Balanced, ecological and healthy development between rural and growth centers

People are forced to move to growth centers and elsewhere in Finland, even if they do not want to, when there is no job in more remote areas or in their own province, and when acquaintances move out. It is also possible to move to a city from the countryside and vice versa to experience both urban and rural living. It is neither fun nor healthy to live in city congestion, traffic pollution and noise. Drive at peak traffic for work. You pay huge prices for residence when it is cheaper in the countryside. Wages, too, will have to be higher, that the cost of housing will be paid for, and that there will be pressure on businesses not to get cheaper labor and it hampers their competitiveness. Building plots are expensive in cities.

As telecommunications is advanced, many companies could operate in more remote areas. If the more remote areas were to be populated and the urban congested population moved into them, the services of the remote areas could be better and people would be more comfortable being nearer to nature.

Now there is a lot of extra costs for congested Finland to be further increased and prevent hinterlands to become wretched. The direction should be changed, from cities to countryside. Retirees could also live well in the country by building communities where health can be maintained and promoted. Even pensioners could still benefit society by volunteering. In the country there is clean air, clean nature, could cultivate healthy, clean food in the garden, make crafts in workshops, get physical exercise, save on health care expenses. Even in the rural community, people could know each other better and have a good social interaction. There could be communities and villages of like-minded, ethically and ideologically. More attention could be paid to ecology and health.

Too much unnecessary consumption could be reduced, people would be able to cope and be content with less goods produced by industry and high technology. More spiritual values, values ​​created by nature, etc.

When cities are overcrowded, cities will also become more pleasant living environments. Cities, too, should be developed in a natural and healthy direction.

Increasing use of renewable resources in the business world, instead of non-renewable ones, also requires the rural labor force to nurture and cultivate natural production and nature values.

Until now, urbanization has been huge for several decades. I predict that the direction will turn back to countryside. And rural living and livelihoods in the countryside will come and be more economically profitable than growing growth centers. New high technology, advances in science, particularly in the life sciences, make rural living and livelihoods more rational.

As automation progresses, the physical condition of people deteriorates when they do not need physical strength at work. Automation requires a lot of energy and raw materials, which further consumes nature’s carrying capacity. Mass production is not agile, flexible, requires a lot of capital, and does not give work to just a few. Small-scale and flexible production should be developed. More human energy and human capital should be used in the workplace, thus avoiding the need for new large power plants to meet the energy needs. And if unnecessary production and consumption were eliminated, energy and raw materials would also be saved and people’s income would be sufficient for a precious life. The decentralization of energy, services and other production also saves traffic costs. Energy transfer costs, imports of goods and services from afar cost. Local production, local services are the best option. Keeping people healthier and livelihoods would save on social and health expenditure. Small communities could be good learning environments where they learn from each other and have lifelong learning, save on education costs, and improve learning. With the production of a lot of food using human energy in small-sized gardens and hobby cultivation places, maintaining industrial agriculture would not require so much capital and would make the noise of tractors in the countryside so much. Small-scale farming could be more organic, bio-intensive and produce healthier, tastier, more sustainable and more competitive products.

In urban areas, the unemployed have little chance of earning their living. If they lived in cottages in countryside, they could produce food, energy, products in workshops and construction with their own work. The quality of life would be better. Bound in a city in a tiny apartment, in polluted air, using only media, and the energy that goes into exercising brings little health and takes time away from work, especially in the summer and in the other seasons when nature offers its charm. Even in cities, they face loneliness when people interact poorly. One has to engage in occupations in the city that do not maintain human health and well-being.

New and old ideas and ways of working are an opportunity in Finland because there is a lot of nature here and the country is sparsely populated. It is not expedient in Finland to follow the doctrines of the densely populated areas of the world. However, there is wisdom in the ecological way of living in densely populated areas as well.

Veikko J. Pyhtilä, 2015