Tiny

When asked to examine an environmental issue and argue for a solution, I decided to
look at the biggest environmental issue of all: man. Through our greed, over-consumption, and
desire for luxury, man has created an environment in which we have so much waste, we dont
have space or the wherewithal to know what to do with it, we consume resources much more
quickly than they can be replenished, and we continuously poison the world around us. Due to
evolved psychological mechanisms driving us to utilize our environments effectively, todays
technology has enabled us to use resources much quicker than they can be replenished and if
continued at the same rate, we will soon render the earth uninhabitable. The biggest
environmental harm of all is mankind, and if we dont begin to look to more sustainable
behaviors, we will destroy the environment around us.
According to evolutionary psychology, mechanisms meant to help us survive, that
evolved in a time when we did not have the population, knowledge, tools or technology available
to exploit the environment in the way we do now, are rendered wasteful and destructive today.
We have the technology to take more, use more, cheaper and more quickly than any generations
before us, and the numbers to do so at incredible rates. At low levels of consumption, it is
evident that a large proportion of the worlds population needs to consume morein order to
meet basic needs relating to food, water, housing, security and family health. However, at the
aggregate level, the average global citizen is consuming too much. If those without are to have
the opportunity to consume more, then by definition those with too much must consume less.
This is not widely accepted. (Pretty) This is because man also has a predisposition to prioritize
self-interest over the welfare of the group. While this does create a lot of selfish behavior, this
does not render a completely selfish person, due to our social nature. Kin ties are strong, our

reputations in society matter to us, and small, dense, interdependent social networks also serve as
bonds that lead us to act in ways that benefit others. In a culture, however, where we have dense
cities with no real sense of interconnectedness, and suburban life where one hardly knows their
neighbors, selfish consumption can easily arise at the stake of the groups well-being.
(Griskevicius, Cantu, Vugt)
America perfectly exemplifies mankinds drive to over-consume. Consumption
contributes positively to human development and well-being when it enlarges the capabilities of
people without adverse effects on others, when it is fair to future generations, when it respects
the carrying capacity of the planet, and when it encourages the emergence of lively, creative and
content communities. However, current consumption patterns fail on these criteria, and are both
unsustainable and unfair. Despite the world producing 34% more food per capita than in 1961,
there are still some 8001,000 million people malnourished and hungry. (Pretty) The United
States uses about a quarter of the worlds fossil fuel resources, is third highest in carbon
emissions, second highest in water consumption, highest in meat consumption, and has more
vehicles owned than there are licensed drivers, despite being less than 5 % of the global
population. (The State of Consumption Today) Despite the economy growing by nearly 4-fold,
more than two billion people still live on less than $2 per day. Despite daily domestic water
consumption of 170L, 884 million people have no access to safe water, and 2.6 billion have poor
and unsafe sanitation. (Pretty)
It is no question that the great disparity between nations, like ours, that overconsume and
third-world nations, where there is little to no access to even the most basic of amenities, needs a
sustainable solution. The best sustainable solution I have seen, that appears to address most
over-consumption issues (at least on an individual level) is tiny houses. Despite a decrease in

average family size, the average size of homes in America has increased from 1,780 square feet
in 1978 to 2,479 square feet in 2007. There is, however, a growing social and architectural
movement called the small or tiny house movement. Tiny houses, firstly, aim to be zero-energy
homes. Secondly, they capitalize on the idea that less is more, and with that they also mean less
space. Typically ranging from 120 square feet to 500 square feet, (Small House Movement) tiny
houses encourage a sense of minimalism and of great consideration for what we really need, but
at the same time making great use of the space available to them, utilizing cabinets, cubbies.
Not only are they appealing to those who desire to be environmentally friendly or
minimalistic, but they can be quite cheap to build (or buy) and cost much less to power, heat,
maintain and live in. Costing anywhere from $20,000 to $50,000 they are much more affordable
to buy or build and because of their tiny size, (Small House Movement) these houses utilize less
resources in general. As a result, tiny houses have been suggested as a potential solution to
homelessness, and tiny house communities are popping up in an effort to test this. Because space
is limited in the house, appliances are smaller and use less energy. Without the need for huge
gas-burning boilers to heat the home, carbon emissions are almost completely reduced, and a
small electric heater is typically enough to heat the small space. Solar panels are often utilized,
and while perhaps the greatest expense when building a tiny home, they can power the space
almost completely, dropping down electric bills or eliminating them completely. Tiny house
owners that still have an electric bill claim bills as low as 20 dollars. Water bills for tiny homes
often look similar. Some forgo plumbing systems, while others utilize rainwater collection and
filtration systems, and others still use low-flow appliances that use and waste less water.
Unfortunately, getting Americans on board with the idea that smaller is better, when it
goes against everything the American Dream stands for, is a major drawback. In a nation that

tells you that you can have it all, that the big house with the big yard with the white picket fence
is the goal, that anything you can buy, we promise you can buy it bigger, downgrading to a tiny
house appears almost like an insult. And there are those psychological mechanisms at play, that
tell us that we should want more. There may be a movement of people looking to downsize, be
it for environmental reasons, minimalistic reasons, or monetary reasons, but this movement is far
from infiltrating the bigger is better culture in America. (Griskevicius, Cantu, Vugt)
Evidence tells us that just telling people to do their part, for the good of the world around
us and for the good of future generations, yields little to no results, and what results there are, are
often short-lived. Studies show that a neighbors resource consumption is the best indicator of
own resource consumption and that people who showed sustainable efforts in resource
consumption, begin to use more resources when learning that their neighbors are not conserving.
This is a result of our desire for relative status. In a social community where reputation is
important, people feel they must keep up with the jones. In order to want to change ones
actions, one has to see some kind of personal benefit, and if people are not so inclined to want
smaller, more sustainable homes, they certainly will not make any changes in their lifestyle. In
this way, attempting to let the tiny house movement transition from a mere movement to a way
of life in our culture appears near impossible. (Griskevicius, Cantu, Vugt)
There is hope however, because research has also provided us with ideas for more
successful tools and marketing techniques, that work with rather than against our psychological
drives to exploit resources, for getting people to see sustainability as something that they can
personally benefit from. Through the use of social media, we can hope to restore the feeling of
interconnectedness with the community and world around us, so that we may begin to feel the
need to do our part. Creating sustainable products that provide immediate and visible benefits

for a person may help them to make the decision to convert to sustainable products. In addition,
making a shift from emphasizing bigger is better to less is more may inspire people to feel
that downsizing is the socially acceptable and socially responsible thing to do. (Griskevicius,
Cantu, Vugt)
Sustainability is important for the world today and for generations in the future and
provides solutions for meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of the
future. Over-consumption in america is unsustainable, not only for today, but for the future and
tiny homes are just one great example of a solution that could create a healthier planet and a
more sustainable future.

Works Cited
Griskevicius, Vladas, Stephanie M. Cant, and Mark van Vugt. "The evolutionary bases for
sustainable behavior: Implications for marketing, policy, and social entrepreneurship."
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 31.1 (2012): 115-128.
Heymann, Jody, and Magda Barrera, eds. Ensuring a Sustainable Future: Making Progress on
Environment and Equity. New York: Oxford UP, 2014. Print
Pretty, Jules. "The Consumption Of A Finite Planet: Well-Being, Convergence, Divergence And
The Nascent Green Economy." Environmental & Resource Economics 55.4 (2013):
475-499. Environment Complete. Web. 28 Nov. 2014.
"Small House Movement." Wikipedia. Web. 20 Nov. 2014. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Small_house_movement>.
"The State of Consumption Today." Worldwatch Institute: Vision For a Sustainable World.
Web. 19 Oct. 2014. <http://www.worldwatch.org/node/810>.
Tiny: A Story About Living Small. 2013. Film.