Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Lessons for sustainability from the world’s most sustainable culture

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Environmentally sustainable development is one of the key challenges faced by societies today. Yet it is not a new challenge; throughout history, societies have faced the need to live within environmental constraints. Some have done so well, and some poorly. One society which did well for tens of thousands of years is that of Aboriginal Australia. This paper explores some lessons from Aboriginal Australia which have resonance in the modern world and shows that countries which have learned those lessons are in fact more sustainable than those which have not. It thus suggests that there is much that the pantheon of human experience can teach the modern world as it endeavours to create a sustainable future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. As opposed to economic and social assets, about which Aboriginal Australia might have many lessons but for which there is insufficient space to address in the paper. My thanks to an anonymous referee for clarifying the distinction between these three types of sustainability.

  2. See, for example, Xu (2004), who focuses on traditional Chinese agriculture Ostri (2005) who focuses on traditional Nepalese water management techniques and Dalle et al. (Dalle et al. 2006) who focus on the traditional knowledge of Ethiopian pastoralists about local resources (or Ghimire et al. 2004; or Donovan and Puri 2004, for the more general literature comparing indigenous and modern scientific knowledge about a resource). More broadly, there is the common pool resources (CPR) literature which examines how societies manage communal resources such as fisheries, irrigation systems, aquifers or forests. Martin (1989) categorises thousands of case studies and Ostrom (1990) develops a set of good governance principles based upon the literature.

  3. This is an issue for Aboriginal Australia, in the context of white settlement, but is broader than the scope of this paper.

  4. Although key environmental and religious leaders have recently been seeking points of common interest, as outlined in The Economist (Anonymous 2009) recently.

  5. The Pintupi word is walytja, a word which literally means “one’s own”, and can refer equally to tools, family or even oneself. Its antonym is yapunta, which literally means “orphaned (Myers 1982). These terms provide a rather neat illustration of how Aboriginal people view property.

  6. Although Agenda 21 (http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/) envisages a greater role for political decentralisation.

  7. A full set of results is available from the author upon request.

  8. In an attempt to increase the explanatory power of each model, I added to the models population density, the proportion of GDP which is accounted for by manufacturing, the United Nations Human Development Index, the proportion of a country which is comprised of national parks and a measure of openness to trade. A higher population density and a greater proportion of GDP accounted for by manufacturing have been associated with lower sustainability in the past (Grossman and Krueger 1995), whilst openness to trade has been associated with greater sustainability (Antweiler et al. 2001). The Human Development Index is used as a broader measure of national well-being than per capita GDP, and the national parks measure is designed to capture the extent to which each country values nature. None of these variables added a great deal of explanatory power, with the best-specified giving R 2 values slightly in excess of 0.6. Further details of these models are available from the author upon request.

  9. It is only significant at the ten per cent level in Model Three.

  10. It has also been highlighted recently in a series of articles in Nature recently; see Sukhdev (2009) and Smith et al. (2009).

References

  • Altman, J. C., Buchanan, G. J., & Larsen, L. (2007). The environmental significance of the indigenous estate: Natural resource management as economic development in remote Australia, CAEPR discussion paper no. 286/2007. Canberra: Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, J. C., & Peterson, N. (1988). Rights to game and rights to cash among contemporary Australian hunter-gatherers. In T. Ingold, D. Riches, & J. Woodburn (Eds.), Hunters and gatherers 2: Property, power and ideology (pp. 75–94). Oxford: Berg Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, J. C., & Whitehead, P. (2003). Caring for country and sustainable indigenous development: Opportunities, constraints and innovation. CAEPR working paper no. 20. Canberra: Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous (2009) Sounding the trumpet. The economist, November 7th 2009 http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14807115.

  • Antweiler, W., Copeland, B. R., & Taylor, M. S. (2001). Is free trade good for the environment? American Economic Review, 91, 877–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berndt, R. M., & Berndt, C. H. (1964). The world of the first Australians: An introduction to the traditional life of the Australian Aboriginals. Sydney: Ure Smith.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C., & Jochem, P. E. P. (2007). Measuring the immeasurable: A survey of sustainability indices. Ecological Economics, 63, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronowski, J. (1973). The hidden structure. The ascent of man, episode 4. First broadcast 26th May 1973. UK: BBC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caughley, J., Bomford, M., & McNee, A. (1996). Use of wildlife by Indigenous Australians: Issues and concepts. In M. Bomford & J. Caughley (Eds.), Sustainable use of wildlife by Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islanders (pp. 7–13). Canberra: AGPS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coppedge, M., & Reinicke, W. (1990). Measuring polyarchy. Studies in Comparative International Development, 25(1), 51–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalle, G., Isselstein, J., & Maass, B. L. (2006). Indigenous ecological knowledge of Borana pastoralists in southern Ethiopia and current challenges. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 13(2), 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. (1998). Guns germs and steel: The fates of human societies. New York: WW Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, D., & Puri, R. (2004). Learning from traditional knowledge of non-timber forest products: Penan Benalui and the autecology of Aquilaria in Indonesian Borneo. Ecology and Society, 9(3), Article 3. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art3.

  • Engle, R. F. (1982). Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimates of the variance of United Kingdom Inflation. Econometrica, 50(3), 987–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, B., Goldfinger, S., Wackernagel, M., Stechbart, M., Rizk, S., Reed, A., et al. (2008). The ecological footprint atlas 2008. Oakland: Global Footprint Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghimire, S. K., McKey, D., & Aumeeruddy-Thomas, Y. (2004). Heterogeneity in ethnoecological knowledge and management of medicinal plants in the Himalayas of Nepal: Implications for conservation. Ecology and Society, 9(3), Article 6. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art6/.

  • Glasby, G. P. (2002). Sustainable development: The need for a new paradigm. Development and Sustainability, 4(4), 333–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glejser, H. (1969). A new test for heteroscedasticity. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 64(325), 316–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goll, E., & Thio, S. L. (2008). Institutions for a sustainable development: Experiences from EU-countries. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10, 69–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1995). Economic growth and the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 353–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harada, K., & Glasby, G. P. (2000). Human impact on the environment in Japan and New Zealand: A comparison. Science of the Total Environment, 263, 79–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, A. C. (1976). Estimating regression models with multiplicative heteroscedasticity. Econometrica, 44(3), 461–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombes, H. C., Brandl, M. M. & Snowdon, W.E. (1983). A certain heritage: Programmes by and for Aboriginal families in Australia, Canberra: Centre for resource and environmental studies: Australian National University.

  • Jones, R. (1969). Fire stick farming. Australian Natural History, 16, 224–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, F. (1989). Common pool resources and collective action: A bibliography. Bloomington: Indiana University, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, R. R. J., Gordon, I. J., Janussen, M. A., & Abel, N. (2006). Pastoralists responses to variation of rangeland resources in time and space. Ecological Applications, 16(2), 572–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, F. R. (1982). Always ask: Resource use and land ownership among the Pintupi Aborigines of the Australian Western Desert. In N. M. Williams & E. S. Hunn (Eds.), Resource managers: North American and Australian hunter gatherers (pp. 173–195). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, B. C., & Noonan, D. (2007). Ecology and valuation: Big changes needed. Ecological Economics, 63, 664–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, P. (2008). The collapse of civilizations: What paleo environmental reconstruction cannot tell us, but anthropology can. Holocene, 18(1), 45–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perevolotsky, A. (1987). Territoriality and resource sharing among the Bedouin of Southern Sinai: A socio-ecological interpretation. Journal of Arid Environments, 13, 153–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ropke, I. (2005). Trends in the development of ecological economics from the late 1980s to the early 2000s. Ecological Economics, 55, 262–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. B. (1998). Totemism, regions, and co-management in Aboriginal Australia, draft paper presented to crossing boundaries: The 7th annual conference of the international association for the study of common property, Vancouver, BC, June, 10–14.

  • Russell-Smith, J., Yates, C., Edwards, A., Allen, G. E., Cook, G. D., Cooke, P., et al. (2003). Contemporary fire regimes of Northern Australia, 1997–2001: Change since Aboriginal occupancy, challenges for sustainable management. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 12, 283–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. J., Veríssimo, D., Leader-Williams, N., Cowling, R. M., Andrew, T., & Knight, A. T. (2009). Let the locals lead. Nature, 462, 280–281. doi:10.1038/462280a.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sukhdev, P (2009). Costing the earth. Nature 462, p. 277. doi:10.1038/462277a.

  • Sveiby, K. E. (2009). Aboriginal principles for sustainable development as told in traditional law stories. Sustainable development. 17, forthcoming.

  • Teorell, J., Holmberg S. & Rothstein, B. (2008). The Quality of Government Dataset, Version 15, May 08, University of Gothenburg: Quality of government institute, http://www.qog.pol.gu.se.

  • Vanhanen, T. (2003). Democratization and power resources 1850–2000, FSD1216, version 1.0 (2003-03-10). Tampere: Finnish Social Science Data Archive.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroscedasticity. Econometrica, 48(3), 817–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, N. M. (1982). A boundary is to cross: Observations on Yolngu boundaries and permission. In N. M. Williams & E. S. Hunn (Eds.), Resource managers: North American and Australian hunter gatherers (pp. 131–153). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environmental Development (WCED). (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, C. (2004). Comparative study of Chinese ecological agriculture and sustainable agriculture. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 11(1), 54–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nick Wills-Johnson.

Additional information

Readers should send their comments on this paper to BhaskarNath@aol.com within 3 months of publication of this issue.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 6.

Table 6 Countries included in each model

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wills-Johnson, N. Lessons for sustainability from the world’s most sustainable culture. Environ Dev Sustain 12, 909–925 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9231-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9231-2

Keywords

Navigation