- All encompassing nature of the concept gives it strength however incomplete perception of problems of poverty and env degradation and confusion about role of eco growth and sustainability and participation – weakness.
- Some believe the power of the concept is in its roadness. However some say it has already been misinterpreted. Buttell and Gillespie continent that agencies such as world bank, Asian Development bank and OECD have been quick to adopt it without clear framework to ensure sustainable outcomes.
- Interpreting SD – Many interpretations. May be either process of change that has ecological sustainability added to objectives. Could be sustained growth, change or successful development. (a) Contradictions and trivialities – Development is a process of directed change. Need to be careful to define objectives and not just allow for change to continue forever. For example sustaining the growth of material consumption . Neoclassical economists define objective of dev as increased social welfare – but they in terms of eco output but not necessarily growth in physical throughput – but this argument is circular because you need to know what social welfare is to define outputs. Also dangerous as it does not consider theoretical problems with aggresgating individual utility functions within and across generations. (b) Sustainability – Origionated from renewables so many thing is about sustainment of life (ecological view). But has been realization that social conditions must exist that influence ecological sustainability. (c) Sustainable development = development + sustainability ? In mainstream interpreted as a social change that has an additional driver of sustainability.
- The concept of sustainable development - (a) Evolution of objectives – First came to prominence in 1980 with IUCN presented world conoservation strategy. Issue was that it was lopsided – it considered only the issue of ecological sustainability rather than sustainabile development as it did not look at change in structure of demand – only what it takes to be ecologically sustainable. Responses included UNEP which encompassed – help very pooor, self reliant development, cost-effective development, health control, appropriate tech, food sel reliance, clean water, and shelter, peter-centered initiatives. Mixes goals and means – fundamental objectives and operational ones. IUNC-UNEP conference in 1986 defined it as responding five requirements – integration of conservation and development, satisfaction of basic human needs, achievement of equity and social justice, provision of social self-detemrination and cultural diversity and maintenance of ecological integrity. World commission on environment and development is brief “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. Although brief it then goes on with critical objectives – reviving growth, changing the quality of growth, meeting essential needs for jobs, food, energy, water, and sanitation, ensuring a sustainable level of population, conserving and enhancing the resource base, reorienting technology and managing risk, merging the environment and economics in decision making and reoirienting international economic relation, making development more participatory. This is now mainstream of thinking – UNEP, IUCN, WWF, World Bank etc. (b) The strength of the concept – Three basis for this concept – scientific realities, ethical principles and consideration of long term self interest. (c) The premis for SD – has not been a comfortable nexus between poverty and environmental degredation. In many cases lack of development has led to environmental problems. Thus they are interdependent to a degree. Some existing premisise (i) env deg is already effecting millsions – often caused by povery, and ultimately effects everyone. (ii) Traditional dev objectives are to provide basic needs , increase productivity in developing nations and maintaining standard of living in developed, can be shown that environmentally sound methods can be profitable in the long run. (iii) Process – process must be participatory to succeed. Much SD lotrature is devoted to shoing this is feasible and can be made attractive. SD has become a bundle of need technological fixes.
- Weaknesses – SD failed to develop coherent . Main issues have been (a) Incomplete characterisation of poverty and env degradation – Seen as a two way link. But it is more complex – access to resources, incorrect technology applications, culture and values all influence. Solutions have been mainly techno-eco ones – designing for efficiency, proper resourcing pricing, managing common resources, attending to basics and building management capability. Deeper social political changes (land reform etc) or changes in cultural values (overconsumption) are either ignored or paid lip service. (b) Conceptual weakness – removal of poverty, sustainability and participation are 3 fundamental objectives of SD. (i) Roe of eco growth –by 1970s the trickle down theory had been rejected and the basic needs approach had taken oroot. Eco growth still does remain. Base don justification that eco growth can be positive or negative as long as stabiliz resource consumption. More realistic is that poverty -> env degredation.. It is necessary but not sufficient however. (ii) Sustainability – World Conservation Strategy – suggested 3 eco principles – maintence of essential eco processes and life support systems, preservation of genetic diversity and sustainable utilisation of species and resources. But this uses the term sustainability so is recursive – must answer what is to be sustained, for whome and for how long. To clarify need to distinguish between renewables, nonrenewables, env proceses critical to life. Need to be more sophisticated with renewables based on unceretainty in conditions, dynamic behaviour of the resource, Stochastic (non deterministic/random element) properties. Social sustainability is more difficult – Brow (1987) suggests existence of infrastructure, services, government. There is no contradiction between social and eco sustain. (iii) Participation – Significant shift o equity and ocal participation. Note that participation is necessary but not sufficient for equity and social justice. Need to distinguise participation in decision making, implementation, benefit distribution and evaluation.
- Policy prescription s- inconsistencies and inadequacies – Given confusion policies suggested in mainstream do not deliver ecologically sound or socially equitable development. (a) International trade and economic relationship – Trade MNC’s, commercial lending and aid are four dominant channels for international eco relations. Flawed – first need to restructure international monetary system so that terms of trade do not favour first world. Second assumption is tht free trade promotes SD and that protectionism is an impediment. This is not clear or simple – there are losers and gainers from freer trade. Also ignore the huge env externalities in free trade. (b) Sustainable agriculture – Attempts to operationalise have focused on ag. Confused – eg. Organic vs low input etc. (c) Tropical forests – Origionally about wildlife and biodiversity also now about social context. But UNDP and FAO critiqued as they focused on poverty , over-pop and ignorance causing foreset destruction. This obscures reasons for poverty, subverts real a causes (such as colonisation), tribal inhabitants and
- Conclusions – Challenge is between wanting to take stron stands and gain political acceptance. It is trying to b both by scientific fact and using economic jargon. Believes that proponents need to reject attempts to focus on eco growth as solution to poverty, recognise inadequacies of neoclassical economics, accept existence of structural, techno and cultural causes of poverty and evn deg, understand multi dimensions ofSD, explore patterns and level s of resource demand would be compatible with different tyes of eco/social sustainability.
No comments:
Post a Comment