TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
(Dr.Suniti Nagpurkar)
The two buzz words of the new millennium lexicon
are Globalization and sustainable development.
Both generate a great amount of passionate public
debate and people almost instantaneously form
themselves in two groups one rallying behind
it and pushing it further while the other is
skeptical about it. But their similarity does
not end here. It is much more deep rooted in
that both of them share same genesis. The industrial
Revolution in Europe first saw the beginning
of air pollution which gradually became a major
global problem summarily referred to as environmental
degradation and it is this very industrial Revolution
which in a way eventually was responsible for
globalization of nation states.
THE GENESIS OF THE CONCEPT
:
The world has come a long way
indeed from the early Industrial Revolution.
With changing scenario our concerns and commitments
also have changed. In the initial stages we
were concerned with economic growth or prosperity
which was mainly the indicator of the national
wealth a country was producing year after year.
It was thus a narrowly defined 'income' or 'wealth
and prosperity' based view and its only parameter
was country's real income, i.e. Gross Domestic
Product (GDP). It, however, did not take much
long to realize that it is not the country's
wealth alone but the welfare of its people that
is most important. Economic growth must become
inclusive, every person, a common man at large,
should be its stakeholder. He should enjoy the
betterment of his living standard. It is not
wealth generation alone but wealth distribution
that is important. We thus moved ahead from
'growth' to 'growth plus equity' That was the
concept of economic development, whereby social
justice, equality of opportunity and access
for all the people in country's prosperity were
the major concern. Today we have moved even
beyond this. Equity as was conventionally understood
was a static concept. It took into consideration
the equality of opportunity to people at a given
point of time. But what about equality of opportunity
over a period of time ? What if using the opportunity
to improve the standard of living today reduces
or destroys similar opportunities for generations
to come? Are we using up the resources over
which they also have their rightful claims?
In other words we need to look at the problem
of equity not only among people at a given point
of time, but among people across different generations
over a period of time. That precisely is the
concept of sustainability of (present) development
or sustainable development.
However, sustainable development
has a broad appeal but little specifics. So
let us first have a look at what it incorporates.
Definitions of sustainability
and sustainable development
Webster's New International
Dictionary Meaning :
"Sustain - to cause to continue
(as in existence or a certain state, or in force
or intensity); to keep up, especially WITHOUT
INTERRUPTION DIMINUTION, flagging, etc.;
to prolong."
The start of the debate about
the environment and the Economy is usually attributed
to Rachel Carron and her book Silent Spring
Published in 1962, while the decade that followed
did carry the debate further the most enfluential
environmental publication was the Club of Rome
report entitled The Limits to Growth.
Since 1970s various International
initiatives are being taken and International
platform has been developed to discuss, deliberate
and decide about environmental concerns like
the Save Earth Conference at Burtland in 70s,
the Kyoto protocol of 2000 etc. So a quick look
at various definitions that represent different
dimensions of the problem.
Caring for the Earth View
"Improving the quality of
human life while LIVING WITHIN THE CARRYING
CAPACITY of supporting ecosystems."
Sustainable Seattle View
Sustainability is the "long
- term, cultural, economic and environmental
health and vitality" with emphasis on long
- term, "together with the importance of
linking our social, financial, and environmental
well - being"
Friends of the Earth Scotland
view :
"Sustainability e-compasses
the simple principle of taking from the earth
only what it can provide indefinitely, THUS
LEAVING FUTURE GENERATION NO LESS THAN WE HAVE
ACCESS TO OURSELVES."
It is clear from above definitions that the
concern for sustainable development is essentially
constrained by :
-
What the nature/earth has to offer (Carrying
Capacity)
-
What we can take from it while not undermining
the future generations.
-
Improvements of standard of living for
present generation within the above constraints.
Carrying Capacity : What nature
has to offer
In ecological terms, the carrying
capacity of an ecosystem is the size of the
population that can be supported indefinitely
upon the available resources and services of
that ecosystem. Living within the limits of
an ecosystems depends on three factors:
-
the amount of resources available in the
ecosystem,
-
the size of the population, and
-
the amount of resources each individual
is consuming.
A simple example of carrying is
the number of people who could survive in a
lifeboat after a shipwreck. Their survival depends
on how much food and water they have, how much
each person eats and drinks each day, and how
many days they are afloat. If the lifeboat made
it to an island, how long the people survived
would depend upon the food and water supply
on the island and how wisely they used it. A
small desert island will support far fewer people
than a large continent with abundant water and
good soil for growing crops.
In this example, food and water
are the natural capital of the island. LIVING
WITHIN THE CARRYING CAPACITY MEANS USING THOSE
SUPPLIES NO FASTER THAN THEY ARE REPLENISHED
BY THE ISLAND'S ENVIRONMENT: USING THE 'INTEREST'
INCOME OF THE NATURAL CAPITAL. A COMMUNITY THAT
IS LIVING OFF THE INTEREST OF ITS COMMUNITY
CAPITAL IS LIVING WITHIN THE CARRYING CAPACITY.
A COMMUNITY THAT IS DEGRADING OR DESTROYING
THE ECOSYSTEM ON WHICH IT DEPENDS IS USING UP
ITS COMMUNITY CAPITAL IS LIVING UNSUSTAINABILITY.
It is worthwhile to remember at
this juncture what Mahatma Gandhiji has said
once; "Nature has enough to satisfy every,
persons needs but not any persons greed".
Equally important to community
sustainability is living within the carrying
capacity of the community's human, social and
built capital. Carrying capacity is much harder
to measure for these types of capital, but the
basic concept is the same - are the different
types of capital being used up faster than they
are being replenished ? For example :
-
A community that allows its children to
be poorly educated, undernourished, and poorly housed
is eroding its human capital.
-
A community that allows the quality of
its social interactions to decline through lack of trust,
respect, and tolerance is eroding its social capital.
-
A community that allows its buildings,
roads, parks, power facilities, water facilities, and
waste processing capability to decay is eroding its built
capital. Additionally, a community that is creating built
capital without considering the future maintenance of
that capital is setting itself up for eventual decay.
The Industrial Revolution which
for the first time made man aware of the tremendous
potential of technology and gave him a control
over technology and through it, control over
natural resources, resulted in unprecedented
prosperity at-least in some part of the world.
So long as one part of the world was using the
resources of the other part of the world and
controlled that world, it was as if the development
can become unending process. However, this view
came under heavy skepticism and criticism when
two things started happening
-
When this other part of the world started
asserting itself, developed its own aspirations and expectations
from life this hegemony of one world over other met with
resistance
-
Secondly the amount of pollution that
was being generated as unintended by product of economic
productive activity started getting disproportionately
bigger. Serious doubts came to be expressed as to whether
the present pattern of development can go on forever.
Further as population started increasing the concern became
much more severe and urgent. The size of population determine
the carrying capacity given the natural resources. The
following table indicates the population dynamics of the
world. Indicating the diminishing time world has taken
to add its next One Billion population each time.
Time taken to add 1 billion population
| 1st billion population |
2 million years |
| 2nd billion population |
130 years |
| 3rd billion population |
30 years |
| 4th billion population |
15 years |
| 5th billion population |
12 years |
Thus, the massive population size and its mind boggling speed
of growth has created serious concerns as to how and whether
the earth's resources will be enough to ensure the sustainance
to this growing population. Given the rate at which the natural
resources are being depleted, are we undermining the chances
of future generations to the standard of living we have achieved
for us today. Hence the problem of sustainable development.
To put it differently sustainable development is the ability
to make development choice which respect the relationship
between the three "Es" - economy ecology and equality.
For this the three "es" should be viewed from a
certain angle . For instance,
-
Economy - Economic activity should serve
common good, be
self renewing and SHOULD build local assets AND
SELF RELIANCE.
-
Ecology - It should involve the realization
that humans are part of nature , nature has limits and
COMMUNITIES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING AND BUILDING
NATURAL ASSETS.
-
Equity - The opportunity for all for full
participation in all activities, benefits and decision
making of a society at a given point of time as well as
protecting the rightful claims of future generations.
If these ingredients are incorporated in the national goals
of all countries then it should be possible to develop sustainable
society. Such a society would be characterized by an emphasis
on preserving the environment, developing strong peaceful
relationships between people and nations and an emphasis on
equitable distribution of wealth.
In a conventional approach however these three essential
ingredients are treated separately . It is as if the community
were made of three separate parts - economic , environmental
and social - that do not overlap and are totally disconnected
as shown below.
That is why when we refer to community's progress
we make reference to growth rate, number of jobs created,
health centers opened etc. Thus the Economic Development Council
or bodies like that try to create more jobs, while NGOs and
other centers address the social needs and environmental agencies
try to prevent and correct pollution Treating these different
Components in the society in disconnected way results in the
piecemeal approach. Is it not ironical that very often the
conflict is presented on the lines 'business v/s environment
?' very often
it presents dilemma like 'if the environmentalist win the
economy suffers' or 'if business has its way the environment
will be destroyed'. What we fail to realize is that if any
one if them looses, the entire community will eventually loose
. Actually economy - environment linkage is one such area
where we have to have a win - win solution and not win - looser
solution . No body can afford to be a loser, we all are on
one side only, and there are no two sides to this coin of
sustainable community development. There has to be a holistic
solutions and not a piecemeal solution.
Problems Related To Piecemeal Solutions.
- Solution to one problems can make another problem worse.
Creating affordable housing is a good thing, but when that
housing is built in areas a from workplaces, the results
is increased traffic and the pollution then comes with it
.
- They tend to create opposite groups as mentioned above.
- They utions tend to focus on short term benefits without
monitoring long term results.
A holistic approach on the other hand will take note of underlying
mutual linkages and connectivity among economy - environment
and the society.
Actions to improve conditions in a sustainable
development takes these connections into account.
Sustainability requires this type of integrated view of the
world -- it requires multidimensional indicators that show
the links among a community's economy, environment, and society.
For example, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a well-publicized
traditional indicator, measures the amount of money being
spent in a country. It is generally reported as a measure
of the country's economic well-being: the more money being
spent, the higher the GDP and the better the overall economic
well-being is assumed to be. However, because GDP reflects
only the amount of economic activity, regardless of the effect
of that activity on the community's social and environmental
health, GDP can go up when overall community health goes down.
For example, when there is a ten-car pileup on the highway,
the GDP goes up because of the money spent on medical
money spent on medical fees and repair costs. On the other
hand, if ten people decide not to buy cars and instead walk
to work, their health and wealth may increase but the GDP
goes down.
In contrast, a comparable sustainability indicator is the
INDEX OF SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC WELFARE (ISEW). In order
to get a more complete picture of what is economic progress,
the ISEW subtracts from the GDP corrections for harmful bases
or consequences of economic activity and adds to the GDP corrections
for significant activities such as unpaid domestic labor.
For instance, the ISEW accounts for air pollution by estimating
the cost of damage per ton of five key air pollutants. It
accounts for depletion of resources by estimating the cost
to replace a barrel of oil equivalent with the same amount
of energy from a renewable source. It estimates the cost of
climate change due to greenhouse gas emissions per ton of
emissions. The cost of ozone depletion is also calculated
per ton of ozone depleting substance produced. Additionally,
adjustments are made to reflect concern about unequal income
distribution. The correction for unpaid domestic labor is
based on the average domestic pay rate. Some health expenses
are considered as not contributing to welfare, as well as
some education expenses.
Like the GDP, the ISEW bundles together in one index tremendous
amounts of information, but the key difference is that the
INFORMATION TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE LINKS BETWEEN ENVIRONMENT,
ECONOMY AND SOCIETY.
In addition to IESW other indicators suggested by different
experts include :
Green Accounting : This essentially concentrates on
depletion of Environmental Capital. Conventionally the physical
capital so much dominated the thinking, policy as well as
practice that the natural capital and its depreciation was
overlooked. This is corrected through the system of Green
Accounting,
On the basis of Green Accounting another indicator that is
developed is Sustainable Net National Product (SNNP).
SNNP is calculated as :
GNP - (Deffensive Expenditure + Cost of Unmitigated pollution
+Depreciation of Manmade capital + depreciation of Environmental
capital)
Corporate Environment Monitoring :
The corporate units are persuaded by pollution
control boards in different countries to take steps to comply
with the prescribed standards. They are awarded special incentives
if they change over to Green Technology or make efforts to
reduce the amount of pollution they generate year on year
basis. The credit is given in terms of Carbon Points or Carbon
Credits.
Indicators of sustainability are different from traditional
indicators of economic, social, and environmental progress.
Traditional indicators -- such as stockholder profits, asthma
rates, and water quality -- measure changes in one part of
a community as if they were entirely independent of the other
parts. Sustainability indicators reflect the reality that
the three different segments are very tightly interconnected.
Indicators of sustainable community are useful to different
communities for different reasons. For a healthy, vibrant
community, indicators help monitor that health so that negative
trends are caught and dealt with before they become a problem.
For communities with economic, social, or environmental problems,
indicators can point the way to a better future. For all communities,
indicators can generate discussion among people with different
backgrounds and viewpoints, and, in the process, help CREATE
A SHARED VISION OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY SHOULD BE.
How do we go about developing the policies and systems based
on this realization?
First and foremost, we all must realize that environment
protection is not a charity. It cannot be done through philanthrophy
alone. It has to be achieved through participation and empowerment.
Secondly not only is environment protection not charity,
but also a business and must be treated like one. Business
is about optimization choices, so are the choices relating
sustainable development. Environment is just like any other
business and therefore should be dealt with like any other
business applying business principles.
Basis of any business is exchange and the purpose of any
business is to
Maximize the outcome of business. This happens when both the
parties
involved in the exchange achieve what is the best 'possible'
outcome in their
own . When everybody achieves ones own best available /possible
outcome in
their own context the collective outcome is maximized. Further
for the exchange
to take place the offers must match e.g. the price of a commodity
and the
expected utility of that commodity. Thus exchange involves
valuation of things to
be exchanged. And it is in this area that the policies involving
sustainable
development hit the rock.
Externality Aspect and Valuation of Natural Resources :
How to value natural resources and natural Capital? For
instance what is the value of the log of wood you buy as raw
material for making a table out of it? Is it the cost of cutting
and transporting the log of wood from the forest or should
it also consider the time and money it will take to replace
that tree - depreciation value ? If it takes 30 years for
the tree to grow to become wood meant for table making, we
have to incorporate the time value used up in using the log
of wood currently available. Further some of the natural capital
like fossil fuel has taken the mother earth lakhs of years
to produce. How do we calculate their time value ? We may
treat them as non - reproducible natural capital. This capital
infinite in size. To overcome the problems like this we have
to go back to the concept of carrying capacity. We have to
work out the demographic trends to estimate the time it will
take for the world population to stabilize. This is possible
given the population dynamics, and estimate the resources
required for that size of population and match it against
the finite natural capital to arrive at the rate of use of
natural capital that is sustainable. The whole exercise sounds
stupendous but it is possible and experts have already started
working towards it.
Again if felling of trees affects rain cycle in the region
and thereby affects the farmers yields adversely should not
that be the cost to some members of society and should not
that be incorporated ? This precisely is the problem of externality
in economics. An Externality arises when the market outcome
affects parties other than the buyers and sellers in the market.
It is the side effect or incidental unintended outcome of
market exchange. It arises when a person engages in an activity
that influences the well being of a by-stander and yet neither
pays nor receives any compensation. When the impact on the
by-stands is adverse, the externality is called a negative
externality and when the impact is beneficial, the externality
is called a positive externality. So how do we calculate the
cost of using natural Capital.
Some Tools to assess the impact : Efforts are being
made to assess the
impact of economy on environment by developing various tools.
Some of them
concentrate on the rate of use of earth's reproducible resources
in different parts
of the world to maintain their current standard of living.
One such tool is
ecological foot print.
Ecological foot print : Ecological Foot Print is
defined as the hectors of land
required to sustain the present consumption levels considering
the reproducible
natural resources incorporated in it some rough estimates
indicate that if the
developed Countries want to maintain their present rate of
resource consumption
we would need 10 to 12 earths to sustain it ! That essentially
indicates that the
world is moving at rate faster than the one than can be sustained
in the long run.
What is the way out ?
Sustainable Development and Civil Society
As was suggested we must treat environmental issues by making
them a part of larger economic issues and develop a holistic
approach. One broad mechanism is suggested below.
Conclusion :
If viewed positively great hopes are yielded due to the recent
advancements in technologies and newer researches. The use
and varied application of solar energy gives us a new hope
as a substitute for fuel problem. The constant research pertaining
to Green Technology and Chemistry, Bio-Technology and NanoTechnology
now offers us a series of solutions to overcome the serious
problem of deplition of natural resources and environmental
degradation. The problem of sustainable development thus need
not be very untractable. We have various solutions looming
on the horizon. In order to rebenefits and to ease our journey
towards sustainable development all we need is an integrated
approach a holy stick framework which can regulates the effects
of all the components in properly well connected roles. From
where we are now we need to take the above outlined approach
while marking towards sustainable developments.
Back
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
 |
