Sustainable development and its dimensions

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:
              Sustainable development is a dominant idea of development in recent age. Most of the development theorists, environmentalists, academics, aid agencies and NGOs favor it with some exceptions. The term “sustainable development” came into use after the publication of the Bruntland commission’s report on environment and development in 1987. (Castro, 2004)
The sustainable development is a reaction to 1970s limits-to-growth literature. It was an outcome of mainstream reaction to radicalism of environmental movement. Which was proposing limits-to-growth idea and also advocating regulations as a means of stopping environmental degregation. (Pearce & Warford, 1993)
Limits-to-growth or environmental movement of 1970s emphasized on ‘prohibition’ as a way of protecting the natural world. Here ‘Prohibition’ means government should do something directly or order different required companies to use particular technology to limit pollution.
Accordingly to World commission on Environment and Development report published in 1987 sustainable development is a special kind of development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs.
Some authors like Norgaard identifies this definition as too vague and not defining what needs are and how to achieve them. The definition, in any case, reflects a political compromise between growth and environmental sustainability that the pro-growth delegations at the UN could accept. (Norgaard, 1994)
In bare eyes it seems that “Sustainable Development” is merely an economical and environmental concept but it is not. Actually “Sustainable Development” is a political concept which indirectly advocating Neo-liberal ideology. (Castro, 2004)
So if we intend to understand “Sustainable development” deeply we must discuss the political dimensions as well as scientific dimensions. And we also have to discuss, what we need? Who decides this? And on what basis are the decisions are made?
In 2015, the 193 countries of the UN General Assembly adopted the 2030 Development Agenda titled “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. Following the decision, UN agencies, under the umbrella of the United Nations Development Programme decided to support a campaign by several independent entities, among them corporate institutions and International Organizations. This Campaign, popularly known as ‘Project Everyone’. The Official Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted on 25 September 2015 outlining the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. This included the following goals: 

Scientific and Economic dimensions of sustainable development:
The Brundtland Report put spotlight on the idea Sustainable Development and provided its most famous definition that “….meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs”. The report recognized that there was huge poverty and environmental degradation in the countries of periphery and proposed suggestion to solve them. (Castro, 2004)
Report says poverty needed to be reduced. UN sees poverty as a result of environmental degradation. Hence, environmental degradation will be reduced when poverty is reduced. To reduce poverty, the countries in periphery need to have economic growth. To achieve it, there need to free markets. To ensure free market, developed countries have to transfer to the underdeveloped countries knowledge, capital and technology.
Which actually means that businesses in the core will continue accumulating capital selling expertise, resources and technologies to countries in the periphery. This is not a new, this idea it existed. It is hard to find any real differences between old plain development and so called new sustainable development. In other words, sustainable development echoes suspiciously like old plain development.
Sustainable development promotes trade liberalization at the same time it advocates environmental sustainability. But mainstream economists do not think free market will promote environmental sustainability. (Daly, 1993)
Actually in political sense sustainable development advocates for the neo-liberal idea of Milton Friedman. Which gives opportunity to western world selling expertise, technology and capital to the countries of the periphery. But unfortunately free market economy doesn’t even promote economic growth let alone environmental sustainability as the data show.
Latin America’s GDP growth was 3.1% during the state led growth period (1945 to 1980) but only 1.6% during the neoliberal period for which data available (1990 to 2000) (Dussel, 2003). The idea that economic growth and poverty reduction will be achieved by free trade and once poverty is reduced environmental degradation will be reduced automatically doesn’t work in practical.
Some economists criticize sustainable development. To them this idea serve the purpose of business communities. Sustainable development advocates for deregulation of business and oppose any state intervention.
Brundtland commission’s report provides much more importance on different non-governmental organizations, institutions and civil society as well as business community for achieving sustainable development goals in developing countries. It encourages seminar, symposium and training sessions in the country of periphery on SDG. To them lack of training is one of the major problem in the peripheral countries, and providing training is a process to empower indigenous people and their community. But then they making people and community so called ‘empower’ often ignore indigenous culture and tradition.
Sustainable Development puts so much importance on modern technology and recommends to change existing technology in the countries of periphery. According to Sustainable Development Goals ‘Environmentally Sound’ technology is essential for development. It emphasizes on technological transfer between Centre and Periphery. But it often skips different complexities regarding technology transfer.
Proprietary technology is available through commercial channels, and international business is an important vehicle for technology transfer. (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, 1992).
The confidence in ‘Technology transfer’ disregards the fact that in the international political economy, ‘Environmentally sound’ technology is very expensive, and most countries of the periphery will have to export more natural resources, thereby creating more environmental destruction, to be able to buy this so called ‘Environmentally sound’ technology. If the countries of periphery have to create more pressure on environment to buy this so called ‘Environmental sound’ technology then how it helping to reduce environmental degradation. If the first world (countries of the center) would provide this technology to peripheral countries free, it could probably reduce environmental degradation. Different organizations, environmentalists and economists argue that countries of periphery don’t need to create more pressure on environment as World Bank, IMF and different international organizations providing loan in this issue. But they often don’t pay any attention on the complexities of loan and the prescription World Bank or IMF provides with loan. Radical Marxist economists believe that loan provided by different organizations don’t empower third world rather it creates a cycle of poverty which is more dangerous than environmental degradation.
Furthermore, the commission does not recognize that communities in the periphery may have ‘environmentally sound’ technologies. And those technologies are more compatible in the countries of periphery than the capitalist modernization that the report promotes.
We see, sustainable development approach doesn’t recognize that people of peripheral country or indigenous communities may have the power to make development sustainable. The Acceptance of neo-liberal agenda as fundamental tool is a one of the main weaknesses of sustainable development programme as I mentioned before.  

Post Structural and Marxist view on Sustainable Development:
Defining development from western perspectives is a problem. Most of the cases development programmes and policies don’t meet the desired destination because development agencies do not take into account the characteristics of indigenous people and communities in development process. They say the countries in periphery have to have different institutions like west for development. As if it’s a Prerequisite for development.
‘Development projects that do not take into account the historical development of communities they are supposed to develop end up destroying their culture and identity’. Escober said it criticizing sustain development.
Post-structuralist idea criticizes this view. According to post structuralist idea it is essential to consider indigenous culture in development process. They emphasis to make a hybrid culture by assimilating western and local culture. Most importantly post structuralism recognizes that local culture may have the power to sustain development what conventional idea of development rejects.

A professor from India who lives in United States and wants to develop his village said to a reporter from The New York Times, the problem is “how to bring country’s (India) thousands of thousands villages ….. Into the 21th century”- as if the 21th century has not reached Indian villages yet. (Waldman, 2003)
A country like India or Bangladesh where people still struggle to reconcile their basic needs like food, shelter, education, here western development model won’t success. UNCSO, UNDP, World Bank and other organizations underestimate the local characteristics and culture in their development policy that’s why development progremmes often fail to attain its goal. Post-structuralist economists suggest to incorporate indigenous culture in development policy and process.
Accumulation of capital is the most important feature of the capitalist system. Capitalism always wants to expand profit. On the other hand sustainable development emphasis on environmental sustainability. For Marxist economists it is impossible to achieve sustainability and economic growth at the same time.
Marx theorized that capitalism brings about environmental destruction is by creating a metabolic rift in the relations between humans and nature. With the introduction of trade to distant places and the concentration of population in cities, capital moves energy and matter from one place to another, taking them away from the places they had evolved, sending them to other places, and creating this metabolic rift. (Foster, 2000)
For Marxists, human interaction in a capitalist economy is motivated by the profit motive, which is an accepted social goal that legitimizes the exploitation of nature and labor. This profit motive drives science and technology as well, and this is why environmental Marxists, even though they do not take a negative stance toward science and technology, and are aware of their limitations. Science and technology are produced in a capitalist society and their results and applications do not represent a value neutral effort by scientists to improve humanity.
Marxist economists don’t believe that environment friendly development is possible in capitalist society. To them sustainable development is basically economic growth and a capitalist term, which was originated to maximize profit for the business community and to oppress the people in third world.
Sustainable development and Bangladesh:
The National Sustainable Development Strategy (NSDS) of Bangladesh has been prepared to meet the tremendous environmental challenges that Bangladesh faces in the way to development. The challenges arise when the country’s development efforts and made without proper recognition of consequential environmental impacts which lead to degraded agro-ecosystem, rivers and wetlands, coastal and urban environment, degradation and depletion of ground water and desertification in different parts of the country. (Bangladesh planning commission, 2013)
Equally and perhaps more important are the challenges arising from global climate change induced by the production and consumption patterns of other countries especially the developed and fast growing developing countries that exert multiple impacts on our development. Apart from the domestic exigencies, The National Sustainable Development Strategy fulfils Bangladesh’s commitment to the international community to formulate and implement a sustainable development strategy addressing environmental issues.
Conclusion:
Sustainable development is still largely defined within the mainstream paradigm of development, which gives primacy to the market in allocating resources and theoretically takes account of the environment only as a subsidiary concern when pursuing its main object of promoting economic growth. One of the main weaknesses of sustainable development is it defines development from Neo-liberal approach assuming that third world have to have different organizations like west for development and sustainable development often doesn’t take into indigenous characteristics of third world in development process.
Marxist and Post-Structuralist approach criticize this view. And suggest some idea to make development sustainable. With some criticism sustainable development has become the main development idea in 21th century. We hope sustainable development will reduce environmental degradation and make our lovely world greener, where we’ll able to live in peace.

References

Bangladesh planning commission. (2013). Retrieved November 8, 2016, from www.plancomm.gov.bd: http://www.plancomm.gov.bd/national-sustainable-development-strategy/
Castro, C. J. (2004). Sustainable development: mainstream and critical perspectives.
Daly, H. E. (1993). The obstacle of sstainable development. Boston: Beacon.
Dussel, E. P. (2003). The dictatorsdip of macroeconomy in latin america. moscow: progress publication.
Foster, J. B. (2000). Mark's ecology: Mainsteam and nature. New York : Monthly review press.
Norgaard, R. (1994). development betrayed: the end of progress and a coevolutionary revisioning of the future. london: routledge kegan paul .
Pearce, D., & Warford, J. (1993). World without end: Economics, environment and sustainable development. New york: Oxford university press.
Sustainable development. (n.d.). Retrieved November 5, 2016, from wikipedia.org: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_development
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. (1992).
Waldman, A. (2003, august 17). Professor teaches change in his Indian village. The new york times.

খান, . . (২০০০) পরার্থপরতার অর্থনীতি ঢাকা: দি ইউনিভসিটি প্রেস লিমিটেড

No comments:

Post a Comment