The given videos represent a classic contest between two intellectual and scientific streams working parallel with each others with conflicting modes. Their intellectual and practical designs are aimed at the greater benefits for the sustainable development on the planet. Despite similarities in the objectives, the courses of actions are colliding and are confusing the common man. At the same time, an average mind cannot deny the role of safe water for the healthy man on the planet and also can not appreciate the plastic waste generated as essential paraphernalia of bottled water. One is vital for existence of mankind while other is important for sustainability.
The dilemma of development is its unequal scales regarding distribution across the globe. One billion people living on the planet does not have significant access to safe and clean drinking water on the planets where a large number of MNCs are growing with geometrical progression. The companies like Starbucks are trying to remove this anomaly. 6.2 million dollars has been contributed by the Starbucks for this cause and number of beneficiaries is more than 120,000. It is a definitely a giant leap towards a sustainable planet. More clean water means healthy humanity. The healthy mankind means a better globe where development is sustainable. Starbucks is showing social responsibility and obligations in the South. The themes in second video also reflect the existence of two worlds: the North, where even the tap water may be safe for drinking and the South, where availability of safe water is an issue. The planet cannot accommodate more and more bio non degradable material on it which threatens the life of flora and fauna. Such material is being produced on large scale as a bye product of bottled water. There is a compromising way between these two beneficial but conflicting intellectual and scientific streams. The clean and safe drinking water should be available across the globe in a more environmental friendly way.
Achieving sustainable development requires a more complementary and coherent framework of global developmental and environmental governance. Environment and Development are friends in objectives but enemies in strategies. The developmental process has made possible the metamorphosis of man from glorified apes to the architect of modern world. This transformation has changed the mode of life on planet and has also generated a lot of anthropogenic activities which has adversely affected human ecology in multiple ways. The industrial sector has catalyzed the development but is generated chemical which are alien for the globe. It is altering the normal climatic happening and, by implications, threatening the existence of life on earth. The reduction in the levels of emissions is greater debate in global political economy which is unlikely to settle in near future. There is no doubt in the fact that pace and mode of development activities are considerably damaging the environment.
The development process is also controversial with reference to its unequal distribution on the globe. The present day world is clearly divided into two segments; North and South. The southern part is poor and still has to exploit the opportunities emerged in current world. The North is surely a better part for man. This disparity, deeply embedded in political history of the world, has generated multidimensional disputes. The dirty share of North in environmental degradation is much more that Southern part of the world. However, its subsequent implications are more alarming for the South. Most of the emissions are coming out of industrial chimneys of the North. Any global framework for the drastic change in the levels of emissions will alter global economy. The sustainable development in future will depend upon the green technologies. This choice is also challenging for the South because of out dated technologies operating there. The incorporation of green technologies in industrial structure of South is not practical due to high installation cost and resultant impact upon production cost. It is a disadvantage in era of globalization. South also lacks capability to engage the North into a political dialogue for more environment friendly, political and economic global framework. The indigenous demographic and political maladies in South are also a handicap for a more globalised green political attitude towards earth. Both should join hands for sustainable development on healthy planet in future.