre for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto corporations 41 University 45 cosmology: 17, 45 child abuse 47 author’s definition of 49 cosmological reorientation 51 colonialism: 51 cosmology of sustainability 11–15, 55, colonial mentality 37 73–75, 83–87, 91–93, 99, 101, 107, 115 consequences of 51–53, 57 mechanistic cosmology 51 in relation to catholicism 77 (Also see ‘Ca- new cosmology 55 tholicism’) unsustainable cosmologies 61, 75, 101 in relation to commodity cultures 21 within indigenous cultures 63, 113, 133 compassion: cosmovision 73 and connectedness 93 as a feature of spirituality 11, 79 148

culture: 25, 31–33, 37 DINKY 47 American culture 35, 41–45 (Also see ‘Americanism’) E and globalisation 103, 121 and spirituality 79, 81, 87, 107 Earth Summit 61 and sustainabile development 3, 9–11, 67, ecology: 122–123 81 and indigenous peoples 73 and sustainability 9, 55, 63, 89, 123–124, and spirituality 79, 83 126 and sustainability 9, 31, 55, 71–73, 91, 107, and urbanisation 9, 31 (Also see ‘urban- 124, 132 (Also see ‘sustainability’) ism’) crisis of 21, 103, 132–133 Asian cultures xvii, 11, 17, 25–29, 43, 49, 57 ecological consciousness 120–121 (Also see ‘Asia’) ecological footprint 27, 69, 103 coloniser culture 37 (Also see ‘colonial- ecological impacts 63 ism’) ecological movement 5 commodity/commercial culture 21, 27, 41, future of 25, 103 49, 61, 73, 83, 120, 125 philosophical ecology 49 crisis of 13, 21, 33, 45, 132–133 ecosystem 49 cultural alloy 37 Empire of Now 31, 95–97 cultural bomb 43 Engaged Buddhism and Catholicism 83 cultural imperialism/hegemony 41, 57, 75 entertainment 21–23, 27 (Also see ‘hegemony’) environment: cultural practices 29, 89 and businesses 21 entertainment culture 27 and indigenous cultures 73 fast-food culture 91 and limits 67 indigenous culture 37, 49, 53–55, 67–79, and spirituality 95 91–95, 113, 133 and sustainability 29, 33, 49, 61, 71, 107, loss of 31–33 124, 126 marginalisation of 73 and sustainable development 9, 63, 81, 123 multiculturalism 31 and the media 119 nationalistic culture 71–73 and urbanism 31, 41 present-day culture 13, 91, 122–123 effects of consumption upon 5, 69 touristic culture 73, 115 environmental cost 43 environmental degradation 1–3, 19–21, 133 D problems with 9, 55, 81, 120–121 socialistic 7 de Mesa, José 37 environmentalism 3, 120–121 dematerialisation: F and eco-friendliness 71 and sustainability 124–125, 127 (Also see Fernandez, Josie 5 ‘growth’) non-materialism 11, 25, 69–71, 83 149 of the economy 69 Diabetes 45

G I GDP 55, 103 Ifugao Province 11, 75 gimong 73, 99 Gross National Happiness 101–103 Ikuta, Masato 71 growth: (Also see ‘dematerialisation’) and sustainability 25 inayan 69, 73, 89 (Also see ‘lawa’) ‘de-growth’ development 13 economic 13, 55, 67, 75, 81, 131 indigenous peoples: 55, 73, 91, 95 growth-oriented development 19–21, 33, 47, and consumption 7, 95, 99 63, 69, 79–83, 101 and modern society 103, 113–115, 133 growth-related activity 126 and spirituality 79 material growth 19, 41 and sustainability 25, 33, 69, 87, 107–109, ‘no-growth’ development 103 124 pro-capitalist market growth model 63 author’s interactions with 11, 49, 75 pro-growth 61, 91 cosmologies of xix, 11–13, 73, 87, 101 critique of 71 guardians 73, 91 philosophies of 53–55, 69, 91–93, 99 H Indigenous Peoples’ International Centre for Policy Research and Education (Tebtebba) 69, 87 Happy Planet Index 103 individualism 91 hedonism: 21–23, 75, 98 Institute of Hindu Dharma 89 hegemony: and development 57, 75 inter-being: 13, 91 and the media 125–127 and Buddhism 25, 95 and urbanism 29 and sustainable cultures 93, 133 Buddhist and Catholic response to 83 in relation to globalisation 73 Gramscian hegemony 57 hegemonic anthropocentrism 49 interconnectedness: 33, 87 in relation to Americanism 41, 113–115 and Buddhism 95 (Also see ‘Buddhism’) and spirituality 11, 15, 83, 93 Henanga 25, 67, 91 and the future 55 in relation to business 19, 133 Hiroshima 41, 67 Ishikawa International Cooperation Research Cen- historical materialism 3–5, 9, 13 tre (IICRC) 9 human beings: 27, 122 J as part of a triadic relationship xix, 87 (Also see ‘triadic relationship’) Japanese Zen garden 29, 75 in relation to the material world xvii with nature and environment 7, 19, 27, 49, Jawaharlal Nehru University 3 63, 95 justice: 23–25 hunger 57–61 crisis of 1, 21 in Islam 95 hurry: 27–31 practice of 103, 133 ‘hurry-stopper’ 29 social justice 59 150

K and ashrams 11, 29 and self-awareness 67, 83 kammic merit 49 as part of the ‘fourth pillar’ 19 author’s experience with 5, 25, 29, 95 Kanazawa Approach to Culture in the Sustainability military: of Cities 9, 13 of America 35–37, 41 intervention of 57 Kankanaey 69, 89–91 of Japan 71 of the West 101 kapwa 73, 93–95 Millennium Development Goals 57 mindfulness: 23, 27, 33, 43, 69 Karen: 31, 75, 87 and Buddhism 25, 95 (Also see ‘Bud beliefs of 91 dhism’) rituals of 49 and interconnectedness 55, 83, 91, 133 Khoo Salma Nasution 9 and spirituality 11–15 and sustainability 29, 73 Kumar, Sashi 5 struggles of 71 Mud House Movement 29, 71 Kyoto 45–47, 61, 71 N L Nara 75 Lanna 87 nationalism: (Also see ‘military’) and Japan 43, 71, 91 lawa 69, 89 (Also see ‘inayan’) nationalistic culture 73 negative consequences of 35, 71 life worlds 21 nature: 33, 47–49, 81, 95, 120–123 and extinction 19 limits: and indigenous peoples 67–69, 73, 91, 95 and balance 31, 67–69, 73, 83, 89, 95, 103 and sustainable development 63 (Also see in the Zen garden 29 (Also see ‘Japanese ‘sustainable development’) Zen garden’) destruction of 7, 51, 120, 133 on development 81 natural world xix, 49, 73, 83–87 perceived lack of 23, 31, 45, 55, 132 protection of 25, 99 returning to 29, 33 Lumiwes, Olowan 69 Nippon Foundation 1, 11 (Also see ‘Asian Public Intellectuals’) M O Made Titib 87 organic intellectuals 33 malnutrition (See ‘hunger’) “Our Common Future” 19, 81 materialism: 33, 75 151 and consumption 21, 61, 99 and development 13 Media: 21, 23, 57, 115, 119–127, 129–130, 133 and Americanism 43 (Also see ‘American- isation’) and Japan 47 author’s experience with 1, 5 meditation: 23, 49

P S personhood: 3, 11, 93–95 Sacred: 75, 91 author’s personal development 7–11, 87 and sustainability 109 personal life 27, 81 as part of a triadic relationship 85 (Also see personal needs 69 ‘Triadic Relationship’) shared personhood 73 (Also see ‘kapwa’) in cosmovision 73 (Also see ‘cosmovision’) Press Trust of India 5 in Islam 95 pura 89 sacred portal 89 (Also see ‘candi bentar’) sacred spaces 75, 91 R sacredness of all things 87–91 spiritual sacredness 99, 107 Ramakrishna, Sundari xix Ratna Rana 9 Sagada 69 religion: 23–25, 93 and spirituality (see ‘spirituality’) samsara 49 in Bali 75, 89 (Also see ‘Bali’) institutionalised religion 77 Shintoists 29, 75, 91 ‘Cosmic Religion’ 75–77, 83 and atheism 79 Sivaraksa, Sulak 75 Research and Training Centre for Religio-Cultural Community 33, 109 social Darwinism 41 re-situating the human 49 resources: speed of life: 47 and consumption 97 ‘blind’ speed 29 and sustainability 67–69, 73, 99, 124 common property resource 73 (Also see Spirit: ‘gimong’) American spirit 35–37 cultural resources 27 and cosmovision 73 educational resources 55, 115 of sustainability 2 ( Also see ‘urbanism’) financial resources 19 spirits 69, 79, 87, 91 natural resources xvii, 45, 49 the human spirit 3–5, 130 resource depletion 7, 19, 51, 63, 95, 120, 126, 132 Spirituality: 13,17–19, 57, 83, 107, 113 ‘Unlimited Resources’ 31 and cosmology 55 responsibility: 27, 37, 73 and religion 11, 67, 79, 121 corporate social responsibility 21 and the environment 121 media responsibility 23, 126–127 as a ‘fourth pillar’ 19 Right Livelihood Award 67, 75 crisis of 21, 87 spiritual futures 23 152 spiritual world xix, 73, 85–87 spiritually-engaged sustainability 11, 13, 101 sustainability: crisis of 21, 25, 81, 103, 109, 132 strong sustainability 63, 67, 81 sustainable futures 23–25, 33, 55, 75, 95, 99, 115, 126 sustainable pasts 55 weak sustainability 63, 67

sustainable development xvii, 1, 5–13, 61–63, 67, V 75, 81, 87, 91, 101–103, 107, 119–127 virtue of selfishness 59 Visalo, Paisal 75, 95 T W Tanaka, Koji 45 Waqf 95 Thammasat University, Bangkok 27 Wayan Redig 87–89 theology 37 (Also see ‘religion’) the West: xvii, 23, 37, 93 Thianvihan, Niphot 33, 37, 77, 109 and sustainable development 63, 101–103, 107, 120 Thich Nhat Hanh 83, 93 Asia’s romance with 35 commodity culture of 21, 49 Thirakanont, Anucha 27 cultural imperialism of 41, 53–55, 113 (Also see ‘hegemony’) Thoreau, Henry David 33–35 ‘West is Best’ policy 35 Western knowledge 51, 55 thudong monks 49 versus the East 61 Tokyo Disneyland 41–43 worldview: 51, 126 and ‘world-feel’ 49, 55 torii 91 anthropocentric worldview 63 hegemonic worldview 57 touristic culture 73, 115 materialistic worldview 7, 13 mechanistic worldview 55 Tri Hita Karana 73, 87 of indigenous peoples 91, 107 (Also see ‘indigenous peoples’) triadic relationship 85–89 Z triple bottom line 19–21, 99, 133 (Also see ‘sus- tainable development’) Zialcita, Fernando 67–69 U Udayana University 87 United Nations: 57, 61, 79 133 and the Brundtland Commission 5, 19, 81 (Also see ‘Brundtland Commission) United Nations University 9 urbanism: 27 and consumerism 25, 41, 87 dangers of 27–31, 49 in capitalist societies 7 (Also see ‘capitalism’) of Japan 47, 91 of Thailand 83 urbanisation 9, 33, 45, 51 153

living pathways Meditations on sustainable cultures and cosmologies in Asia Globalisation and technological progress have ushered us into a new era of development. Never before has the promise of the ‘Good Life’ in a hedonistic, consumerist utopia, been within reach for so many. Yet a significant portion of humanity is still unable to meet their basic needs. These trends are unsustainable, and beg the question: Where are we heading as a global community… and at what cost? In 2005, M. Nadarajah embarked on a journey into the heart of Asia to research culturally imbedded notions of sustainable development. He met with the indigenous communities of the Henanga, Ainu, Lanna, Karen, Kankanaey, Balinese and several others. These cultures reside far from the problems of mainstream development, both physically and spiritually. Their lifestyles incorporate philosophies of interconnectedness; of the sacredness of nature; of the continuity of Past, Present and Future. Rather than offer notions of sustainable development, these life-affirming philosophies pave a pathway towards a deep sustainability. On this path, we find answers to how we must change as a society in order for us to preserve our world for all future generations. But do we have the collective will to overcome our consumptive habits and start living responsibly? Living Pathways offers its readers a chance to meditate upon these questions. It provides meaningful directions towards the spiritual paths of sustainable communities we often take for granted. Above all, it shows the reader a picture of the world we live in as it could be, if only we choose to make it so.