熊本大學で2009年に出題された問題文です。１パラグラフづつ、月曜日と金曜日に解説して參ります。
Two approaches have tended to define the debate about sustainable prosperity in recent years. The first is conscious consumption, also known as “green shopping.” The second approach, “green technology” (ecological technology) is a topic which covers everything from energy to transportation, housing to product design. These two approaches are mutually supportive, and both have a lot to offer as we try to find our way to a “green future.”
But there is a danger concerning these approaches, in thinking that all we have to do is design better, greener products to replace those we already consume, and then convince people to buy them. I call this idea “the Swap.” It’s sort of a middle stage on the road to a better future, where people have accepted that something must change, but not yet realized that everything must change. Therefore, the Swap is a form of denial.
It’s an attractive fantasy ―― instead of driving a big car, living in a big house and shopping at “The Gap,” I can drive a Toyota Prius, live in an eco-home and shop at a “green” online shopping site. However this doesn’t work, because the systems, such as highways and suburbs, that support such choices are unsustainable. For instance, highways are destructive, even when full of hybrid cars, and suburbs are unsustainable, even when the individual houses are ecological.
If we’re going to avoid ecological destruction, we need to not only do things differently, rather we need to do different things. We need to build dense neighborhoods where people can do more walking, composed of “green” buildings, well-planned bicycle pathways with adequate bicycle parking, and public transportation served by bicycle. We also need good design choices and smart technologies that let us live in a different set of relationships with the things we own. By accepting innovation in technology, design, planning, and policy, we can transform the systems around us, and provide ourselves with much more sustainable choices. “Green” lives will not look like the lives we live today. That doesn’t mean that they’ll be less attractive. On the contrary, both our quality of life and our prosperity may increase dramatically.
But there is a side to this change which is more an art than a science: understanding how we can reconnect with one another in our communities. I believe that to ignore the creative, emotional, even spiritual aspects of this transformation is to fail.
Many of the unsustainable systems we’re trying to change seem to give us individual independence by inserting goods and commercialism between the citizen and his or her community. However, as we change such systems, we will need to enter a new reality ―― one of interdependence. We need to remind people how to be good neighbors, how to build friendships, how to share, how to see their own best interests in public goods. That is, how to be a good citizen.
So, one of the major design challenges we face is figuring out how to successfully develop architecture, urban planning, the arts, new forms of community engagement, and new forms of commerce. At the same time, I don’t think that when we approach changing the world, we ought to exclude the possibility of changing ourselves.【534語】
NOTE
sustainable: able to be maintained without destroying the environment
