Environmental Sustainability

Practical Global Applications

Fraser Smith

• Publisher: CRC Press
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9780429525346
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Biological Sciences
• Subtopic: Environmental Conservation & Protection
• Index: Biological Sciences

In 1994, representatives from all over the world met in Costa Rica to discuss the impact of ecological economics on developing countries. That groundbreaking conference laid the foundation for this new collection of research on environmental sustainability.
While most discussions on sustainable development focus on the industrialized nations, Environmental Sustainability: Practical Global Applications takes a different angle: it presents the views of the developing countries themselves on issues such as wildlife resources in Nambia, timber production in Costa Rica, property rights and land reform in South Africa, and other steps being taken to implement environmentally sustainable economies around the world.
This is an ideal text for students of natural and social sciences, development professionals and entrepreneurs seeking opportunities for ecologically sustainable businesses. Academics will find it useful as a source of current research and for making new contacts in the field. For anyone interested in exploring the link between man and his environment-specifically, the relationship between economics and ecology- Environmental Sustainability, is a must.

A Synthetic Framework and a Heuristic for Integrating Multiple Perspectives on Sustainability

1

Fraser Smith*

Datafusion, Inc., San Francisco, California

Abstract

Because the challenge of sustainability is heterogeneous in time and space, it will require heterogeneous solutions. This introductory chapter draws together the findings of the other chapters in the present volume to draft a synthetic framework to guide this heterogeneous challenge. The inspiration for this approach comes from the synthetic theory of biological evolution, which emerged from two divergent evolutionary disciplines in the 1930s and 1940s.

The framework integrates the heterogeneous “Southern” perspectives presented in subsequent chapters with the predominating “Northern” perspective characterized here. The Southern views contain a number of common themes, elaborated in this chapter, which differ substantially from the Northern perspective. The present chapter makes a critical analysis of both sets of views and integrates them for a more complete vision, establishing broad criteria for sustainability and enumerating a suite of metrics. Under the framework, different criteria and different metrics will apply in different circumstances. As an illustrative example, the framework is applied to the problem of harvesting fish for ecological stability and economic return.

One of the recurring themes in this book is the emphasis on economic growth as a prerequisite of sustainability in developing countries. Using a simple heuristic to model economic activity in relation to resource throughput, population, and technology, it is shown that sustainability would allow economic growth as long as certain conditions were satisfied concerning technology; in fact, certain technologies may be beneficial for sustainability. It is intended that the use of heuristics, such as the one presented here, may, within a synthetic framework for sustainability, help to identify the important drivers for formulating integrated, heterogeneous solutions to the problem.

Dominion of the world from end to end

Is worth less than a drip of blood upon the earth.

Saadi of Shiraz

Introduction

In the last few years, much has been written about the concept of “sustainable development,” to the point where whole books are devoted to defining it (e.g., van den Bergh and van der Straaten, 1994; Reid, 1995). The term is, in fact, so vague that it has been used not only by advocates of precaution to refer to the environmental sustainability of economic activity but also by advocates of growth to refer to the sustainability of economic expansion—two concepts that appear at first glance to be diametrically opposed. In 1987, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) attempted to provide a definition of environmentally sustainable development which has, almost ten years hence, passed into common parlance: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the current generation without compromising the needs of future generations” (WCED, 1987). Unfortunately, this definition is conceptually flawed because it is impossible to know what the preferences of future generations will be. Logically, then, precaution would dictate the preservation of the natural environment in its unaltered state, and we thus arrive at the so-called “strong” definition of sustainability, which is economic development that does not compromise environmental integrity.* This form of sustainability is probably the most appropriate long-term policy goal (see Smith, 1996a).

In fact, the strong definition of sustainable development can be justified in a second way, more related to current economic conditions. Contrary to prevailing assumptions, the strong definition need not exclude economic growth, as long as that growth is directed toward conserving environmental integrity. Put another way, the “expansionist” interpretation of sustainable development is essentially containable within the strong definition of sustainability, subject to constraints on exactly what is expanded. This interpretation of sustainability has plenty of empirical evidence to support it, but until now very little such evidence has been presented in one place. Much of it comes from developing countries, where economic growth is less universally regarded as the enemy of environmental integrity than in industrialized countries. The present volume describes practical applications toward sustainability emanating from developing countries, informing the concept in ways that are unfamiliar in the industrialized world. It also presents the philosophical underpinnings of sustainability from a developing country point of view and highlights the differences between this view and the “Northern”* one. Because substantial differences exist between these two points of view, the aim of the present chapter is to use the findings in the rest of the book and elsewhere to begin a synthesis of “Northern” and “Southern” perspectives into a more all-encompassing conception of sustainable development. Of course, if sustainability were achieved, we would probably not be talking about “North” and “South” anyway, but the fact is that pronounced distributional inequities exist between the higher income and lower income countries, as well as significant differences in resource intensity, attitudes toward the environment, and so on. These differences are what motivate the present discussion, but it is hoped that the exercise of an integrated conception of sustainability will eventually eliminate such labels as “North” and “South.” The motivation for the present synthesis is that it might make the operation of international development projects more successful at improving the lives of the people they are supposed to help and that it might address fundamentally why the North has been so slow to become environmentally efficient.

The inspiration for this synthesis comes from evolutionary theory. In the early part of the 20th century, biologists were deeply split over the importance of natural selection as a driving force for evolution. The “naturalists” believed that natural selection was the only important evolutionary force and argued that it did not require a genetic basis. The “geneticists,” by contrast, believed that the only significant force for evolution was genetic mutation: if a mutation had a large enough effect, it would bypass the incremental changes hypothesized by Darwin. In the 1930s and 1940s, a new view emerged that reformulated the theory of natural selection with a strictly genetic basis. Certain other types of evolution were also hypothesized and later supported by empirical evidence (see Mayr, 1982). Known as the “synthetic” theory of evolution, this formulation has persisted largely intact to the present. That the synthetic theory took 20 years to reach maturity and broad scientific acceptance should make it quite clear that the present synthesis is strictly preliminary. The intention here is to focus attention on the important questions in sustainable development in different places, at different times, and under a variety of circumstances—just as the synthetic theory of evolution provides a broad framework for testing and interpreting biological phenomena. The real value of a synthetic conception of sustainability is its ability to shed light on how to make the best use of all available opportunities. Making sustainability operational is really a matter of predicting and measuring it, far more than just defining it (Costanza and Patten, 1995).

In addition to a synthetic framework, this chapter also presents a simple heuristic to explore from basic principles the conditions required for environmentally sustainable economic development. The main insight of the heuristic is in accord with the synthetic framework: sustainable development may encompass a variety of processes, in different places at different times, including some not usually associated with the conservation of environmental integrity. In particular, economic growth may in fact be not only compatible with sustainability but actually beneficial for it, and the main driving force for sustainability relates to the universe of human technologies.

It is hoped that these two complementary results will provide a powerful impetus for identifying the range of opportunities and constraints for sustainable development on a practical basis as well as a conceptual one. It is also hoped that the diversity of theoretical and practical approaches contained herein will make clear the necessity of heterogeneous progress toward sustainability. As Kaufmann and Cleveland (1995) correctly point out, “ecological economists need to graduate to a less aggregated, more interdisciplinary and more sophisticated notion of sustainability.”

The present chapter is organized into five subsequent sections. First, the “Northern” perspective on sustainable development is briefly characterized and its main conceptual and practical deficiencies presented. A few brief points are made about why the Northern perspective has dominated efforts to institute sustainability and why it may be incomplete. Second, the main components of a range of contrasting Southern perspectives are presented, drawing on the work in subsequent chapters. These perspectives are critiqued from two Northern standpoints: one expansionist, one precautionist. These two sections then lead into a third, which synthesizes the foregoing perspectives into a conceptual framework and a set of practical prescriptions that address the problem of sustainable development. Fourth, the heuristic for identifying allowable conditions for sustainability is presented, and its insights are placed within the synthetic formulation. Finally, a set of generalized “signposts” is developed for decision making in a sustainable economy.

Sustainable Development as Envisioned in the North

Martinez-Alier, writing ten years ago, expressed surprise that there are “almost no ecological social movements with roots in the Third World.” In almost the same breath, he expresses puzzlement that “left-wing ecologism has grown…not so much in the Third World as among part of the youth of some of the most over-developed countries” (Martinez-Alier, 1987, pp. 237, 238). The ecological critique of neoclassical economics was already under way in the industrialized countries almost 30 years ago (Boulding, 1966; Daly, 1968; Georgescu-Roegen, 1971), yet only more recently, and especially in the last 10 years, has a strong “ecopopulism” (Martinez-Alier’s term) emerged outside the OECD countries (e.g., Cavalcanti, Chapter 2).

The notion of environmentally sustainable development was promoted in the 1970s most prominently by Herman Daly (1972), who argued that economies should not grow but exist in a dynamically steady state within environmental limits. This is essentially the strong definition of sustainability given previously. To move the debate from the academic to the political arena has, however, required a more politically expedient interpretation of the goal, which is encapsulated in the WCED definition. Many ecological economists maintain that this intergenerational form of sustainability should be treated as really no more than a stepping-stone toward the stricter biophysical form (e.g., Smith, 1996a). However, the fact remains that “sustainable development” as a concept is a product of the North, and this fact prompts two important questions:

1. Why did a similar concept not appear in the South?

2. Is the notion of sustainable development applicable to the South?

Before answering these questions, it is necessary to identify what constitutes sustainable development as seen through Northern eyes. Many of the requirements of sustainability in the Northern vision are replicated in the Southern perspective, as we shall see below, but the emphasis is different. Not all people in the North who believe in sustainable development would necessarily subscribe to the all of following criteria, but by definition they should subscribe to at least one:

1. The intergenerational requirement should be satisfied and, in addition, the more stringent requirement of not breaching biophysical limits should be achieved as soon as possible, regionally, globally, and continuously.

2. The economy should not grow in size, or at most should grow only by a very small amount, over the long term.

3. Discount rates should be abolished in the economy so that a long-term perspective is fostered.

4. Distributional equity should be encouraged, as should a conservationist ethic.

5. Industries and products should be environmentally non-damaging or beneficial, and individuals should choose their professions likewise.

6. Institutional and political changes should be enacted that foster changes in individual attitudes and behaviors toward environmental sustainability.

7. Economic instruments (taxes, quotas, etc.) should be used to regulate economic activity toward the sustainable goal.

Of these criteria, the one that has most pervaded the popular consciousness relates to the environmental soundness of products and the industrial processes that generate them. The label “environmentally friendly” is often financially lucrative for Northern manufacturers, even if a product does not live up to the billing. Conservationist concerns are now widely voiced among the populations of the rich countries, and in some (e.g., the Netherlands), sustainability is beginning to appear in lawmaking. However, most people do not think very much about intergenerational or broader biophysical criteria for sustainability as they relate to everyday life—even though these criteria alone could guide all the others—and attempts by administrations to foster distributional equity have had only limited success, at great fiscal cost. There is no sign of an imminent abolition of discount rates, nor have lawmakers had the courage to alter tax structures so that only environmental “bads” are taxed, and not income or other goods. As for the criterion on economic non-growth, it will be discussed later.

In answer to Martinez-Alier’s question about why a concept of sustainable development did not appear in the South, the answer is probably that this is due to differences in living standards between South and North. Martinez-Alier himself notes in relation to his own “German” political ecologism that “there is some inconsistency about caring for the conservation...