Sustainable Societies (The actual report)

By Jess B

What is a sustainable society?

I believe that a sustainable society is a society that either existed for centuries with continuous success (economic prosperity, social stability, cultural complexity, etc.) and showing evidence of sustainability for 800 years before their collapse, or sustainability for 300 years up until the present. It is hard to develop a concrete definition for a sustainable society as I have come to the conclusion there is no one society (past or present) that is completely sustainable.

What makes a society sustainable?

There are many factors that contribute to the level of sustainability within a society. These factors range from the societies system of government and its decisions to how the society disposes of its waste and manages it water consumption.

I think that there are four main categories that these factors fall under though, government, economic factors (includes trade), environmental factors and warfare. (neutrality, allies, enemies, etc.)

The four main factors:

This is only the framework at its most basic level; these main factors can be split into tens, possibly hundreds of other factors, all on different levels of complexity.

One thing that may seem to be missing from my framework are the cultural factors (their values, religion, etc.) When I first formed my framework I had a separate category for “Cultural factors”, later on I found that these factors usually influenced the factors from other categories, they were not a driving force of sustainability in themselves. Yet, I have decided that a flexible culture is needed for a society to be sustainable and I will discuss this in depth later.

Government:

Not only are the people who are governing (ruling) a country the ones who make the decisions, they are also the ones who are to be blamed when everything goes wrong. There are many different systems of government as well, and all of them are effective is used in the right situation. Examples:

Ancient Egypt

Ancient Egypt was governed by a system of monarchy. At the very, very top where their gods, underneath them was the pharaoh, one man with a funny beard, lots of gold and a face covered in make-up. The pharaoh is basically the Egyptians version of a king, though the people believed that he was more than a man, they believed that he was a god. This gave the pharaoh absolute control over the affairs of his country. This means that they weren’t really a monarchy, they were actually a theocracy. (A form of government in which God or a deity is recognized as the supreme ruler) Beneath the pharaoh were his advisors and ministers, these people were mostly priests and were there to do the pharaohs biding.

The Egyptian society was actually immensely successful and, in my opinion, had a very sustainable system of government. (It is said that the Egyptians may have the longest continuous history of any people, spanning some 7,000 years-but this includes pre-history and their collapse)

Ancient Greece

Ancient Greece was government has changed to suit the needs of its society (it was flexible); at first each city-state was ruled by wealthy men, this was a form of tyranny. Over the years the government changed until it came to the system that we mostly associate with Ancient Greece, democracy. (Democracy literally means ‘government of the people.’

In the Ancient Greek version of democracy only men of Athenian decent were allowed to vote. (No women, children or slaves were allowed to vote) They assembly was held in the Pynx (which was a hill on the west of the Acropolis); this meeting place could hold around 6000 people. Assembly members met about once a week and at each meeting of the assembly certain topics were discussed and voted on. The assembly would also gather in cases of emergency and in cases of trials of law in which the assembly became a jury.

The advantage of having such a government system as this was that everyone was represented and could have their say. (Well every Athenian male at least) This would stop the people from revolting against their government (like the pharaoh but by using a different method)

Britain and the United Kingdom

The Untied Kingdom is governed by a variation of monarchy called a constitutional monarchy. At the head of the government is the queen, the current monarch is Queen Elizabeth the second. This form of government involves a hereditary title of sovereign (the exclusive right to have complete control over an area of governance, people, or oneself) Beneath the queen (and king) is a long list of advisors and cabinets including the Privy Council and Cabinet, the Prime Minister, chancellor and the home secretary.

In this form of government the people do not really have a chance to express their views and there is a higher risk of revolt (and there is history of this occurring)

Out of these three forms of government I believe that democracy is the most effective and agreeable form of government. Although my views are rather biased as this is the present day and we value freedom of speech above many other things.

Environmental:

At its most basic level, this point in the framework looks simple, but it isn’t. There are so many different factors that belong under the ‘Environmental’ heading that it just isn’t funny, here are just a few of them:

~Soil-erosion
~agriculture
~Forests-management, deforestation and measures to prevent it
~Animals/fauna/Biodiversity
~Over hunting and measures to prevent that
~Control of introduced species
~Water usage/conservation-preservation of the societies water sources
~Waste management-how the society dispose/d of/stored its waste materials
~Climate change- the societies response to climate change and how they plan to combat it
~Recycling
~Preservation of non-renewable resources
~Adaptation to environment-if a society adapts to their environment and uses it to their advantage, they are more likely to be successful
~Renewable energy vs. non renewable


Edo Japan

Though the Edo period only accounted for a short part of Japan’s history, it was a very influential period. (Or at least influential on today’s societies) During this time, Edo Japan had the largest population in the world, some 1.25 million people. In this time, the people realized that they only had a very limited supply of resources because they were purposely closed off from the rest of the world (and so had no trade system) and if they didn’t try to conserve it, it would not be sustainable. To fix this problem many specialized collectors and tradesmen evolved and they became a society of “ultimate recyclers.” Among many other things, they used human waste and ash as fertilizer, collected used candle wax to create new candles and collected used umbrella ribs to recycle into new umbrellas.

Today Japan depends on imports from other countries for 78 percent of its energy, 60 percent of its food (caloric value), and 82 percent of its timber consumption. Japan in the Edo Period could serve as one model of a sustainable society. The basis of its sustained economy and cultural development was not mass production and mass consumption for convenience, as we see in modern society, but rather the full utilization of limited resources.

Australian Aboriginals

Though some may argue that they did not practice very sustainable agricultural methods, I beg to differ. Australia’s climate, poor rainfall and poor soil make it one of the harshest places to live in the world. We have modern technology to enable us to survive here but the aboriginals had nothing when they first arrived. For anyone to survive in such a place for any length of time is amazing, but the aborigines have been in Australia for somewhere around 60, 000 years.

The aboriginals were nomadic people, the traveled in tribes across the land to find food and water sources and shelter. They passed the knowledge of bush food and bush medicines down through the generations through their dreamtime stories. They burnt grasses to find animals for food but they were also creating the conditions that some Australian plants need to germinate. They avoided over hunting by leaving animals and plants to reproduce and so ensured that they had an ongoing food supply. It was incredible that they survived for as long as they did and if it had been us in there place I don’t think we would be able to get that far.

Warfare:

There are actually a few ways for societies to be sustainable in this area. One way is to have a huge, well supplied and organized army and to completely destroy your enemies and defend your borders like it’s the end of the world. Another way is to be a neutral country, meaning that you do not participate in wars (don’t take sides, don’t have enemies or allies, etc.) in the hope that people will just leave your country alone. The last way is to have a lot of allies and have them help you when you get in trouble (but it has to be able to work the other way as well)

Ancient Rome

Ancient Roman society spanned from 800 BC-AD 476. (Although there were many changes to their civilization within this time frame) They were the ‘we have a huge, well supplied and organized army to completely destroy your enemies and defend your borders like it’s the end of the world’ type guys.

Their military systems was incredibly complex and they actually invented many things for the purpose of war (bridges, fortified camps, siege machines, roads, systems for mining, walling and civil engineering by military troops (such as putting in aqueducts, draining land, cultivating vineyards, the digging of shipping canals, harbors and the construction of town walls) they even used a census system to organize the people into different classes and to decide on who to recruit and where to put them. The Roman’s were involved in so many wars that it just wasn’t funny. Their civilization was built closely around war and they had a lot of enemies.

A modern society that would fall into the same group as the Roman’s would probably be America. They have a very well organized and supplied military and they have also invented many things for the purpose of war. A large difference though is that America has many allies.

Switzerland

Switzerland is the place that you want to be if you’re the opposite of the Roman’s. They are a self-imposed neutral society and have been since its neutrality was officially established in 1815 by the Congress of Vienna. It is the second oldest neutral society. (the oldest being Sweden)

The major flaw that comes with being a neutral society is that there is nothing actually stopping somebody from attacking you. Who cares if you signed some treaty? Who cares if you say that you’re a neutral country? There is an example of this exact thing happening to Switzerland in the Second World War when German bombs were dropped within its borders even though they were a neutral country.

Some other examples of a neutral society would be Ireland (neutral country since its independence in 1922), Sweden (the oldest neutral country-since a short war with Norway in the Napoleonic wars in 1914), Moldova (since 1994) and the Netherlands. (now a member of NATO)

United Nations

This is one of the largest groups of allies to ever exist. Unlike past agreements between countries to be ‘allies’ of sorts, the UN is an official group which involves the government of every country and it would be pretty hard to stab a country in the back through the UN.

Economic factors:

For a society to be sustainable at the most basic level they need to have food, shelter and water. A lot of societies did not have access to some resource that they needed. (Such as certain types of food like wheat and rice and certain metals like gold and copper) To be able to trade countries had to find one thing that the other country would be willing to trade for. This would usually result in the creation of an economy. (If the country didn’t already have one) Another reason why a society needs an economy is that the workers need something to be working for otherwise they won’t feel very motivated to work.

Ancient Greece

At its economic height, in the 5th and 4th centuries BC, ancient Greece was the most advanced economy in the world. The Mediterranean Sea was by far the most important resource for the Greeks. Without it the Greeks would not have been able to trade with the other surrounding countries. They traded grapes, wine, olives, olive oil, and works of art for things like cotton, fruit, livestock, rice, pottery, and wheat.
An example of the Greeks economic standing is the average daily wage of the Greek worker. Their average wage in, terms of wheat, was about 12 kg. This was more than 3 times the average daily wage of an Egyptian worker during the Roman period, about 3.75 kg.

Modern Day Australia

Although our economy wasn’t always as well off as it is now it is showing huge ‘improvements.’ Australia’s economy is booming thanks to our success in the mining sector, low employment rates and overseas interest in our resources. Some people say that it’s Christmas come early, others disagree. The one thing that I’m pretty sure of is that our economy may seem like its booming but on the inside it isn’t very stable-at all.

The effect of culture upon sustainability

The flexibility of a society’s culture could have a very dramatic effect on the sustainability of their society. An example of an inflexible culture would the Easter Islanders and the deforestation of their island for the sake of their gods. Another one would be the Mayans who sacrificed their forests to build huge pyramid-like structures to honor their gods.

An example of a flexible culture would be the Byzantine Empire. They were once part of the Roman Empire but when the Empire started to crumble they split off and became the Byzantines. They slowly adapted to Greek culture (hellinization) and were able to survive a lot longer than the rest of the Roman Empire.

Conclusion

It is almost certainly impossible for a society to be utterly and totally sustainable because if they turned their back on even one little part of the framework it would come crashing down around their ears. Creating a sustainable society may seem like an easy thing to do when you look at a framework at its most basic level, but as soon as you get into the finer points of it, it gets a lot more complicated.

Though it isn’t all doom and gloom, of course many things have changed today, but perhaps there are some hints to help us create a sustainable future if instead we look to the past.

References:

Books:

Butler, 2001, Nations of the World: Sweden, Raintree Steck-Vaughn Publishers, United States
-----, 1999, Facts about Finland, Otava Book Printing Co, Keuruu
-----, 2004, The Book of Rule: How the World is Governed, Dorling Kindersely, China

Websites (prepare for the huge list)….or just look at my delicious:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece#Society
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece#Society
http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/education/projects/webunits/greecerome/Greecegovt1.html http://library.thinkquest.org/3011/egypt3.htm
http://dictionary.reference.com/
http://www.ancient-egypt-online.com/ancient-egypt-government.html
http://www.riverschool.org/students/work/culture.e.gov.htm
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Monarchy
http://bhc.britaus.net/About_the_UK/aboutukdefault.asp?id=71

http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page5.asp

http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page1.asphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_monarchy
http://www.japanfs.org/en/newsletter/200303-1.html
http://billtotten.blogspot.com/2005/10/japans-sustainable-society-in-edo_04.html
http://www.energybulletin.net/5140.htmlhttp://www.backyardnature.com/cgi-bin/gt/tpl.h,content=438 http://www.japanfs.org/en/column/images/edo_pdf/edo_chapter10.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_archaeology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_ancient_Rome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_ancient_Rome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_wars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_military_engineering
http://www.roman-empire.net/army/army.html
http://www.crystalinks.com/romemilitary.htmlhttp://library.thinkquest.org/16325/r-mil.html

http://www.numbera.com/rome/http://library.thinkquest.org/26602/war.htmhttp://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ancient_rome.htm

http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/romeancientrome/Ancient_Rome_Republic_Empire_Fall_of_Rome.htm
http://history-switzerland.geschichte-schweiz.ch/switzerland-neutrality-world-war-ii.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_country
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Neutral_countries.svg

http://www.swissworld.org/en/politics/foreign_policy/neutrality_and_isolationism/
http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/topics/peasec/sec/ref_neutr.html
http://www.energybulletin.net/5140.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability
http://www.humboldt.edu/~envecon/ppt/309/food/tsld004.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/sustainability?cat=technology

200 Hits

Yay, something good-I'm past 200 hits! (and no, I don't mean that my blog was shot 200 times)

Economy and Trade

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece#Society

Economy

At its economic height, in the 5th and 4th centuries BC, ancient Greece was the most advanced economy in the world. According to some economic historians, it was one of the most advanced preindustrial economies. This is demonstrated by the average daily wage of the Greek worker which was, in terms of wheat, about 12 kg. This was more than 3 times the average daily wage of an Egyptian worker during the Roman period, about 3.75 kg.

System of Government

There are many different forms of government and they change over time.

Ancient Greece

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greece#Society

The assembly of ancient Greece is one of the first known forms of Democratic government. Ecclesia or Ekklesia means “Greek assembly of a city state.” Its origins are from the Homeric Agora meaning “the meeting of people". The first known assembly was held as early as the reign of Draco in 621 B.C.

Democracy (according to http://dictionary.reference.com/) is:


1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.
3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
4. political or social equality; democratic spirit.
5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

The assembly was held in the Pnyx (which was on a hill west of the Acropolis). This meeting place was said to hold at most 6,000 Athenian men based on calculations done with the average size of an Athenian male. Assembly members meet four times every Prytany (about once a week). At each meeting of the assembly certain topics were discussed and voted on. The assembly would also gather in cases of emergency and in cases of trials of law in which the assembly became a jury.

Men were allowed to vote (no slaves, women or children were though) and the votes were cast by a large group.

Votes were taken by a tally of hands raised. After being tallied the majority decision ruled and carried. Although it was the first form of Democracy the only people allowed to vote in the assembly were free-born men. During the reign of Pericles (around the mid 400's B.C.) the assembly was given the sole power to veto or approve any and all matters concerning the Greek state.

http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/education/projects/webunits/greecerome/Greecegovt1.html

Since city-states were separated from each other, each had its own government. When city-states were first formed, they were ruled by a few wealthy men. However, they moved toward democracy.

Their system of government changed to suit their societies needs.

Ancient Egypt

http://library.thinkquest.org/3011/egypt3.htm

Ancient Egyptian Government was dominated by a single man, the Pharaoh. The people believed that the king was more than a man, however, but that he was a god. This gave him absolute control over the affairs of the Empire and its people.

Government and it's power linked highly to religion and the power of the gods

Ancient Egypt was also a theocracy, controlled by the clergy. The Pharaoh¹s advisors and ministers were almost always priests, who were considered the only ones worthy and able to carry out the god-king¹s commands.

(According to http://dictionary.reference.com/) A theocracy is:

1. a form of government in which God or a deity is recognized as the supreme civil ruler, the God's or deity's laws being interpreted by the ecclesiastical authorities.
2. a system of government by priests claiming a divine commission.
3. a commonwealth or state under such a form or system of government.

The governmental officials included the vizier, or the prime minister, the chief treasurer, the tax collector, the minister of public works, and the army commander. These officials were directly responsible to the Pharaoh. The land itself was divided up into provinces called nomes. Each nome had a governor, who was appointed by the Pharaoh, and responsible to the vizier.

Taxes were paid in goods and labor. Citizens were drafted into the army and forced labor for periods of time to pay what was called a corvée, the labor tax.

The majority of Egyptian people were peasants who worked the land along the fertile Nile flood basin. These people had no voice in their government, and accepted this fact because it was backed by their religion. This mingling of religion and government is probably what kept Egypt so powerful and centralized during its high points.

http://www.ancient-egypt-online.com/ancient-egypt-government.html

When it came to laws, many of them involved punishments to fit crimes. In a religious country, right and wrong were most likely clearly defined, and doing 'wrong' was not just a general bad idea, but it brought disgrace on one's entire family. Punishments for wrong doing were as lax as caning or as severe as dismemberment or various executions.

In the several thousand year span of Egyptian history, the general way of governing was quite consistent. Things only seemed to change in large ways when parts of Egypt were invaded, or someone chose to overthrow the government. Perhaps the mix of politics, religion and the belief that the pharaoh was infallible and a deity was what allowed Egypt to remain the powerful country that it was for such a long time.

More websites:

http://www.riverschool.org/students/work/culture.e.gov.htm

Britain/monarchy

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Monarchy

1. Government by a monarch.
2. A state ruled or headed by a monarch.

A system of government in which one person reigns, usually a king or queen. The authority, or crown, in a monarchy is generally inherited. The ruler, or monarch, is often only the head of state, not the head of government. Many monarchies, such as Britain and Denmark, are actually governed by parliaments. (See absolute monarchy and constitutional monarchy.)

Other references:

http://bhc.britaus.net/About_the_UK/aboutukdefault.asp?id=71
http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page5.asp
http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page1.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_monarchy

Care for/Managment of the Environment:

There are heaps of branches that spread from this category and it would be impossible to explore all of them within a 2000 word limit....but who defines whats possible and impossible?

Some stuff under here would be:

• Soil-erosion, agriculture
• Forests-managment, deforrestation and measures to prevent it
• Animals/fauna/Biodiversity-overhunting and measures to prevent that, introduced species
• Water usage/conservation-what the societies water sources are and how well they manage/d them
• Waste managment-how the society dispose/d of its waste materials
• Climate change-is an environmental thing because it does have the biggest effect on the enivironment but this would be the societies response to climate change and how they plan to combat it
• Adaption to environment-if a society adapts to their environment and uses it to their andvatage, they are more likely to be succesful

Now to the societies,

Edo Japan-

http://www.japanfs.org/en/newsletter/200303-1.html

In the history of Japan, the 265-year period between 1603 (when Tokugawa Ieyasu became the generalissimo or great "shogun" of the Tokugawa shogunate) and 1867 (when Tokugawa Yoshinobu formally returned political authority to the emperor) is called the Edo Period. Edo is the former name for what is now Tokyo.

The Edo period did not last long enough for it to be classed as sustainable society in itself but Japan (as a whole) has been around a long time.

During most of the Edo Period, Japan was closed off to the world, suffered no invasion from the outside, and had virtually no exchange with other countries. For the most part, it was a peaceful period, with almost no war inside the country, and marked a remarkable time of development in the economy and culture of Japan.

They would have had to depend on their own environment to produce the sustinance to support their country/society

The first national census, conducted around 1720, indicates a population of approximately 30 million people, which remained relatively constant throughout the entire two and a half centuries of the Edo Period. The population of Edo, at the time the largest city in the world, has been estimated at 1 million to 1.25 million people. In comparison, London had about 860,000 people (1801) and Paris about 670,000 (1802).

Like the Romans, they developed a census and they had a very large population, larger so than any country in Europe

Today Japan depends on imports from other countries for 78 percent of its energy, 60 percent of its food (caloric value), and 82 percent of its timber consumption. But for approximately 250 years during the Edo Period, Japan was self-sufficient in all resources, since nothing could be imported from overseas due to the national policy of isolation.

They have either run out of resources or are trying to protect their remaining resources.

Novelist Eisuke Ishikawa is one of Japan's leading researchers on the Edo Period. With reference to his book "The Edo Period had a Recycling Society," ("O-edo recycle jijo": published in 1994, Kodansha Publishing Company) we now introduce some elements of what made this sustainable society possible for 250 years. This month's issue of the JFS Newsletter focuses on the reuse and recycling practices of the Edo Period. Next month we will focus on its energy systems, showing that at the time Japan was a nation that functioned based on plants.

Japan is now promoting efforts to recycle end-of-life products and materials. A major motivation for this today is to reduce the burden on landfills and prevent dioxins and other toxic chemical emissions from incinerators. But people in Edo Japan recycled of goods and materials for another reason: they had very limited goods and materials in the first place.

This shows that the Japanese are actually learning from their past societies-this is an example of taking the lessons of the past and implementing them in modern day society.

Many specialized traders and craftsmen were also engaged in reuse and recycling (though there was no word for recycling, since "recycling" was just a normal part of life). Below we introduce some of the specialized recyclers of the Edo Period.

- Tinker (repairers of metal products): Tinkers repaired old pans, kettles and pots, even those rendered useless by holes in the bottom. They had special techniques to use bellows to raise the temperature of charcoal fires and repair holes using other metal pieces or by welding.

- Ceramics repairer: These specialized craftsmen glued broken pieces of ceramics with starch extracted from sticky rice and heated for coagulation.

- Truss hoop repairer: Until 40 to 50 years ago, people usually used wooden tubs and barrels to store liquids. Wooden tubs and barrels were made of wooden slats fastened by bamboo hoops. When the hoops aged and broke or warped, the craftsmen fixed the tubs and barrels with new bamboo fasteners.

There were many other kinds of specialized craftsmen to repair broken items, including paper lanterns and locks, replenish vermilion inkpads, and refurbish old Japanese wooden footwear, mills and mirrors, to name a few.

They actually had specialised trade persons to recycle-this is probably one of the earliest examples of recycling (to this extent).

Besides the repair experts, there were other specialized workers who collected and traded end-of-life materials.

- Used-paper buyers: These buyers bought old shopkeepers' books, sorted and sold them to paper makers. In those days, Japanese paper (washi) was made of long fibers of over 10 mm, and specialized paper makers bought and blended various kinds of used paper to make a wide range of recycled paper, from bathroom tissue to printing paper.

- Used-paper collectors: Some collectors were also specialized in used paper, but didn't have the financial resources to buy it. Instead, they picked up and collected trash paper by walking around the town and sold it to used-paper warehouses to get a daily cash income.

- Used-clothes dealers: Until the end of Edo Period, clothes were more precious and expensive than today since all clothes at the time were hand-woven. It is said that there were about 4,000 old clothes dealers in the city of Edo.

- Used-umbrella rib buyers: Umbrellas in the Edo Period were made of bamboo ribs with paper pasted on. Used-umbrella rib buyers bought and collected old umbrellas and sold them to specialized warehouses. At the warehouses workers removed oiled paper from the ribs, repaired the rib structures and then other workers were contracted to paste new oiled-paper onto the ribs to make new umbrellas. Incidentally, the oiled paper from used umbrellas was removed and sold as packaging material.

- Used-barrel buyers: When barrels became empty, specialized traders bought, collected and sold them to specialized warehouses. Japan today has private collection systems for beer and sake (Japanese rice wine) bottles, and collection/recycling ratios are high. Some of today's used-bottle dealers are descendents of those who conducted this business in the Edo Period.

- Singing collectors: Some traders walked around the town, singing, "let's exchange, let's exchange," and offered small toys and candies to children in return for old nails and other metal pieces the children found while playing.

Ash buyers: Ash is a natural byproduct of fuelwood burning. During the Edo Period, buyers collected ash and sold it to farmers as fertilizer. Ordinary houses had an ash box, and public bathhouses and larger shops an "ash hut" for storage until buyers came by.

They found new fertilizers that were easy for their society to produce.

- Human waste dipper: Until around 1955, human waste (night soil) was the most important fertilizer source for farmers in Japan. In many parts of Europe, before construction of sewage lines, human waste was simply thrown from the window to the street below, and the plague occurred repeatedly due to bad hygiene conditions. In contrast, in Japan human waste was treated as a valuable resource in those days.

Farmers regularly visited homes with whom they had contracts and paid money or offered vegetables they had grown, in return for night soil to be used as fertilizer. As distribution channels became more established, specialized night soil warehouses and retailers emerged.

They actually traded within their society for human waste (Wow) to use as fertilizer-sustainable resource at the same time as disposing of their waste without the risk of disease in the major cities/towns

Landlords with many tenants made good money from the night soil produced on their premises. There are even stories of friction between landlords and tenants about ownership of the night soil. Some farmers were very particular about their sources of fertilizer. For example, certain areas were regarded as sources of highly-coveted night soil for growing exclusive brands of Japanese tea.

Source of income for people-night soil actually had an effect upon the economy

"ultimate recycling"

In the Edo Period, the reuse of goods was a common practice. There were many temple schools for children of commoners in Edo Period. Textbooks at temple schools were owned by the schools, not the users. According to records, one arithmetic textbook was used for 109 years.

Yep, I feel sorry for anyone who had to use that textbook now.

Japan in the Edo Period could serve as one model of a sustainable society. The basis of its sustained economy and cultural development was not mass production and mass consumption for convenience, as we see in modern society, but rather the full utilization of limited resources.

It is certain that many things have changed today, but perhaps there are some hints for a sustainable future if we look at the past.

http://billtotten.blogspot.com/2005/10/japans-sustainable-society-in-edo_04.html

For approximately 250 years during the Edo Period, Japan was self-sufficient in all resources, since nothing could be imported from overseas due to the national policy of isolation.

The society of Japan during the Edo Period was driven only with solar energy. Plants transform solar energy, using water and hydrogen, into branches, wood, stems and fruit. If you harvest and use as energy the branches, plants and fruit that have grown in the past year, you are using the past year's solar energy in plant form.

During the Edo Period, about eighty percent of daily commodities was made from the solar energy of the previous year and 95 percent was derived from solar energy received in the past three years. This means that the Edo society was a sustainable society in which almost everything needed for living was provided by solar energy of the past two or three years.

So, basically, the Japanese were using solar energy....25o years ago!

Oil for lighting was mainly from sesame seeds, camellia, rapeseeds and cottonseeds. People in regions where fishermen hunted whales used whale oil, and people in areas where fishermen caught sardines used sardine oil. Oil cake that remained after extracting the oil was also used as a quality nitrogen fertilizer.

More recycling and more fertilizer


Other websites:

http://www.energybulletin.net/5140.html
http://www.backyardnature.com/cgi-bin/gt/tpl.h,content=438 http://www.japanfs.org/en/column/images/edo_pdf/edo_chapter10.pdf


Finland

http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Europe/Finland-ENVIRONMENT.html

Finland's main environmental issues are air and water pollution, and the preservation of its wildlife. Finland's principal environmental agency is the Ministry of the Environment, established in 1983. Beginning in 1987, environmental protection boards were established for every community with more than 3,000 inhabitants. To preserve the shoreline profile, 30–50% of the shores suitable for recreational use may not be built on. Industrial pollutants from within the country and surrounding countries affect the purity of both the nation's air and water supplies. In 1996 carbon dioxide emissions from industrial sources totaled 59.1 million metric tons. Acid rain from high concentrations of sulfur in the air has damaged the nation's lakes. Finland's cities produce about 2.8 million tons of solid waste per year. The nation has 107 cubic kilometers of renewable water resources with 82% used for industry and 17% used in domestic and urban areas. In 1993, the Finnish Council of State introduced new approaches to the control of water pollution. Lead-free gasoline was introduced in 1985.

This demonstrates that the society responds to threats and finds ways to combat them. (Able to change to suit their changing environment)

Care is taken to protect the flora and fauna of the forests, which are of recreational as well as economic importance. Closed hunting seasons, nature protection areas, and other game-management measures are applied to preserve threatened animal species. As of 2001, 5.5% of Finland's total land area was protected. In 2001, 4 of the nation's 60 mammal species and 4 of its 248 breeding bird species were threatened, as well as 1 type of freshwater fish. Endangered species include the Siberian sturgeon, European mink, and the Saimaa ringed seal.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:DxMH77ICgjEJ:sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/esi/ESI_2005_PressRelease.pdf+Finland+environment&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=au

[In 2005] Finland ranks first in the world in environmental
sustainability out of 146 countries according to the latest Environmental Sustainability
Index (ESI) produced by a team of environmental experts at Yale and Columbia
Universities

Their high ESI scores are attributed to substantial natural resource endowments, low population density, and successful management of environment and development issues.

The lowest ranked countries are North Korea, Iraq, Taiwan, Turkmenistan and
Uzbekistan. Esty said these countries face many challenges, both natural and manmade,
and have poorly managed their policy choices.

http://virtual.finland.fi/netcomm/news/showarticle.asp?intNWSAID=25664

Many polluted lakes and rivers have been cleaned up. Air quality has improved greatly around industrial locations. An extensive network of protected areas has been built up to safeguard biodiversity. Forests – Finland's most valuable natural resources – are managed more sensitively than in the past, and the overall annual growth rate clearly exceeds the total timber harvest.

The vegetation of Finnish Lapland is especially sensitive to disturbances such as logging and overgrazing by domesticated reindeer. Fortunately these threats have been reduced through the protection of large areas of forest and restrictions on the number of reindeer.

It is much harder and more expensive to repair any damage done to the environment than to prevent harm in the first place. In the worst cases damage may even be irreparable. Arctic climatic conditions may inhibit the natural regeneration of logged forests in northern Lapland. On the other hand, the predicted warming of the climate could completely wipe out species and whole ecosystems adapted to cold conditions.

Water quality is classified as excellent or good across 80% of the total area of Finland's lakes.

Finland's strengths include highly effective environmental administration and legislation, and the ways environmental protection is considered in all sectors of society.

Finland has achieved notable nature conservation successes in recent years, particularly in the cases of some larger animals and birds that were formerly hunted or harassed. Finland's national bird, the whooper swan, for instance, has become much more widespread in recent decades.

Other websites:

http://www.stat.fi/tup/suoluk/suoluk_alue_en.html

Australian Aborigines

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_archaeology

It is proven that that Megafauna existed in Australia alongside Aborigines until about 6,000 years ago. A large extinction occurred as is evident by the lack of these species in modern times. The great debate centres on whether Aborigines were responsible for the extinction of these animals. Many factors have been considered as possible causes of the extinction, ranging from environmental variables to entirely human-based activity.

The most extreme theory is that Aborigines were completely responsible for the extinction of these animals through extensive hunting. This theory is largely based on the

Overkill Hypothesis of the Americas, where hunters travelled through the land exterminating megafauna. This Overkill Hypothesis is largely discredited (not just in Australia), as there have been no confirmed discoveries of kill sites, sites that are found in other contexts around the world and associated with Megafauna hunting. The site of Cuddie Springs in New South Wales, does display some evidence of the hunting of these animals, but it is an isolated site and could not prove conclusively the overkill theory.

It was unlikely that the Aboriginals caused the extinction of the magefauna.

For instance, Aboriginal women in traditional societies often transplanted immature "bush tucker" plants found growing in unfavourable locations to more favourable spots. There were also a number of plants (particularly seeds and roots) that could have lent themselves to cultivation, and were used in making such foods as damper. Charles Sturt in his exploration of the Murray River reports seeing large hay stacks built by Aboriginal people of seed crops harvested at the beginning of summer. Firestick farming has also always been a technique used by Aboriginal people to open the canopy of closed canopy forests, introducing sunlight to the ground, and prompting germination of a number of foodstuffs known to attract kangaroo and other marsupials. This would encourage a more intensive landuse than otherwise. But the main reason for the lack of agriculture in Australia is the extreme variability of the climate.

Australia is the only continent on Earth, which, as a result of the El Nino Southern Oscillation, experiences greater variability between years than it does between the seasons. Such climatic variability makes farming very difficult, especially for incipient farmers, unable to be supported from outside of their community. Australian Aboriginal people found, by maintaining stable populations below the effective carrying capacity of the environment, would enable an adequate supply of food, even in drought years, so maintaining a stable culture. This made hunting and gathering a more sustainable activity on the Australian continent than neolithic farming.

This proves that the Aboriginals adapted to the Australian environment (and they would have to be able to survive in such a harsh environment) and that they did a much better job than the Greenland Norse. They were also isolated from any other societies and so did not have the ability to trade with others.

Ancient Romans-They built acqueducts to transport water to their cities from water sources that would be too far away otherwise.

Warfare

This whole post will include my research and summaries from internet pages and the final list of resources for this part of the report.....this could get long.

1) Wargods: Societies who's miltary efforts were sustainable and were so through their organization, supplies and tatics.

Ancient Romans:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_ancient_Rome

Ancient Roman society spanned from 800 BC-AD 476 (although there were manycahnges to their civilization within this time frame)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_ancient_Rome

This article was useful as an overview and as point at which to begin my research. A summary of the information from this page is:

'The branches of the Roman military at the highest level were the Roman army and the Roman navy. Within these branches the actual structure was subject to substantial change throughout its history.'

The Roman army was highly structurised and organized but this structure was constantly changing.

'Ancient Rome was a state whose history was often closely entwined with its military history over the roughly 13 centuries that the Roman state existed. The core of the Military campaigns of ancient Rome is the account of the Roman military's land battles, from the conquest of Italy to its fights against the Huns and invading Germanic peoples'

The Roman state existed for 13 centuries. Their history was often cloesly intwined with the military and they involved themselves in various land battles.

'The Roman army battled first against its tribal neighbours and Etruscan towns within Italy, and later came to dominate much of the land surrounding the Mediterranean Sea, including the provinces of Britannia and Asia Minor at the Empire's height. '

I wouldn't want to be their neighbour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_wars

This is what the address says: A list of Roman wars

'4th century BC

First Samnite War (343-341 BC)
Latin War (340-338 BC)
Second Samnite War (326-304 BC)

3rd century BC

Third Samnite War (298-290 BC)
Pyrrhic War (280-275 BC)
First Punic War (264-241 BC)
First Illyrian War (229-228 BC)
Second Illyrian War (220-219 BC)
Second Punic War (218-202 BC)
First Macedonian War (215-205 BC; Roman intervention in 211)

2nd century BC

Second Macedonian War (200-196 BC)
Roman-Spartan War (195 BC)
Roman-Syrian War (192 BC - 188 BC)
Aetolian War (191-189 BC)
First Celtiberian War (181-179 BC)
Third Macedonian War (171-168 BC)
Lusitanian War (155-139 BC)
First Numantine War/Second Celtiberian War (154-151 BC)
Fourth Macedonian War (150-148 BC)
Third Punic War (149-146 BC)
Second Numantine War/Third Celtiberian War (143-133 BC)
First Servile War (135-132 BC)
Cimbrian War (113-101 BC)
Jugurthine War (112-105 BC)
Second Servile War (104-103 BC)

1st century BC

Roman-Persian Wars (92 BC-627)
Social War (91-88 BC)
First Mithridatic War (90-85 BC)
First Marian-Sullan Civil War (88-87 BC)
Second Mithridatic War (83-82 BC)
Sertorius' revolt (83-81 BC)
Second Marian-Sullan Civil War (82-81 BC)
Third Mithridatic War (75-65 BC)
Third Servile War (73-71 BC)
Catilinarian Civil War (63-62 BC)
Gallic Wars (59-51 BC)
Caesar's civil war (49-45 BC)
Post-Caesarian civil war (44 BC)
Liberators' civil war (44-42 BC)
Sicilian revolt (44-36 BC)
Fulvia's civil war (41-40 BC)
Final war of the Roman Republic (32-30 BC)

1st century

Roman conquest of Britain (43)
First Jewish-Roman War (66-73)

2nd century

First Dacian War (101-102)
Second Dacian War (105-106)
Kitos War (115-117)
Bar Kokhba's revolt (132-135)
Marcomannic War (166-180)

3rd century

4th century

Gothic War (376-382) '

A summary of this would be: They were involved in many, many wars. Although there is one thing that is very interesting about this list. As the Roman's draw closer to their collapse (or at least the collapse of Imperial reign) they are involved in less wars, with none occuring in 3rd Century compared with 19 in the 1st century. This shows that there is a link between their military acrivity and the health of their society.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_military_engineering

The interesting thing about this article is that it shows that many things that the Roman's invented were invented for the purpose of war. These included bridges, fortified camps, siege machines, roads, systems for mining, walling and civil engineering by military troops (stuff like putting in aqueducts, draining land, cultivating vineyards, the digging of shipping canals, harbours and the construction of town walls)

http://www.roman-empire.net/army/army.html

This is a huge article and if I tried to read it I think I may kill myself, but a few things that I found from the first few (I think it must have been a hundred or so :P) pages were:

'A key moment in Roman history was the introduction of the census (the counting of the people) under Servius Tullius. With this the citizens were graded into five classes, from these classes were in varying degrees recruited the ranks of the army. The most wealthy, the first class, were the most heavily armed, equipped like the Greek hoplite warrior with helmet, round shield, greaves and breastplate, all of bronze, and carrying a spear and sword.'

They had a census system and their troops were well equipped (according to their importance some were more so than others though)

'The lesser classes bore lesser armament and weaponry, the fifth class carrying no armour at all, solely armed with slings.The army officers as well as the cavalry were drawn from leading citizens who were enrolled as equestrians (equites). '

This also relates to the classes of people in our society (or first world countries and third world countries) and it shows that they didn't just pick any random person to be in the cavalry-they did have a huge amount of structure in their military.

Other references for Rome:

http://www.crystalinks.com/romemilitary.html
http://library.thinkquest.org/16325/r-mil.html
http://www.numbera.com/rome/
http://library.thinkquest.org/26602/war.htm
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ancient_rome.htm
http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/romeancientrome/Ancient_Rome_Republic_Empire_Fall_of_Rome.htm
2) Neutrals: Societies who remain/reamined neautral to avoid conflict and were therefore sustainable.

Switzerland:

http://history-switzerland.geschichte-schweiz.ch/switzerland-neutrality-world-war-ii.html

'In 1920 all major nations confirmed, that Switzerland's neutrality towards warfaring nations as fixed on the 1815 Vienna Conference on post-Napoleon international relations would still be respected'

Switzerland has been a neutral country for quite sometime and likes to stay that way. Through being known to be a neutral country they would avoid many needless conflicts (*cough* Romans *cough*)

'In every major conflict of the 20th century the great powers were not willing to respect international rules like neutrality or the Geneva Conventions, if this would have had severe consequences for their military strategy. But rules must be obeyed by everybody or they cease to be respected altogether. This is true for nations as well as for individuals. The continuing efforts of the USA to exclude its troops from the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice are not an encouraging sign for the 21st century.'

But this section proves the flaws of trying to remain neutral....nobody really cares! It also provides a comparisson to modern day society (or at least more modern than the WW2)

"Of all the neutrals Switzerland has the greatest right to distinction. She has been the sole international force linking the hideously-sundered nations and ourselves. What does it matter whether she has been able to give us the commercial advantages we desire or has given too many to the Germans, to keep herself alive? She has been a democratic State, standing for freedom in self defence among her mountains, and in thought, in spite of race, largely on our side."Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965), British wartime Prime Minister

And a quote from Winston Churchill that may come in handy for my report.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_country

Definition of a neutral country: A neutral country takes no side in a war between other parties, and in return hopes to avoid being attacked by any of them.

Current neutral countries include:

Austria (now a member of EU, see below) - neutral country since 1955, to maintain external independence and inviolability of borders (expressly modeled after the Swiss neutrality).
Costa Rica - neutral country since 1949, after abolishing its military.
Finland (now EU) - military doctrine of competent, "credible" independent defence, not depending on any outside support, and the desire to remain outside international conflicts.
Ireland (now EU) - neutral country since independence in 1922.
Liechtenstein
Sweden (now EU) - Sweden hasn't fought a war since ending its involvement in the Napoleonic Wars in 1814 with a short war with Norway, making it the oldest neutral country in the world.
Switzerland - self-imposed, permanent, and armed, designed to ensure external security. Switzerland is the second oldest neutral country in the world; it has not fought a foreign war since its neutrality was established by the Congress of Vienna in 1815.
Turkmenistan - declared its permanent neutrality and had it formally recognised by the U.N.
Countries claimed to have neutrality but not recognized by international affairs
Cambodia - claimed neutrality 1955-1970, 1993 to the present day
Moldova - Article 11 of the 1994 Constitution proclaims "permanent neutrality"
Past neutral countries include:
Belgium - neutral stance since 1839, abolished through the Treaty of Versailles after WWI and abolished again after WWII, non-neutral alignment confirmed by membership of NATO.
Laos - the International Agreement on the Neutrality of Laos was signed in Geneva on July 23, 1962 by 14 nations, including the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.
Luxembourg - neutral stance since 1839, abolished through its constitution in 1948, non-neutral alignment confirmed by membership of NATO.
Netherlands - self-imposed neutrality between 1839 and 1940 on the European continent. Now a NATO member.

And this is a link for a picture that shows the current neutral countries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Neutral_countries.svg

http://www.swissworld.org/en/politics/foreign_policy/neutrality_and_isolationism/

The advice of Switzerland's popular saint, Nicholas of Flüe (1417-87), "Don't get involved in other people's affairs" has been the hallmark of Swiss policy for nearly 500 years. The country has in effect been neutral since 1515, a status formally recognised and guaranteed by the great powers of Europe after the Napoleonic Wars in 1815.

Their culture has an influence on their military standing (Saint Nicholas) and they have been neutral, or considered themselves to be neutral, for nearly 500 years.

Swiss neutrality thus has deeper roots than any of Europe's other major neutral states: Sweden (1815), Eire (1921), Finland (1948) and Austria (1955).

All of these European countries are neutral.

The status of neutrality has not only protected Switzerland from war, but has helped prevent the country from being torn apart when its different language communities might have been tempted to side with different belligerents in cases of conflict.

It's neutral standing has an effect, not just on its interactions with other countries/societies but it also has an effect within the country.

http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/topics/peasec/sec/ref_neutr.html

Permanent neutrality is a principle of Swiss foreign policy. It serves to preserve Switzerland’s independence and the invulnerability of its national territory. In parallel, Switzerland undertakes not to take part in wars between other states.

http://www.energybulletin.net/5140.html

Another example of neutrality would be Edo Japan, but this is a different version completely as well:

During most of the Edo Period, Japan was closed off to the world, suffered no invasion from the outside, and had virtually no exchange with other countries. For the most part, it was a peaceful period, with almost no war inside the country, and marked a remarkable time of development in the economy and culture of Japan

This was a self-imposed exclusion of the rest of the world-although they didn't do it just to avoid invasion.

The Big List

Now for the list of socities that I think demonstrate the factors that I have come up with, after this I will research each:

Care for/managment of the environment:

• Australian Aborigines
• Finland
• Edo Japan

Warfare:

• Ancient Rome (although they weren't very good at much else)
• Switzerland, Norway, etc. (Neutrality in modern times)

Trade/Economy:

• Ancient Egypt
• Mayans? Or some South American people

Government/system of laws/religion:

• Ancient Greece
• Ancient Egypt (pharoahs)
• Britain (Monarchy)

Cultural:

• Probably any of the above

As I am yet to research most of these this is only a very basic outline (meaning that there will be quite a bit more in my report) but it shall be interesting to see what the final report looks like....If I ever get that far...T.T

Factors

I have come up with a few factors to do with sustainability (although these factors have many sub-points that relate to them)

• Care for/managment of the environment
• Warfare
• Trade/Economy
• Cultural/religion
• Government/system of laws/religion

Coincidentally this equates to a five point framework (at the moment) though I'm sure that I'll think of something else later. I think that the factors that make a society collapse are also what make them sustainable if used in reverse. That's probably why this resembles Jared Diamond's framework.

Hypotheses+What is a Sustainable Society?

This is just a part of my research not my report

1) Develop hypotheses about what factors create a sustainable society.

It is hard to develop a concrete model for social sustainability as no society is completely sustainable. Each society will have its weak points and its strong points, the points that lead to its prosperity and the points that lead to its collapse. It would probably be easier to get an overview of the definition of social sustainability before I go any further.

According to the wikipedia on sustainability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability), (wonderful resource...not very reliable ^^) 'Sustainability is a characteristic of a process or state that can be maintained at a certain level indefinitely.' Although most sustainable societies do come to an end (or fall in to decline and become only a shadow of their former selves)

Something interesting in that article was a paragraph on the effect of a cultures moral values on sustainability: 'Values vary greatly in detail within and between cultures, as well as between academic disciplines (e.g., between economists and ecologists). The introduction of social values to sustainability goals implies a much more complex and contentious debate, and those focused on ecological impacts tend to strongly resist non-ecological interpretations.'

Another website (http://www.humboldt.edu/~envecon/ppt/309/food/tsld004.htm) defines societal stability as:

'Definition of a sustainable society:
The economics of a sustainable society,
“occurs at the intersection, or balancing, of three global imperatives: environmental integrity, economic efficiency, and the well-being of people and community.” '

This summarises that the sustainability of a society is dependent on a variety of factors from a wide range of topics such as environmental and economic.

Another definition of sustainability (http://www.answers.com/topic/sustainability?cat=technology) is:

Capable of being sustained.
Capable of being continued with minimal long-term effect on the environment: sustainable agriculture.

This wasn't really very helpful at all, but it supports the other definitions that I have found. Something a little more useful from this site though was to do with environmental stability:

"The Entropy Law and the Economic Process") suggests the following three operational rules defining the condition of sustainability:
1. Renewable resources such as fish, soil, and groundwater must be used no faster than the rate at which they regenerate.
2. Nonrenewable resources such as minerals and fossil fuels must be used no faster than renewable substitutes for them can be put into place.
3. Pollution and wastes must be emitted no faster than natural systems can absorb them, recycle them, or render them harmless.

They are rather basic principles but they are something that modern day society struggles with.

Most of the results that my searches turned up were to do with the defintion of 'sustainable development' which is has more to do with the human population and its effects on the environment- lots of humans=depletion of resources+waste=damage to the environment

Social sustainability depends on a wide range of factors and it is possible for a society to survive if they are only succesful in a few of these factors, although their days will be numbered because of this. Collapse is inevitable.

My definition of a sustainable society is, a society that has some form of government system, transport system, cultural complexity (artwork, religion, etc.), social stability (stable within itself) and economic gain/trade....or at least that is my definition at this point in time.

I Have Been Abducted By Aliens

So, I haven't posted for ages and here are the reasons:

a) Homework

b) Homework

c) Procrastinating with homweork

and d) All of the above

The stuff that I have going at the moment:
Science articles thing-I have done 4 articles (and I feel very proud)
English short story (I should really start that)
Sose assingment (but I have a bit more time to do that one becuase it's due in the holidays)
Health (better not to ask)
Sport (did everyone just go 'what the?')
Maths (I really need to get my head around factorization)
Language Diary (for english and I really should put some more stuff into it before our teacher asks to see it)

Yep, so thats heaps.......and I am going to collapse from a homework overload......T.T