Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Sustainable development was famously defined in the 1987 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (The Brundtland Report) as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Long accepted as a guiding notion aimed at reconciling developmental and environmental concerns, the concept has been criticized as being based on the anthropocentric notion of nature as a resource requiring expert human management. Others point out that this is too closely linked with notions of capital-intensive economic development to be of any use in the formulation of an alternative environmental vision that can restore the balance in human interaction with the ecosphere. Proponents and detractors of the concept agree that it is a vague notion that can be interpreted in divergent ways, depending on whether the emphasis is placed on development or on resource sustainability, on economic development only, or on broader notions of human development. Despite the appropriateness of these and other criticisms, there is no evidence that the concept is soon to lose its privileged position in the national and international politics of development and the environment.

Development refers to the process of increasing people's welfare. The welfare of a group ultimately depends on the extent and quality of stock of all natural and human assets in their economy—commonly referred to as wealth. The notion of sustainable development reminds us that current changes in wealth must have consequences for welfare in the future of both the current generation and generations to come. Attempts to increase people's welfare must therefore be accompanied by genuine savings in wealth: the offsetting of resource depletion and environmental degradation, limiting exhaustible resource exports, protecting critical natural capital, and maintaining and increasing investment in human resources.

Intergenerational and Global Inequality

Sustainable development's biggest contribution is to broaden the scope of ethical thinking to include future generations among those to whom we owe obligations. It also holds important consequences for the practices of national accounting and for issues of global governance. Appreciation of the importance of genuine savings implies that we have to look anew at national accounts and indicators of development. Analysts have long agreed that national production and income figures provide little evidence of the fundamentals of development, as they indicate only how successfully the current generation is exploiting resources. With its measure of human development the United Nations (UN) Development Programme and its annual Human Development Reports have attempted to introduce a broader and intergenerational measure of development by combining data about education and health with national production/income figures. However, the literature on sustainable development prescribes that we also consider how countries manage their natural and human resources with an eye to the future. Income ratios between the rich and poor have converged in recent decades (according to some measures and in some parts of the world) and infant mortality is declining across the majority of countries. There is also a perceptible narrowing of average human development index scores over time in the cross-sectional data. Some analysts take this as indicative of a narrowing of inequality between countries (which is only one but a very important dimension of the phenomenon of global inequality). However, when we measure in what shape the production processes and social policies of the industrial era have left the human and natural resource base of many parts of the world, it is clear that a devastating global divide is widening between those parts of the world where genuine savings have kept pace with population growth and those where fertility increasingly outstrips genuine savings. The evolution of this genuine savings divide is a tale of the misuse of power and the generation of privilege and of marginalization, and it places humankind before one of its most daunting policy and moral challenges: how to reduce global poverty and inequality now without exacerbating both in the future. Unfortunately, the international politics of sustainable development makes it unlikely that we will be able to meet that challenge anytime soon.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading