Overview of the Idea
The idea of planning for the entire community is not new in many societies across the world. Each government is concerned with the issue of development. Studies show that any sustained development calls for the formulation of strong policies to help in the achievement of sustainable living. In the United States, sustainability is based on equality, provision of water, clean and safer sources of energy, and finally comprehensive management of wastes and other toxic materials. Based on this, it is noted that the concept of sustainable communities focuses on environmental sustainability, especially in development and agriculture, and economic sustainability, including consideration of environmental conservation and global warming when establishing factories and industries (Maliene, & Malys, 2008).
Planners of sustainable communities are often advised to focus on developing a persistent urban road and rail network, fair play, and affordable public transportation. In fact, a sustained community cannot be created without developing all aspects of society, including the financial system, the atmosphere, egalitarianism, and sustainability. The challenges that environmental pollution pose to the health of people is taken seriously under the sustainable communities program because a healthier population is believed to promote economic development. If a community suffers from any health problem that comes about because of pollution, chances are high that many resources will be wasted in securing the wellbeing of the community instead of channeling the funds to economic development. This paper analyzes the idea of sustainable communities by assessing its strengths and weaknesses as regards to development.
Strengths of the Idea
In the United States, the Atlanta Beltline is considered a model for sustainable communities program globally. Many analysts term the idea the most ambitious smart growth project because of its prospects. In California, students at the state polytechnic set up the Lyle Center for Regenerative Studies to act as a replica of the sustained community project (Darden, & Wyly, 2010). This implies that the idea has several benefits, even though some developmental experts have been quick to criticize it. One of the benefits of the idea entails offering people an opportunity to live in a green home with neighbors who have the same aspirations in life.
If the project is implemented efficiently, people will not incur costs in developing the community. However, this calls for the involvement of experts in the exercise because the efforts would be fruitless if done by inexperienced people (Jacobus, & Chapple, 2009).
The idea promotes a healthier living given the fact that it insists on walking to work, schools, and market places. Studies show that many people, especially children, suffer from obesity, which is known to be one of the causes of heart diseases. Children rarely engage in physical activities because they spend most of their time playing computer games. In fact, parents have failed to control the leisure activities of their children leading to serious disease complications. Some people claim that the idea of walking to work and school cannot be implemented because of rains, but the planners of the sustainable community program will ensure that distances are reduced to enable people conduct their businesses smoothly without interruptions from the weather (Maliene, & Malys, 2009).
Through the program, storm water will always be infiltrated on-site implying that the streets will be designed in such a way that they will be shedding water to the trenches. The community will never encounter problems that come about due to excessive rains and flooding. In various parts of the country, local governments have been forced to spend many resources trying to provide drainage in cities, but sustainable community idea would provide a lasting solution to the problem (Dymski, Hernandez, & Mohanty, 2013).
The drained water might be purified to be reused in gardens and homes for cleaning and feeding animals. Since there would be fewer automobile travel miles in the community, pollution will greatly be reduced in the air and the community will benefit from free circulation of wind. The program calls for the planting of trees meaning that pollution from neighboring villages would be eaten up easily. Plants use carbon dioxide produced in factories and industries while in the same time producing oxygen that freshens the air. The creation of sustainable community entails the involvement of the locals, which means that it provides them an opportunity to access quality education, employment opportunities, and economic rewards. While the system is known to offer economic benefits, it aims at preserving functionality and the diversity of the entire system whereby human beings coexist with the environment mutually (Maliene, & Malys, 2009).
If the program is carefully implemented, it has the chance of supporting diversification of forest products, such as non-wood forest products. Some people claim that sustainability is an issue of concern because it goes against the elements of liberal economic development. However, the reality is that sustained communities support the native people in the modern society whereby they can engage in economic activities, as well as preserve the environment.
Without sustainability, the chances of the future generation developing are scarce because they would not have enough resources. Sustainability calls on the community to integrate conservation with development. Therefore, sustained communities will never suffer from the problems that many cities in the country are facing currently (Sianipar, Dowaki, Yudoko, & Adhiutama, 2013). In many parts of the country, people live in congested neighborhoods leading to outbreak of communicable diseases and the local authorities have been spending billions of dollars in addressing these issues.
Weaknesses
Sustainable community is a program that is highly encouraged in the country, but it faces several challenges, with some analysts noting that it cannot be achieved in the short-term. Additionally, the program is expensive in case it is implemented without planning. Even though the aim is to preserve the environment while encouraging development, the program faces the risk of over-exploitation in the sense that people will be using scarce resources frequently. Before establishing the project, policy makers are required to engage in intense planning and research, which brings about additional costs (Pastor, Dreier, Grigsbylll, & Ldpez-Garza, 2011).
Since people live in the same locality, connecting to other places might be problematic and this calls on the government to develop the infrastructure. Again, the program is incompatible with the idea of free market economy in which the American economic principles are based. Before achieving the objectives and the goals of the program, it would need several compromises and intensive communication to ensure that each person is involved. Based on this, the government has to set up clear conflict resolution mechanism. Finally, the program requires the government to come up with complex land reforms, which might infringe on the rights and freedoms of many people in the country (White, Stallones, & Last, 2013). Based on this, many groups might not be willing to adopt the program since they believe in individualism whereby each person should determine his or her destiny and the government should simply provide an enabling environment to facilitate individual fulfillment.
References
Darden, J. T., & Wyly, E. (2010). Cartographic editorial mapping the racial/ethnic topography of subprime inequality in urban America. Urban Geography, 31(4), 425–433. Web.
Dymski, G., Hernandez, G., & Mohanty, L. (2013). Race, Gender, Power, and the US Subprime Mortgage and Foreclosure Crisis: A Meso Analysis, Feminist Economics, 3(1), 1-28. Web.
Jacobus, R., & Chapple, K. (2009). What difference can a few stores make? Retail and neighborhood revitalization. Center for community Innovation, 6(1), 1-14. Web.
Maliene, V., & Malys, N. (2009). High-quality housing—a key issue in delivering sustainable communities. Building and Environment, 44(2), 426–30. Web.
Maliene, V., Howe, J., & Malys, N. (2008). Sustainable communities: affordable housing and socio-economic relations. Local Economy, 23(4), 267–76. Web.
Maliene, V., Howe, J., & Malys, N. (2009). Urban regeneration for sustainable communities: a case study. Technologic and Economic Development of Economy, 15(1), 49–59. Web.
Pastor, M., Dreier, P., Grigsbylll, E., & Ldpez-Garza, M. (2011). Regions That Work: How Cities and Suburbs Can Grow Together. Globalization and Community, 6(1), 155-180. Web.
Sianipar, C. P. M., Dowaki, K., Yudoko, G., & Adhiutama, A. (2013). Seven Pillars of Survivability: Appropriate Technology with a Human Face. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(4), 1-18. Web.
White, F, Stallones, L., & Last, J.M. (2013). Global Public Health: Ecological Foundations. Oxford University Press. Web.