The past few posts on unequal ecological exchange and CBDR have given us a good global perspective on how pollution is distributed on a global scale. However, saying that the rich, developed countries are exerting a greater ecological burden is a generalization. That is because not every state, community, or person in that rich, developed country can be held accountable for doing so. To understand why, we need to “zoom in” our perspective lenses and observe on a state level.

Just like how there is a disparity in pollution burden between richer and poorer countries, there is also a similar disparity in a country’s richer and poorer communities. According to Danny Dorling, the author of The Equality Effect: Improving Life for Everyone, rich countries with greater economic inequality such as the US and Canada have greater average pollution rates than economically equitable rich countries such as Japan and Italy (Dorling, 2017). This is because people in more economically unequal countries have higher consumption rates and engage in pollutive activities. These high consumption patterns are inherently rooted in the pressure to buy items in order to “keep up with [their] peers” (Dorling, 2017). For instance, if we compare the meat consumption among most equal countries (left) with most unequal countries (right), we can observe a general increasing trend in meat consumption which I have indicated using a dotted line in Figure 1 below (Dorling, 2017). We see Singapore on the list as well, which is interesting because we are such a small country compared to other countries. Of course, there are some outliers of this trend such as New Zealand and Australia which could have high meat consumption due to their cultural history of rearing cattle (Dorling, 2017). 

Figure 1: Graph showing a relationship between meat consumption and level of economic inequality between countries (Source: Guardian) 

Singapore has been grappling with high income inequality for years, but I had never looked at this inequality as a potential cause of high consumption rates or high levels of pollution and carbon emissions. In fact, Singapore ranks 27th out of 142 countries in terms of carbon emissions per capita based on the IEA data (National Climate Change Secretariat [NCCS], n.d.). It could perhaps be helpful for the government to focus their efforts and policies on reducing income inequality in order to improve both social and environmental conditions in Singapore.

On a personal note – having lived in Singapore all my life –  I have noticed high consumption patterns among those around me. However, I do not feel that these high consumption and waste habits are rooted in societal pressure to maintain a social status. For instance, many of my peers like to purchase new clothes or indulge in meat simply because they like it. However, there could be limitations in my observations because I have not met alot of people with diverse demographics. I have mostly interacted with like-minded folks with equal social status who are still in their schooling years- many of whom have not experienced full financial freedom to exhibit their true spending habits. 

How about you? Have you experienced similar observations around you?

Keep Looking!
Komal 

 

—————-

References

Dorling, D. (2017, July 4). Is inequality bad for the environment? The Guardian. Retrieved April 13, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/jul/04/is-inequality-bad-for-the-environment

National Climate Change Secretariat [NCCS] Singapore. (n.d.). Singapore’s emissions profile. Retrieved April 13, 2022, from https://www.nccs.gov.sg/singapores-climate-action/singapore-emissions-profile/