Download this free resource from One Future Collective for 16 days of Activism

Earth Up! : Questioning Sustainability and Sustainable Development

In the 1960s, many issues regarding the consequences of Industrialization in India were raised. Issues like pollution, climate change, resource limitations, biodiversity loss, water stress, effect on Human Heath, role…

Written by

OFC

Published on

January 1, 1970
BlogMiscellaneous

In the 1960s, many issues regarding the consequences of Industrialization in India were raised. Issues like pollution, climate change, resource limitations, biodiversity loss, water stress, effect on Human Heath, role of markets in the Indian system and alternative solutions raised a hue and cry. Where were all the resources going even though we were still ‘underdeveloped’? Why were (and still are) we degrading environmentally at such a fast rate? Moreover, why is no one concerned about this? If we stop growing, what will happen next? ‘The Sustainable Society’ explored the issue of how to reconcile limits to growth with concern for social justice. The book concluded that less growth would make equality more difficult. (Dresner, 2008, pp.32). Therefore, to strike a balance between resource consumption for development WITHOUT harming the environment was an important concept which needed serious attention. Neglect of either one of these would lead to negative consequences.

The first notion we need to accept is that Environmental Protection and Economic Growth ARE compatible. The agenda of exploiting energy to get rich quickly as well as develop faster and then fix the problem we have ourselves caused in the first place is not a solution. Is it possible to run a world with four billion cars, with China alone having 700 million cars and India with 600 million cars? How do we acquire all the resources to run such commodities of mass production and consumption? In the idea of ‘sustainable development’, there are a lot of factors which contribute to develop a sustainable society such as political upheaval and mobility; efficiency of technologies; concentration of resources and integration of environmental, economic, social, qualitative models. Sustainable development was defined as ‘the integration of conservation and development to ensure that modifications to the planet do indeed secure the survival and well-being of all people’. Development was defined as ‘the modification of the biosphere and the application of human, financial, living and non-living resources to satisfy human needs and improve the quality of human life’. (Dresner, 2008, pp.33). Through equal distribution and wise utilization of resources, we can develop progressively. The Bruntland report answered many questions on the theory of Sustainable Development and what a positive impact it would make upon practice. The report stressed on equitable distribution of resources amongst all, which would help in balancing consumption and developing.

The arguments made were very justifiable in the context of the larger picture in this concept. Environmental exploitation and degradation, although affecting regions in different ways, is impacting the Earth as a whole. The developed countries like USA and Russia have already consumed a very large portion of global resources and other emerging countries are bearing the brunt of this inequitable consumption. The text has provided ample examples to prove ‘material wealth’, ‘greed’ and ‘hunger for quick growth’ leading to harmful environmental impacts. (Dresner, 2008, pp.76-80).

However, there were many loopholes and questions that remained unanswered. The terms ‘Sustainability’ and ‘Sustainable Development’ were unclear in definition and there was a doubtful point about whether they were the same thing. The definition of sustainable development given by the Brundtland Commission, ‘development which meets the needs of the present without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet their needs’, is often criticized as something vague or, in the language of experts, non-operationalizable. (Dresner, 2008, pp.70). Is this method really being applied and if it is, how is it helping our natural resource base. The notion of limits and finitudes is still something which no one wants to hear and accept. The question of mobilizing this politically also arises. Is it fair for the developing nations to utilize these resources without any conservation practices or heed for the environmental harm caused in the name of development. I also think that the text could have covered the impact of poverty and population explosion in pollution more explicitly, and how sustainable development plays a role in this.

A sustainable model can succeed in India and many other developing/underderveloped countries only when we strive to make ourselves an equitable society. Also, how our focus should not only be financial prosperity and content, but also a healthy, aware and well-sustained society as a whole.

References

1. Dresner, Simon. 2008. The Principles of Sustainability (2nd edition). Chapters 3 and 5. pp. 31-40, 69-80.

2. Guha,Ramachandra.2010.HowMuchShouldaPersonConsume?.Chapter9.pp. 306-322.

page2image5787552