Introduction of Sustainable Develeopment:
Sustainable Development (SD) has become a ubiquitous development paradigm—the catchphrase for international aid agencies, the jargon of development planners, the theme of conferences and academic papers, as well as the slogan of development and environmental activists. The concept seems to have attracted the broad-based attention that other development concept lack(ed), and appears poised to remain the pervasive development paradigm for a long time. In 1987, the Bruntland Commission published its report, Our Common Future, in an effort to link the issues of economic development and environmental stability.
In doing so, this report provided the oft-cited definition of sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (United Nations General Assembly, 1987, p. 43). Albeit somewhat vague, this concept of sustainable development aims to maintain economic advancement and progress while protecting the long-term value of the environment; it “provides a framework for the integration of environment policies and development strategies” (United Nations General Assembly, 1987). However, long before the late 20th century, scholars argued that there need not be a trade-off between environmental sustainability and economic development.
Definitions of Sustainable Develeopment:
Sustainable development is the idea that human societies must live and meet their needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The “official” definition of sustainable development was developed for the first time in the Brundtland Report in 1987.
According to Brundtland, sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the of future generations to meets their own needs.
Sustainable development is a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also future generations.
It contains within two concepts of need, in particular the essential needs of the world’s poor, to which over-riding priority should be given; the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organizations on the environment’s ability to meet present and future needs.
Sustainable development he use of renewable and nonrenewable resources in a manner that satisfies our current needs but does not compromise the future availability of resources.
According to the UN, sustainable development “meets the needs of the present without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
Specifically, sustainable development is a way of organizing society so that it can exist in the long term. This means taking into account both the imperatives present and those of the future, such as the preservation of the environment and natural resources or social and economic equity.
Sustainable development is the organizing principle for economic development while simultaneously sustaining the ability of natural systems to provide the natural resources and ecosystem services on which the economy and society depend. The desired result is a state of society where living conditions and resources are used to continue to meet human needs without undermining the integrity and stability of the natural system.
Sustainable development can be defined as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainability goals, such as the current UN-level Sustainable Development Goals, address the global challenges, including poverty, inequality, climate change, environmental degradation, peace and justice.
While the modern concept of sustainable development is derived mostly from the 1987 Brundtland Report, it is also rooted in earlier ideas about sustainable forest management and twentieth-century environmental concerns. As the concept of sustainable development developed, it has shifted its focus more towards the economic development, social development and environmental protection for future generations. It has been suggested that the term ‘sustainability’ should be viewed as humanity’s target goal of human-ecosystem equilibrium, while ‘sustainable development’ refers to the holistic approach and temporal processes that lead us to the endpoint of sustainability”.
Modern economies are endeavoring to reconcile ambitious economic development and obligations of preserving natural resources and ecosystems, as the two are usually seen as of conflicting nature. Instead of holding climate change commitments and other sustainability measures as a remedy to economic development, turning and leveraging them into market opportunities will do greater good. The economic development brought by such organized principles and practices in an economy is called Managed Sustainable Development (MSD).
The Concept of Sustainable Development:
The concept of sustainable development has been, and still is, subject to criticism, including the question of what is to be sustained in sustainable development. It has been argued that there is no such thing as a sustainable use of a non-renewable resource, since any positive rate of exploitation will eventually lead to the exhaustion of earth’s finite stock; this perspective renders the Industrial Revolution as a whole unsustainable. It has also been argued that the meaning of the concept has opportunistically been stretched from ‘conservation management’ to ‘economic development’, and that the Brundtland Report promoted nothing but a business as usual strategy for world development, with an ambiguous and insubstantial concept attached as a public relations slogan.
Sustainable Development is a concept that at its core is revolutionary, yet unfortunately incredibly difficult to pragmatically define. The history behind sustainable development is one that does not stretch far. Tensions that can be found within the concept of sustainable development are numerous, ranging from its ambiguous and vague definition, to the failure of attaining a universal pragmatic and operational framework. The great challenge that lies ahead with sustainable development is not only the need to educate it to the people, but to first define it in a way people will understand it.
The concept of sustainable development is one that arguably is multi-disciplinary, complex, and systematic, yet defining the concept is without a doubt a great task. Sustainable development was a term first coined in 1980, when the intent of the concept was merely basic. It was in the World Conservation Strategy, a union between three prominent environmental non-governmental organizations IUCN, WWF, and UNEP, where sustainable development took on the meaning of ‘conserving the earth’s natural resources’. What the World Conservation Strategy had realized is that with the world’s economic growth, came the near-sighted exploitation of the world’s natural resources.
The original, and sole, intent of the World Conservation Strategy was to bring nations together to stop the exploitation of natural resources, which in turn was negatively affecting the environment. Sustainable development was thus merely seen on quite a basic level, at the time of its coinage. Not even a decade later, did the definition take on much more of a multi-disciplinary approach. In 1987 the white paper, named Our Common Future, was published by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED).
The document set the loose foundation of sustainable development with a widely quoted definition, which states “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. The document, also frequently known as the Brundtland Report, has “since been taken up by almost every international institution, agency and NGO”. The Brundtland Report became the first document to support sustainable development as a multi-disciplinary field, as it explained that the economy, society, and the environment were key to sustainable development. In 1992 the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development devised a program entitled Agenda 21, which allegedly “is the blueprint for sustainability in the 21st century”.
It is a framework that nations and government strictly can adhere to. Nations that gave their consent to accepting Agenda 21 are monitored by the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD), who “is responsible for reviewing progress in the implementation of Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development; as well as providing policy guidance to follow up the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) at the local, national, regional and international levels”. Both the Agenda 21 as well as the Brundtland Report have proven to be widely used frameworks that nations, agencies, and organizations use in modern times, yet even though they are accepted, a clear definition still is not evident.
The greatest problem with the concept of sustainable development is the sheer amount of definitions that are available. Unfortunately, a clear definition of sustainable development has still not been devised. Although the Brundtland Report’s definition is widely-quoted, one can see exactly where it fails. When relooking at the definition “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”, one can spot two clear issues. Firstly, the ‘needs’ are not defined. There is a major difference between the needs of a person living in a Third-World country, as opposed to the needs of a person living in Western Europe. Secondly, the definition does not offer any type of time frame, as ‘generations’ can only be vaguely interpreted.
The incredible amount of definitions available for sustainable development, thus make it a topic that the common man does not wish to pursue. An interesting way of looking at the issues at hand with sustainable development is too look at the following quote, which states “a combination of uncertainty about what to do, and a feeling of guilt about what is not being done, means that many people seem afraid to expose what they feel is their lack of understanding of sustainable development. Therefore, it is often easier to pretend that it does not need to be addressed”. It is quite clear that because of sustainable development’s uncertain definition people, nations, and governments seem to act on it in varying ways. Yet, for those that have agreed on a definition, the problem of implementation arises.
Countries that have made a conscious effort to understand sustainable development and are willing to make changes, both nationally as well as internationally, face the problem of implementing sustainable development-geared policies. As with Agenda 21, the document that gave a framework to countries for sustainable development, there is no ‘enforcer’ of the document. That is to say, countries may claim to understand sustainable development, agree to make changes to their policies, but nobody actually enforces them to do so. As it was stated in the Brundtland report, “our inability to promote the common interest in sustainable development is often a product of the relative neglect of economic and social justice within and amongst nations”; which sheds light on yet another paramount issue in sustainable development, that stretches far beyond simply sustainable development.
The problem with the enforcement of sustainable development policies is that countries that are in the greatest need of them have no reason to adhere to the policies. As the North-South dialogue still clearly exists, the North essentially is telling the South the proper way to develop. This seemingly condescending method of saying “you must do it this way”, not only contributes to the hegemonic nature of the West, but simply further will concentrate the interests between both the North and South. As mentioned in an Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) report,
“At the institutional level, the interdependent goals of economic growth, social development and environmental protection are managed today by institutions that tend to be independent and fragmented, and that respond to narrow man -dates with closed decision-making bodies. Sustainable development stresses the importance of institutions that are willing to integrate economic, social and environmental objectives at each level of policy development and decision-making”.
Unfortunately, the age of individuals is still strongly evident in the world today. It is however in the nature of sustainable development to distinctly outline the issues that not only a nation has with its policies, but also the world has with its tensions. Sustainable development is thus a concept that is revolutionary, yet limited in the scope of its beholder.
Sustainable development has the potential of being a groundbreaking concept that can revolutionize the way nations act on a national level, and more so on an international level. Unfortunately though, due to its multi-disciplinary nature, ideal-oriented goals, and flexible interpretations, a clear definition of the concept has yet to be found. Moreover, its vague interpretation and ambiguity further add to the tensions found within this concept, as any country could state they are following sustainable development policies. The challenge ahead is firstly to devise a concise definition, and secondly to pragmatically be able to apply it to any nation across the world.
Due to sustainable development’s potential of further dividing the North and South dialogue, every country must make the necessary changes to their own policies in order to provide for a cleaner, safer, and more efficient environment, economy, and society. What sustainable development essentially calls for is transparency as well as cooperative nations that are willing to work together for the betterment of the world. It is perhaps for this sole reason that sustainable development is quite difficult to define, because every nation has a different view of what a better world is.
Approaches of Sustainable Development:
1. Ecocentric approach aims at reducing human numbers because population growth is seen to magnify environmental degradation and therefore impair the overall quality of human life’ as well to have negative impact on the ‘nonhuman community’
2. Ecocentric environmentalism suffers from essentialism in relation to both women and environments. Women are conceived of as a unitary category with universal characteristics which transcend the time, place and circumstances of their lives.
3. The technocentric perspective sees sustained growth and scientific and technological advancement as the only way of dealing with global development and environmental issues.
4. The market-based approach to sustainable development and the environment was formulated in the North and starts from the principle that growth and technical advancement in a free market economy are the keys to sustainable development in the future for the South.
5. The neo-Marxist approach indicates the inequality which exists between North and South. This approach offers a fundamental structural analysis of the relationship of economic dependency between developed and developing nations.
Principles of Sustainable Develeopment:
1. Reduce dependence upon fossil fuels, underground metals, and minerals.
2. Reduce dependence upon synthetic chemicals and other unnatural substances.
3. Reduce encroachment upon nature.
4. Meet human needs fairly & efficiently.
Conclusions:
Development is a changing Phenomenon with the change of human numbers. There is a sea change in the use of both non-renewable and renewable resources. Sustainable Development depends on the scientific and efficient use of the resources (natural and manufactured). Future is on the hands of the people. More researches are needed for finding policy and tools of Sustainable Development.
