Sustainable development
There was once a time that the world could comfortably sustain life comfortably without the worry that there would come a time when the needs of human beings and all livings needs outweighed the resources that nature provided to satisfy them. It was a time where all life only took what they needed for sustenance thus ensuring that raw materials were in abundance. However, with great technological advancement and tremendous population growth, the issue on sustainability has received a lot of attention due to the worry that we are consuming resources available to us at an alarming rate. The field of industrialization for instance plays a significant role on consuming basic natural resources that could threaten sustainability in the future. In most cases, developing countries that are not yet industrialized have little control over the type of developments that are introduced into their states despite the impact they will have on sustainability. The ideas are often shared and implemented by western countries whose ideas are seen as the best approach towards development. Although their ideologies may be beneficial to these countries, there is a down side where the capitalist approach they use ends up curtailing democracy in most, if not all, democratic processes involved. If a positive change is to be achieved on the topic of sustainability and development, there is need to abandon the capitalist approach for a more democratic one.
Although the number of definitions used to define sustainability is a lot, the most common is that sustainability is being able to continue with a behavior that has already been defined without stopping or indefinitely (Kates & Parris, 2003). Even though a lot of ambiguities have come up in the attempt to define what sustainability is, a lot of effort has been put into place to help identify sustainable development through quantitative indicators. Despite all the efforts, there are no sets of indicators that have been recognized or used universally. This is especially because of factors like the ambiguous nature of sustainable development, how to measure it and the intended purpose behind measuring and characterizing it (Kates & Parris, 2003)
The ambiguity involved in defining sustainable development has resulted to differences in opinion on how to go around the issue. One approach is through the identification of the relationship that exists between the quality of the environment and the socioeconomic inequality (Millington & Williams, 2004). When attempting to tackle the issue on sustainable development, there is often a mismatch when it comes to what is needed from the earth and what it can provide. In the case of people aware of this difference ratio in supply and demand, the approach to sustainable development often involves reducing what is demanded from the earth and increasing substitute resources so as to ensure that the gap that exists between demand and supply is reduced. Sustainable development will therefore involve conjoining the demand that arise from the finite and infinite aspects of life to ensure that they do not end up consuming more than the earth can provide (Millington & Williams, 2004).
In an attempt to resolve the ambiguity, two approaches have been used to try and resolve the issue of sustainable development. Two schools of thought have brought about the two approaches of weaker and stronger sustainable development (Millington & Williams, 2004). According to the weaker sustainable developments view, nature is simply a resource and human beings have the right to dominate it. Therefore, there is no need to alter how we relate to or use nature nor should we change what we view as economic development because economic growth is a good indicator of progress within society (Millington & Williams, 2004). The weaker view is therefore based on three notions; that human beings and nature are two separate entities; that people have the right to exercise dominance over nature; and that nature is a resource meant to be used for the purpose of benefiting human beings and society at large.
According to the weaker sustainable development view, the only source of value in the world is human beings and nature is only a raw material that should be utilized to help human beings serve their purpose and meet their needs (Millington & Williams, 2004). Rather than addressing issues that the dominant attitudes that it holds towards nature, this view mostly focuses on how to understand and control nature so as to ensure that it continues to be beneficial to human beings. It is often assumed that human beings will be able to use technological developments for the purpose of solving any environmental problems that may arise now or in the future (Millington & Williams, 2004). As a result, it proposes that there is no need to change the demand that people create in the quest for economic development. Any problems that may arise will be dealt with through the use of the technology invented thanks to the great economic development achieved.
The stronger sustainability development view that the world is finite and in order for it to be able to remain habitable, there must be a balance between the demands that it is required to supply (Millington & Williams, 2004). Human beings must therefore change the attitude they have towards nature and its sustenance even in the pursuit of economic development. This view strives to protect nature and its resources not only because of the repercussions this will have on people but also because nature has its own biotic rights. According to this view, nature, and earth in general, has the right not to be molested and this right is similar to other basic human rights that people possess that do not need any form of justification to validate them. People must therefore abandon the anthropocentric view that they have of the world that considers human beings to be the only source of value and that nature is therefore their raw material intended only to meet their needs at whatever cost (Millington & Williams, 2004). Such notions should be abandoned and replaced with a more biocentric egalitarianism view which suggests that all species are equal and that non human things also need rights to protect them from being abused, misused or exploited for the purpose of establishing sustainable development.
Beliefs and ideologies spread by westerners have played a big role in creating controversy over what needs to be done so as to achieve sustainable development. Most ideologies are spread by capitalists who use corporate models that end up suspending the democratic rights and freedoms of processes used in different nations across the world (Newell, 2015). In order to resolve the issue on development and sustainability, people need to abandon the capitalist ideologies used and adopt more democratic approaches. Throughout history, capitalism has led to class polarization where people in different classes become divided and those in the upper classes often remain there at the expense of the people in lower levels of the hierarchy. When such hierarchies are extended from individuals to nations, western countries start viewing the working class community of countries that are developing as an ideal place to deposit their environmental and social hazards resulting from their industrial activities. Such actions are made possible by the presence of third world views on the side of developing countries who willingly accept any form of development regardless of the impact it may have on their natural resources (Newell, 2015). There are also fewer regulations regarding conservation of resources and how best to use them in the pursuit of economic development thus making them more vulnerable to exploitation.
Most aspects of the debate on sustainable development reach the conclusion that achieving it is essential for the well being of the earth and maintaining its hospitability. Though this may be the case, different cultures have different approaches on how to reach a desired sustainable development (Redcliff, 2005). If, for instance a part of society decides that open space and clean air must be present before any development is considered to be sustainable, it will be impossible to join this belief with another part of society who value technological development even at the cost of causing air pollution (Redcliff, 2005)
. To maneuver through such challenges, develop countries promise great development through economic growth to countries that are developing. Instead of jumping on the opportunity for great development, there is need to pause and think of the repercussions that will arise and whether the development implemented will be sustainable in the long run. I doing so, states will be able to take up ideologies that offer great outcomes but do not alter their positive sustainability development.
References
Agyeman, J., Bullard, R.D. & Evans, B. (Eds.) (2003). Just Sustainabilities: Development in an Unequal World. London: Earthscan. Introduction and Conclusion.
Moran, D.; Wackersnagel, M.; Kitzes, J.; Goldfinger, S.; Boutaud, A. (2008). Measuring Sustainable Development — Nation by Nation, Ecological Economics, 470-
474
Newell, P. (2005). Race, Class, and the Global Politics of Environmental Inequality. Global Environmental Politics, 5(3), 70-94.
Parris, T.M. & Kates R.W. (2003). Characterizing and Measuring Sustainable Development. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28: 559-586
Redclift, M. (2005). Sustainable Development (1987-2005): An Oxymoron Comes of Age. Sustainable Development, 13: 212-227.
Williams, C.C. and Millington, A.C. (2004). The Diverse and Contested Meanings of Sustainable Development. The Geographical Journal
.
