Sustainable development is often touted as the solution to our modern crises, balancing growth with environmental stewardship. However, the real-life saga of land occupations at Oregon’s Malheur Wildlife Refuge and North Dakota’s Standing Rock reservation depicted in Between Equal Rights: Rhetorical Discernment in the Era of Climate Conflict starkly illustrates the complexities and conflicts that lie beneath the surface of this term.
At Malheur in 2016, a group of armed militiamen occupied the wildlife refuge, demanding that federal lands be returned to private control. They argued that the government’s management threatened their livelihoods and way of life. This occupation starkly highlights one of the central tensions in discussions of sustainable development: the conflict between individual economic rights and collective environmental responsibilities. The militiamen’s view of sustainability was narrowly focused on economic and personal freedom, seemingly at the expense of ecological and broader public concerns.
In stark contrast, the Standing Rock Sioux’s protest against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) at the same time underscored a different aspect of sustainability. This indigenous community rallied to protect their water supply and sacred lands from potential oil spills, embodying a holistic view of sustainability that includes social justice, respect for indigenous rights, and environmental protection. Their slogan, “Water is Life,” resonates as a reminder that sustainable practices must prioritize the fundamental needs of all community members and the ecosystem.
These two cases illustrate the broader debate on sustainable development. On one hand, there is a push for deregulation and privatization under the guise of economic freedom and job creation, often supported by neoliberal policies. On the other, there is a movement towards a more inclusive approach that considers environmental sustainability and social equity integral to long-term prosperity.
I believe the path to true sustainability lies not in exploiting resources for immediate economic gain, but in recognizing and respecting the connection between humans and ecological health. The Standing Rock protests are a good example of how sustainable development can also be a form of resistance to exploitative practices that harm the environment and human rights.
However, accepting this broader definition of sustainable development poses significant challenges, particularly in the face of entrenched economic interests and political structures that prioritize short-term gains over long-term well-being. As I reflect on these events, I am struck by the need to incorporate ethical considerations into sustainability discussions. We must question who benefits from specific uses of land and resources and who bears the brunt of the costs. A sustainable future requires us to think critically about the rights of indigenous peoples, protecting land and ecologically sensitive sites, and equitable distribution of resources.
Furthermore, as articulated in the forgiveness ceremony at Standing Rock, the concept that “the land owns us” encapsulates a worldview in which humans are part of a larger ecosystem, rather than its owner. This perspective is crucial as we grapple with the challenges of sustainability in a world facing an unprecedented environmental crisis.
Overall, the juxtaposition of Malheur and Standing Rock is a poignant reminder of the complex dimensions involved in sustainable development. It forces us to consider a more inclusive approach that respects human and ecological rights. As we move forward, let us learn from these lessons and cultivate a sustainable ethos that truly embodies the health and well-being of all living systems on Earth.
Scott, A., & Welch, N. (2018). Between Equal Rights: Rhetorical Discernment in the Era of Climate Conflict. Works and Days, 19.