Sustainable development for green environment

  

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR GREEN ENVIRONMENT

Maruf Mahfuz

Department of Textile Engineerimg

World University of Bangladesh

maruf.txt@gmail.com

Cell- 0173867606

1. INTRODUCTION

Sustainable development refers to a mode of human development in which resource use aims to meet human needs while ensuring the sustainability of natural systems and the environment, so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come. The term 'sustainable development' was used by the Brundtland Commission, which coined what has become the most often-quoted definition of sustainable development: "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." [1][2]

Sustainable development ties together concern for the carrying capacity of natural systems with the social challenges faced by humanity. As early as the 1970s, "sustainability" was employed to describe an economy "in equilibrium with basic ecological support systems."[3] Ecologists have pointed to The Limits to Growth,

[4] and presented the alternative of a "steady state economy"[5] in order to address environmental concerns.

The concept of sustainable development has in the past most often been broken out into three constituent parts: environmental sustainability, economic sustainability and sociopolitical sustainability. More recently, it has been suggested that a more consistent analytical breakdown is to distinguish four domains of economic, ecological, political and cultural sustainability. This is consistent with the UCLG move to make 'culture' the fourth domain of sustainability .[6]

Sustainability refers to the maintenance or enhancement of resource’s productivity on a long term basis (Chambers, 1988 quoted in Hasan, 1999). The concept of sustainable development causes considerable confusion, albeit it is very widely used. Although it is important to impose a single definition, the researchers believe that clarity of understanding is important in order to make the concept useable. A clear definition would help to secure sufficient consensus to promote collective action between individuals and agencies operating within a range of policy areas and at different levels of governance. There are various definitions of sustainable development which are used to mean the concept. One of these definitions, a widely used one given by Brantland Commission, which defines sustainable development as, “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (WCED, 1987).” Sustainable development is in some cases is thought of as involving increases in the quality of life which are equitable. But the problems of sustainability in the developing countries can be held responsible for poverty and issues related to it. Poverty is a social disease, which hinders ‘long term’ productive life, and so needs to be eradicated. The path of sustainable development will be easier through the alleviation of poverty. Frank (1996) also underlines the importance of community participation and beneficiary involvement in sustainable development programs.

2. DEFINITION

In 1987, the United Nations released the Brundtland Report, which included what is now one of the most widely recognised definitions: "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." [7]

According to the same report, the above definition contains within it two key concepts:

the concept of 'needs', in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.[7]

The United Nations 2005 World Summit Outcome Document refers to the "interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars" of sustainable development as economic development, social development, and environmental protection.[8] Based on the triple bottom line, numerous sustainability standards and certification systems have been established in recent years, in particular in the food industry.[9][10]

Fig: The natural resource of wind powers these 5MW wind turbines on this wind farm 28 km off the coast of Belgium.

Indigenous peoples have argued, through various international forums such as the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the Convention on Biological Diversity, that there are four pillars of sustainable development, the fourth being cultural. The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (UNESCO, 2001) further elaborates the concept by stating that "... cultural diversity is as necessary for humankind as biodiversity is for nature”; it becomes “one of the roots of development understood not simply in terms of economic growth, but also as a means to achieve a more satisfactory intellectual, emotional, moral and spiritual existence". In this vision, cultural diversity is the fourth policy area of sustainable development.

3. AN OVERVIEW OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

A useful articulation of the values and principles of sustainability can be found in the Earth Charter. It offers an integrated vision and definition of strong sustainability. The document, an ethical framework for a sustainable world, was developed over several years after the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 and launched officially in 2000. The Charter derives its legitimacy from the participatory process in which it was drafted, which included contributions from hundreds of organizations and thousands of individuals, and from its use since 2000 by thousands of organizations and individuals that have been using the Earth Charter as an educational instrument and a policy tool.

Economic Sustainability Agenda 21 clearly identified information, integration, and participation as key building blocks to help countries achieve development that recognises these interdependent pillars. It emphasises that in sustainable development everyone is a user and provider of information. It stresses the need to change from old sector-centered ways of doing business to new approaches that involve cross-sectoral co-ordination and the integration of environmental and social concerns into all development processes. Furthermore, Agenda 21 emphasises that broad public participation in decision making is a fundamental prerequisite for achieving sustainable development.[11]

According to Hasna Vancock, sustainability is a process which tells of a development of all aspects of human life affecting sustenance. It means resolving the conflict between the various competing goals, and involves the simultaneous pursuit of economic prosperity, environmental quality and social equity famously known as three dimensions (triple bottom line) with the resultant vector being technology, hence it is a continually evolving process; the 'journey' (the process of achieving sustainability) is of course vitally important, but only as a means of getting to the destination (the desired future state). However, the 'destination' of sustainability is not a fixed place in the normal sense that we understand destination. Instead, it is a set of wishful characteristics of a future system.[12]

The concept has included notions of weak sustainability, strong sustainability, deep ecology, and just sustainability. "Just sustainability" offers a socially just conception of sustainability. Just sustainability effectively addresses what has been called the 'equity deficit' of environmental sustainability (Agyeman, 2005:44).[13] It is “the egalitarian conception of sustainable development" (Jacobs, 1999:32).[14] It generates a more nuanced definition of sustainable development: “the need to ensure a better quality of life for all, now and into the future, in a just and equitable manner, whilst living within the limits of supporting ecosystems” (Agyeman, et al., 2003:5).[15] This conception of sustainable development focuses equally on four conditions: improving our quality of life and well-being; on meeting the needs of both present and future generations (intra- and intergenerational equity); on justice and equity in terms of recognition (Schlosberg, 1999),[16] process, procedure and outcome and on the need for us to live within ecosystem limits (also called one planet living) (Agyeman, 2005:92).[17] Open-source appropriate technology has been proposed as an approach for reaching just sustainable development.[18][19] Green development is generally differentiated from sustainable development in that Green development prioritizes what its proponents consider to be environmental sustainability over economic and cultural considerations. Proponents of Sustainable Development argue that it provides a context in which to improve overall sustainability where cutting edge Green Development is unattainable. For example, a cutting edge treatment plant with extremely high maintenance costs may not be sustainable in regions of the world with fewer financial resources. An environmentally ideal plant that is shut down due to bankruptcy is obviously less sustainable than one that is maintainable by the community, even if it is somewhat less effective from an environmental standpoint. However, this view depends on whether one determines that it is the development (the plant) which needs to be sustainable, or whether it is the human-nature ecology (the environmental conditions) in which the plant exists which should be sustainable. It follows, then, that an operational but heavily polluting plant may be judged as actually 'less sustainable' than having no plant at all.

Sustainability educator Michael Thomas Needham referred to 'Sustainable Development' "as the ability to meet the needs of the present while contributing to the future generations’ needs."[20] There is an additional focus on the present generations' responsibility to improve the future generations' life by restoring the previous ecosystem damage and resisting to contribute to further ecosystem damage.

4. DOMAINS:

4.1.ECONOMICS

Fig: Circles of Sustainability image (assessment - Melbourne 2011)

The domain of 'economics' is fundamental to considerations of sustainable development; however there has been considerable criticism of the tendency to use the three-domain model of the triple bottom line: economics, environment and social. This approach is challenged to the extent that it treats the economy as the master domain, or as a domain that exists outside of the social; it treats the environment as a world of natural metrics; and it treats the social as a miscellaneous collection of extra things that do not fit into the economic or environmental domains (see the section on Economic sustainability below). In the alternative Circles of Sustainability approach, the economic domain is defined as the practices and meanings associated with the production, use, and management of resources, where the concept of ‘resources’ is used in the broadest sense of that word.

4.2.ECOLOGY

The domain of 'ecology' has been difficult to resolve because it too has a social dimension. Some research activities start from the definition of green development to argue that the environment is a combination of nature and culture. However, this has the effect of making the domain model unwieldy if culture is to be considered a domain in its own right (see below). Others write of ecology as being more broadly at the intersection of the social and the environmental - hence, ecology. This move allows culture to be used as a domain alongside economics and ecology.[21]

The sustainability of human settlements is implicit in the focus of study into the relationship between humans and their natural, social and built environments. Also termed human ecology, this broadens the focus of sustainable development to include the domain of human health. Fundamental human needs such as the availability and quality of air, water, food and shelter are also the ecological foundations for sustainable development;[22] addressing public health risk through investments in ecosystem services can be a powerful and transformative force for sustainable development which, in this sense, extends to all species.[23]

4.3.CULTURE

Working with a different emphasis, some researchers and institutions have pointed out that a fourth dimension should be added to the dimensions of sustainable development, since the triple-bottom-line dimensions of economic, environmental and social do not seem to be enough to reflect the complexity of contemporary society. In this context, the Agenda 21 for culture and the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) Executive Bureau lead the preparation of the policy statement “Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development”, passed on 17 November 2010, in the framework of the World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders – 3rd World Congress of UCLG, held in Mexico City. This document inaugurates a new perspective and points to the relation between culture and sustainable development through a dual approach: developing a solid cultural policy and advocating a cultural dimension in all public policies.[6] The Network of Excellence "Sustainable Development in a Diverse World",[24] sponsored by the European Union, integrates multidisciplinary capacities and interprets cultural diversity as a key element of a new strategy for sustainable development. The Circles of Sustainability approach defines the cultural domain as practices, discourses, and material expressions, which, over time, express continuities and discontinuities of social meaning. However, culture falls within the social/sociopolitical dimension of sustainability, and therefore the proposal for adding a fourth "cultural" dimension has not been widely accepted.

4.4.POLITICS

The United Nations Global Compact Cities Program has defined sustainable political development is a way that broadens the usual definition beyond states and governance. The political is defined as the domain of practices and meanings associated with basic issues of social power as they pertain to the organization, authorization, legitimation and regulation of a social life held in common. This definition is in accord with the view that political change is important for responding to economic, ecological and cultural challenges. It also means that the politics of economic change can be addressed. This is particularly true in relation to the controversial concept of 'sustainable enterprise' that frames global needs and risks as 'opportunities' for private enterprise to provide profitable entrepreneurial solutions. This concept is now being taught at many business schools including the Center for Sustainable Global Enterprise at Cornell University and the Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise at the University of Michigan.

Sustainable development is an eclectic concept and a wide array of political views fall under its umbrella. The concept has included notions of weak sustainability, strong sustainability and deep ecology. Different conceptions also reveal a strong tension between egocentrism and anthropocentrism. Many definitions and images (Visualizing Sustainability) of sustainable development coexist. Broadly defined, the sustainable development mantra enjoins current generations to take a systems approach to growth and development and to manage natural, produced, and social capital for the welfare of their own and future generations.

During the last ten years, different organizations have tried to measure and monitor the proximity to what they consider sustainability by implementing what has been called sustainability metrics and indices.[25] This has engendered considerable political debate about what is being measured. Sustainable development is said to set limits on the developing world. While current first world countries polluted significantly during their development, the same countries encourage third world countries to reduce pollution, which sometimes impedes growth. Some consider that the implementation of sustainable development would mean a reversion to pre-modern lifestyles.[26]

5. HISTORY OF THE CONCEPT OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The concept of sustainable development was originally synonymous with that of sustainability and is often still used in that way. Both terms derive from the older forestry term "sustained yield", which in turn a translation of the German term “nachhaltiger Ertrag” is dating from 1713.[27][28] According to different sources, the concept of sustainability in the sense of a balance between resource consumption and reproduction was however applied to forestry already in the 12th to 16th century.[29]

‘Sustainability’ is a semantic modification, extension and transfer of the term ‘sustained yield’. This had been the doctrine and, indeed, the ‘holy grail’ of foresters all over the world for more or less two centuries. The essence of ‘sustained yield forestry’ was described for example by William A. Duerr, a leading American expert on forestry: “To fulfill our obligations to our descendents and to stabilize our communities, each generation should sustain its resources at a high level and hand them along undiminished. The sustained yield of timber is an aspect of man’s most fundamental need: to sustain life itself.” A fine anticipation of the Brundtland-formula.[27]

Not just the concept of sustainable development, but also its current interpretations have its roots in forest management. Strong sustainability stipulates living solely off the interest of natural capital, whereas adherents of weak sustainability are content to keep constant the sum of natural and human capital.[30]

The history of the concept of sustainability is however much older. Already in 400 BCE, Aristotle referred to a similar Greek concept in talking about household economics. This Greek household concept differed from modern ones in that the household had to be self-sustaining at least to a certain extent and could not just be consumption oriented.[29]

The first use of the term "sustainable" in the modern sense was by the Club of Rome in March 1972 in its epoch-making report on the ‘Limits to Growth", written by a group of scientists led by Dennis and Donella Meadows of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Describing the desirable "state of global equilibrium", the authors used the word "sustainable": "We are searching for a model output that represents a world system that is: 1. sustainable without sudden and uncontrolled collapse; and 2. capable of satisfying the basic material requirements of its entire people."[27][28]

6. UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, RIO+20:

The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development - or Rio+20 - took place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil on 20-22 June 2012. It resulted in a focused political outcome document which contains clear and practical measures for implementing sustainable development. In Rio, Member States decided to launch a process to develop a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which will build upon the Millennium Development Goals and converge with the post 2015 development agenda. The Conference also adopted ground-breaking guidelines on green economy policies. Governments also decided to establish an intergovernmental process under the General Assembly to prepare options on a strategy for sustainable development financing. Governments also agreed to strengthen the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on several fronts with action to be taken during the 67th session of the General Assembly. They also agreed to establish a high-level political forum for sustainable development. Decisions on its detailed form are expected to be taken during the upcoming session of the General Assembly, with the aim of having the first session of the forum at the beginning of the 68th session of the Assembly.

Governments also requested the United Nations Statistical Commission, in consultation with relevant United Nations system entities and other relevant organizations, to launch a programme of work in the area of measures of progress to complement gross domestic product in order to better inform policy decisions. Governments also adopted the 10-year framework of programmes on sustainable consumption and production patterns, as contained in document A/CONF.216/5, and invited the General Assembly, at its sixty-seventh session, to designate a Member State body to take any necessary steps to fully operationalize the framework. The Conference also took forward-looking decisions on a number of thematic areas, including energy, food security, oceans, cities, and decided to convene a Third International Conference on SIDS in 2014.

The Rio +20 Conference also galvanized the attention of thousands of representatives of the UN system and major groups. It resulted in over 700 voluntary commitments and witnessed the formation of new partnerships to advance sustainable developments.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Fig: Water is an important natural resource that covers 71% of the Earth's surface. Image is the Earth photographed from Apollo 17.

Environmental sustainability is the process of making sure current processes of interaction with the environment are pursued with the idea of keeping the environment as pristine as naturally possible based on ideal-seeking behavior. Thus, environmental sustainability demands that society designs activities to meet human needs while indefinitely preserving the life support systems of the planet. This, for example, entails using water sustainably, only utilizing renewable energy, and sustainable material supplies (e.g. harvesting wood from forests at a rate that maintains the biomass and biodiversity).

An "unsustainable situation" occurs when natural capital (the sum total of nature's resources) is used up faster than it can be replenished. Sustainability requires that human activity only uses nature's resources at a rate at which they can be replenished naturally. Inherently the concept of sustainable development is intertwined with the concept of carrying capacity. Theoretically, the long-term result of environmental degradation is the inability to sustain human life. Such degradation on a global scale could imply extinction for humanity.

8. ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

Fig: Venn diagram; constituents of sustainable development

The Venn diagram of sustainable development has many versions,[31] but was first used by economist Edward Barbier (1987).[32] However, Pearce, Barbier and Markandya (1989)[33] criticized the Venn approach due to the intractability of operationalizing separate indices of economic, environmental, and social sustainability and somehow combining them. They also noted that the Venn approach was inconsistent with the Brundtland Commission Report, which emphasized the interlinkages between economic development, environmental degradation, and population pressure instead of three objectives. Economists have since focused on viewing the economy and the environment as a single interlinked system with a unified valuation methodology (Hamilton 1999,[34] Dasgupta 2007).[35]

Intergenerational equity can be incorporated into this approach, as has become common in economic valuations of climate change economics (Heal 2009).[36] Ruling out discrimination against future generations and allowing for the possibility of renewable alternatives to petro-chemicals and other non-renewable resources, efficient policies are compatible with increasing human welfare, eventually reaching a golden-rule steady state (Ayong le Kama 2001[37] and Endress et al. 2005).[38] Thus the three pillars of sustainable development are interlinkages, intergenerational equity, and dynamic efficiency (Stavins et al. 2003).[39] Arrow et al. (2004)[40] and other economists (e.g. Asheim,1999[41] and Pezzey, 1989[42] and 1997)[43] have advocated a form of the weak criterion for sustainable development – the requirement than the wealth of a society, including human capital, knowledge capital and natural capital (as well as produced capital) not decline over time. Others, including Barbier 2007,[44] continue to contend that strong sustainability – non-depletion of essential forms of natural capital – may be appropriate.

Economic development has traditionally required a growth in the gross domestic product. This model of unlimited personal and GDP growth may be over.[45] Sustainable development may involve improvements in the quality of life for many but, particularly for the affluent, may necessitate a decrease in resource consumption.[46]

8.1.TYPES OF CAPITAL

Fig: Deforestation of native rain forest in Rio de Janeiro City for extraction of clay for civil engineering (2009 picture).

The sustainable development debate is based on the assumption that societies need to manage three types of capital (economic, social, and natural), which may be non-substitutable and whose consumption might be irreversible.[47] Daly (1991),[48] for example, points to the fact that natural capital can not necessarily be substituted by economic capital. While it is possible that we can find ways to replace some natural resources, it is much more unlikely that they will ever be able to replace eco-system services, such as the protection provided by the ozone layer, or the climate stabilizing function of the Amazonian forest. In fact natural capital, social capital and economic capital are often complementarities. A further obstacle to substitutability lies also in the multi-functionality of many natural resources. Forests, for example, not only provide the raw material for paper (which can be substituted quite easily), but they also maintain biodiversity, regulate water flow, and absorb CO2. Another problem of natural and social capital deterioration lies in their partial irreversibility. The loss in biodiversity, for example, is often definite. The same can be true for cultural diversity. For example with globalisation advancing quickly the number of indigenous languages is dropping at alarming rates. Moreover, the depletion of natural and social capital may have non-linear consequences. Consumption of natural and social capital may have no observable impact until a certain threshold is reached. A lake can, for example, absorb nutrients for a long time while actually increasing its productivity. However, once a certain level of algae is reached lack of oxygen causes the lake’s ecosystem to break down suddenly.

8.2. Market failure

Fig: Before flue-gas desulfurization was installed, the air-polluting emissions from this power plant in New Mexico contained excessive amounts of sulfur dioxide.

If the degradation of natural and social capital has such important consequence the question arises why action is not taken more systematically to alleviate it. Cohen and Winn (2007)[49] point to four types of market failure as possible explanations: First, while the benefits of natural or social capital depletion can usually be privatized the costs are often externalized (i.e. they are borne not by the party responsible but by society in general). Second, natural capital is often undervalued by society since we are not fully aware of the real cost of the depletion of natural capital. Information asymmetry is a third reason—often the link between cause and effect is obscured, making it difficult for actors to make informed choices. Cohen and Winn close with the realization that contrary to economic theory many firms are not perfect optimizers. They postulate that firms often do not optimize resource allocation because they are caught in a "business as usual" mentality.

8.3. Business case

The most broadly accepted criterion for corporate sustainability constitutes a firm’s efficient use of natural capital. This eco-efficiency is usually calculated as the economic value added by a firm in relation to its aggregated ecological impact.[50] This idea has been popularised by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) under the following definition: "Eco-efficiency is achieved by the delivery of competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and bring quality of life, while progressively reducing ecological impacts and resource intensity throughout the life-cycle to a level at least in line with the earth’s carrying capacity." (DeSimone and Popoff, 1997: 47)[51]

Similar to the eco-efficiency concept but so far less explored is the second criterion for corporate sustainability. Socio-efficiency [52] describes the relation between a firm's value added and its social impact. Whereas, it can be assumed that most corporate impacts on the environment are negative (apart from rare exceptions such as the planting of trees) this is not true for social impacts. These can be either positive (e.g. corporate giving, creation of employment) or negative (e.g. work accidents, mobbing of employees, human rights abuses). Depending on the type of impact socio-efficiency thus either tries to minimize negative social impacts (i.e. accidents per value added) or maximize positive social impacts (i.e. donations per value added) in relation to the value added.

Both eco-efficiency and socio-efficiency are concerned primarily with increasing economic sustainability. In this process they instrumentalism both natural and social capital aiming to benefit from win-win situations. However, as Dyllick and Hockerts[52] point out the business case alone will not be sufficient to realize sustainable development. They point towards eco-effectiveness, socio-effectiveness, sufficiency, and eco-equity as four criteria that need to be met if sustainable development is to be reached.

9. SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

Sustainable agriculture may be defined as consisting of environmentally friendly methods of farming that allow the production of crops or livestock without damage to human or natural systems. More specifically, it might be said to include preventing adverse effects to soil, water, biodiversity, surrounding or downstream resources—as well as to those working or living on the farm or in neighboring areas. Furthermore, the concept of sustainable agriculture extends intergenerationally, relating to passing on a conserved or improved natural resource, biotic, and economic base instead of one which has been depleted or polluted.[53]

9.1. Elements

Agroforestry

According to the World Agroforestry Centre, agroforestry is a collective name for land use systems and practices in which woody perennials are deliberately integrated with crops and/or animals on the same land management unit. The integration can be either in a spatial mixture or in a temporal sequence. There are normally both ecological and economic interactions between woody and non-woody components in agroforestry.

Mixed Farming

Many farmers in tropical & temperate countries survive by managing a mix of different crops or animals. The best known form of mixing occurs probably where crop residues are used to feed the animals and the excreta from animals are used as nutrients for the crop. Other forms of mixing takes place where grazing under fruit trees keeps the grass short or where manure from pigs is used to feed the fish. Mixed farming exists in many forms depending on external and internal factors. External factors are: Weather Patterns, Market Prices, Political Stability and Technological Development. Internal factors relate to Local Soil Characteristics, Composition of family and Farmer’s Ingenuity. Mixed Farming provides farmers with a) an opportunity to diversify risk from single-crop production; (b) to use labor more efficiently; (c) to have a source of cash for purchasing farm inputs; (d) to add value to crop or crop by-product; (e) combining crops and livestock.

Multiple Cropping

The process of growing two or more crops in the same piece of land, during the same season is called Multiple Cropping. It can be rightly called a form of polyculture. It can be – (a) Double Cropping (the practice where the second crop is planted after the first has been harvested); (b) Relay Cropping (the practice where a second crop is started along with the first one, before it is harvested).

Crop Rotation

The process of growing two or more dissimilar or unrelated crops in the same piece of land in different seasons is known as Crop Rotation. This process could be adopted as it comes with a series of benefits like – (a) avoid the buildup of pests that often occurs when one species is continuously cropped; (b) the traditional element of crop rotation is the replenishment of nitrogen through the use of green manure in sequence with cereals and other crops; (c) Crop rotation can also improve soil structure and fertility by alternating deep-rooted and shallow-rooted plants; (d) it is a component of polyculture.

Fig: Deforestation and increased road-building in the Amazon Rainforest are a significant concern because of increased human encroachment upon wilderness areas, increased resource extraction and further threats to biodiversity.

10. SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING

Fig: Sustainable urban design and innovation: Photovoltaic ombrière SUDI is an autonomous and mobile station that replenishes energy for electric vehicles using solar energy.

Sustainable engineering is the process of designing or operating systems such that they use energy and resources sustainably, i.e., at a rate that does not compromise the natural environment, or the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

• What engineers can do
• Water supply
• Food production
• Housing and shelter
• Sanitation and waste management
• Energy development
• Transportation
• Industrial processing
• Development of natural resources
• Cleaning up polluted waste sitee
• Siting and planning projects to reduce environmental and social impacts
• Restoring natural environments such as forests, lakes, streams, and wetlands
• Improving industrial processes to eliminate waste and reduce consumption
• Recommending the appropriate and innovative use of technology

Accomplishments from 1992 to 2002

The World Engineering Partnership for Sustainable Development (WEPSD) was formed and they are responsible for the following areas: redesign engineering responsibilities and ethic to sustainable development, analyze and develop a long term plan, find solution by exchanging information with partners and using new technologies, and solve the critical global environment problems, such as fresh water and climate change

Developed environmental policies, codes of ethics, and sustainable development guidelines

Earth Charter was restarted as a civil society initiative

The World Bank, United Nations Environmental Program, and the Global Environment Facility joined programs for sustainable development

Launched programs for engineering students and practicing engineers on how to apply sustainable development concepts in their work

Developed new approaches in industrial processes

Future goals

Creating a comprehensive program to identify and provide the information that engineers in developing countries require to meet energy, water, food, health, and other basic human needs

Give education for student and practicing engineers to make them realize the importance of sustainability and become environment generalists

Engaged in decision-making processes and performing projects

Develop better approaches with the consideration of a project’s environmental costs, impacts, and conditions throughout a project’s life cycle

Improve the education on sustainability and provide help in developing countries.

11. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FOR GLOBAL WARMING:

Fig: The increase in global temperature seen in the last 100 years (blue line) is thought to be due to greenhouse gases produced by human activity. The black line shows the increase in Carbon dioxide levels.

Some estimates suggest that global temperatures will rise by 1 - 2.5oC in the next 50 years.

Like no other environmental issue, global warming threatens the wellbeing of both developed and developing countries. While global warming is conspicuous by its near exclusion in the preparations for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), energy--an issue intimately linked to global warming—is prominent on the WSSD agenda, and it needs to be addressed with global warming in mind. More than two billion people in the world today do not have access to sufficient energy and energy services to meet their basic needs. The world community is faced with the daunting challenge of providing all these people with access to clean and affordable energy services without exacerbating the problem of global warming. This can be accomplished only by dramatically reducing the world's reliance on fossil fuels and increasing the use of clean, renewable sources of energy and new technologies to make energy use more efficient. Emissions from fossil fuels are the main contributors to environmental and health problems at the local, regional, and global levels.

Today, approximately 80 percent of all energy used in the world comes from burning of fossil fuels. At the same time, an ever-expanding catalogue of energy saving technologies, as well as reliable and cost-effective sources of renewable energy, is available to policy makers, energy producers and energy consumers. In every part of the world, these technologies make sense from both economic and environmental perspectives. Now, when developing countries are rapidly increasing their energy usage, is the time to help them build new systems that are clean, efficient, affordable and sustainable. Continued reliance on coal and other fossil fuels to meet their burgeoning needs would be extremely costly, in the near term because of the inevitable health and environmental problems associated with fossil fuel emissions and in the longer term because global warming inevitably will require the replacement of dirty energy systems with climate-friendly ones. The impacts of global warming are likely to hit developing countries hardest. In Africa, global warming threatens availability of fresh water, food security and productivity of natural resources. Waterborne and vector-borne diseases pose a special threat to regions with inadequate health infrastructures. Coastal zones could be severely damaged by erosion and sea-level rise, while areas prone to desertification will experience intensification of that problem. Boreal Asia is threatened by degradation of the permafrost, increased surface runoff, and more frequent and intense forest fires. Tropical monsoons and cyclones could become more intense, threatening Asia's crop production, biodiversity and human health. Latin America, with its high concentrations of biodiversity and dependence on natural resources, faces similar threats. Low-lying regions everywhere are threatened with inundation by sea-level rise.

12. GREEN ECONOMIES FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:

Green Economy was identified as “an important tool for achieving sustainable development,” and Section III of the Rio Declaration has several important features which firmly establish green economy as an important and central driver of sustainability. Key elements of the agreed text include paragraph 59 viewing “the implementation of green economy policies by countries that seek to apply them for the transition towards sustainable development as a common undertaking;” and paragraph 64 which notes the “positive experiences in some countries, including in developing countries, in adopting green economy policies in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication through an inclusive approach and welcome the voluntary exchange of experiences as well as capacity building.”

The most important outcome, is embodied in paragraph 66 which invites “the UN System, in cooperation with relevant donors and international organizations to coordinate and provide information upon request on: (a) matching interested countries with the partners best suited to provide requested support; (b) toolboxes and/or best practices in applying policies on green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication at all levels; (c) models or good examples of policies of green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; (d) methodologies for evaluation of policies of green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; (e) existing and emerging platforms that contribute in this regard.” The language produced in the Declaration indicates clearly that those countries wishing to push ahead with reform agendas to transform their economies should be supported. This sentiment is captured well by the last paragraph of section III: “We recognize that the efforts of developing countries that choose to implement green economy policies in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication should be supported through technical and technological assistance.” Building on existing activities, the Republic of Korea, UNEP and ILO have begun to develop a comprehensive framework for a Partnership for Action on Green Economy (PAGE), and as part of the Rio meetings, consulted the idea with Ministers from donor and recipient countries.

Conceived as a response to the call for voluntary support to countries on green economy, PAGE is structured into four components: (i) applied research and policy making, (ii) policy dialogues for high-level government officials, (iii) capacity development and applied practical training as well as (iv) country-driven advisory services. The partnership will be further developed in the next months, in consultation with other key partners, so it can be officially launched at the UNEP Governing Council in February 2013. Another important element of the Rio follow-up is the Green Growth Knowledge Platform launched by World Bank, UNEP, OECD and GGGI.

13. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS59:

Fig: Logo of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development'

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) refer to an agreement of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 2012 (Rio+20), to develop a set of future international development goals.

Millennium development goals

The current development agenda is centered on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that were officially established following the Millennium Summit of the United Nations (UN) in 2000. The MDGs encapsulate eight globally agreed goals in the areas of poverty alleviation, education, gender equality and empowerment of women, child and maternal health, environmental sustainability, reducing HIV/AIDS and communicable diseases, and building a global partnership for development. As the target date of the MDGs, 2015, is approaching, a debate on the framework of international development beyond 2015 has started. In this vein, 192 UN member states agreed at the Rio+20 summit to start a process of designing sustainable development goals, which are “action oriented, concise and easy to communicate, limited in number, aspirational, global in nature and universally applicable to all countries while taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities”.[59]The Rio+20 outcome document, “The Future We Want”, also calls for the goals to be integrated into the UN’s post-2015 Development Agenda.[60]

Current process

Since Rio+20 did not elaborate specific goals, a 30-member Open Working Group (OWG) was established on 22 January 2013 by the decision of the UN General Assembly. The OWG is tasked with preparing a proposal on the SDGs for consideration during the 68th session of the General Assembly, September 2013 – September 2014.[61]

The OWG uses a constituency-based system of representation, which means that most of the seats in the working group are shared by several countries.

The Rio+20 outcome document states that, “at the outset, the OWG will decide on its methods of work, including developing modalities to ensure the full involvement of relevant stakeholders and expertise from civil society, the scientific community and the United Nations system in its work, in order to provide a diversity of perspectives and experience”.[62]

14. CONSEQUENCES:

John Baden [55] views the notion of sustainable development as dangerous because the consequences have unknown effects. He writes: "In economy like in ecology, the interdependence rule applies. Isolated actions are impossible. A policy which is not carefully enough thought will carry along various perverse and adverse effects for the ecology as much as for the economy. Many suggestions to save our environment and to promote a model of 'sustainable development' risk indeed leading to reverse effects."[56] Moreover, he evokes the bounds of public action which are underlined by the public choice theory: the quest by politicians of their own interests, lobby pressure, partial disclosure etc. He develops his critique by noting the vagueness of the expression, which can cover anything [57] it is a gateway to interventionist proceedings which can be against the principle of freedom and without proven efficacy. Against this notion, he is a proponent of private property to impel the producers and the consumers to save the natural resources. According to Baden, “the improvement of environment quality depends on the market economy and the existence of legitimate and protected property rights.” They enable the effective practice of personal responsibility and the development of mechanisms to protect the environment. The State can in this context “create conditions which encourage the people to save the environment.

References

1. ^ United Nations. 1987."Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development." General Assembly Resolution 42/187, 11 December 1987. Retrieved: 2007-04-12

2. ^ Smith, Charles; Rees, Gareth (1998). Economic Development, 2nd edition. Basingstoke: Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-72228-0.

3. ^ Strivers, R. 1976. The Sustainable Society: Ethics and Economic Growth. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.

4. ^ Meadows, D.H., D.L. Meadows, J. Randers, and W.W. Behrens III. 1972. The Limits to Growth. Universe Books, New York, NY. ISBN 0-87663-165-0

5. ^ Daly, H. E. 1973. Towards a Steady State Economy. San Francisco: Freeman. Daly, H. E. 1991. Steady-State Economics (2nd Ed.). Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

6. ^ a b United Cites and Local Governments, "Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development".

7. ^ a b World Commission on Environment and Development. "Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development". Un-documents.net. Retrieved 2011-09-28.

8. ^ 2005 World Summit Outcome Document, World Health Organization, 15 September 2005

9. ^ Manning, S., Boons, F., Von Hagen, O., Reinecke, J. (2011). "National Contexts Matter: The Co-Evolution of Sustainability Standards in Global Value Chains." Ecological Economics, Forthcoming.

10. ^ Reinecke, J., Manning, S., Von Hagen, O. (2012). "The Emergence of a Standards Market: Multiplicity of Sustainability Standards in the Global Coffee Industry" Organization Studies, Forthcoming.

11. ^ Will Allen. 2007."Learning for Sustainability: Sustainable Development."

12. ^ Hasna, A. M. (2007). "Dimensions of sustainability". Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development: Energy, Environment, and Health 2 (1): 47–57.

13. ^ Agyeman, J., Sustainable Communities and the Challenge of Environmental Justice, (New York, USA: New York University Press, 2005), 44.

14. ^ Jacobs, M., Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept, in A. Dobson, Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999), 32.

15. ^ Agyeman, J., Bullard, R. D., and Evans, B. eds., Just Sustainabilities: Development in an Unequal World (Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 2003), 5.

16. ^ Schlosberg, D., Environmental Justice and the New Pluralism: The Challenge of Difference for Environmentalism, (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999)

17. ^ Agyeman, J., Sustainable Communities and the Challenge of Environmental Justice, (New York, USA: New York University Press, 2005), 92.

18. ^ Pearce J., Albritton S., Grant G., Steed G., & Zelenika I. 2012. A new model for enabling innovation in appropriate technology for sustainable development. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 8(2), pp. 42-53, 2012. open access

19. ^ Joshua M. Pearce, “The Case for Open Source Appropriate Technology”, Environment, Development and Sustainability 14, pp. 425–431 (2012). open access

20. ^ Needham, M. T. (2011). A Psychological Approach to a Thriving Resilient Community. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, vol. 1 no. 3. NY, USA.: CPI

21. ^ http://citiesprogramme.com/aboutus/our-approach/circles-of-sustainability; Andy Scerri and Paul James, ‘Accounting for Sustainability: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Research in Developing ‘Indicators’ of Sustainability’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, vol. 13, no. 1, 2010, pp. 41–53.

22. ^ White, F; Stallones, L; Last, JM. (2013). Global Public Health: Ecological Foundations. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-975190-7.

23. ^ Bringing human health and wellbeing back into sustainable development. In: IISD Annual Report 2011-12. http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/annrep_2011_2012_en.pdf

24. ^ "Sus.Div". Sus.Div. Retrieved 2011-09-28.

25. ^ Paul-Marie Boulanger (2008). "Sustainable development indicators: a scientific challenge, a democratic issue. ''S.A.P.I.EN.S.'' '''1''' (1)". Sapiens.revues.org. Retrieved 2011-09-28.

26. ^ a b What Is Sustainable Development?[dead link]

27. ^ a b c Ulrich Grober: Deep roots - A conceptual history of "sustainable development" (Nachhaltigkeit), Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, 2007; pp. 8–9

28. ^ a b Donovan Finn: Our Uncertain Future: Can Good Planning Create Sustainable Communities?; University of Illinois, 2009; p. 3

29. ^ a b Ina Ehnert: Sustainable Human Resource Management: A Conceptual and Exploratory Analysis from a Paradox Perspective; Springer, 2009; pp. 35–36

30. ^ Marian Quigley: Encyclopedia of Information Ethics and Security, Monash University, 2008; p. 623

31. ^ Visualising Sustainability. Posted by Samuel Mann under Computing for Sustainability, visualizing sustainability

32. ^ Barbier, E. (1987). "The Concept of Sustainable Economic Development". Environmental Conservation 14 (2): 101–110. doi:10.1017/S0376892900011449.

33. ^ Pearce, D.; Markandya, A.; Barbier, E. (1989). Blueprint for a green economy. London: Earthscan.

34. ^ Hamilton, K.; Clemens, M. (1999). "Genuine savings rates in developing countries". World Bank Econ Review 13 (2): 333–356. doi:10.1093/wber/13.2.333.

35. ^ Dasgupta, P. (2007). "The idea of sustainable development". Sustainability Science 2 (1): 5–11. doi:10.1007/s11625-007-0024-y.

36. ^ Heal, G. (2009). "Climate Economics: A Meta-Review and Some Suggestions for Future Research". Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 3 (1): 4–21. doi:10.1093/reep/ren014.

37. ^ Ayong Le Kama, A. D. (2001). "Sustainable growth renewable resources, and pollution". Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 25 (12): 1911–1918. doi:10.1016/S0165-1889(00)00007-5.

38. ^ Endress, L.; Roumasset, J.; Zhou, T. (2005). "Sustainable Growth with Environmental Spillovers". Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 58 (4): 527–547. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2004.09.003.

39. ^ Stavins, R.; Wagner, A.; Wagner, G. "Interpreting Sustainability in Economic Terms: Dynamic Efficiency plus Intergenerational Equity". Economic Letters 79 (3): 339–343. doi:10.1016/S0165-1765(03)00036-3.

40. ^ Arrow, K. J.; Dasgupta, P.; Goulder, L.; Daily, G.; Ehrlich, P. R.; Heal, G. M.; Levin, S.; Maler, K-G.; Schneider, S.; Starrett, D. A.; Walker, B. (2004). "Are we consuming too much?". Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (3): 147–172. JSTOR 3216811.

41. ^ Asheim, G. (1999). "Economic analysis of sustainability". In Lafferty, W. M.; Langhalle, O. Towards Sustainable Development. New York: St. Martin’s Press. p. 159. ISBN 9264185321.

42. ^ Pezzey, J. (1989). "Economic Analysis of Sustainable Growth and Sustainable Development". Environmental department Working Paper No. 15 (World Bank).

43. ^ Pezzey, J. (1997). "Sustainability constraints versus 'optimality' versus intertemporal concern, and axioms versus data". Land Economics (University of Wisconsin Press) 73 (4): 448–466. doi:10.2307/3147239. JSTOR 3147239.

44. ^ Barbier, E. 2007 Natural Resources and Economic Development, Cambridge University Press

45. ^ Korowitz, David (2012), Ignorance by Consensus, Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability

46. ^ Brown, L. R. (2011). World on the Edge. Earth Policy Institute. Norton. ISBN 987-0-393-08029-2 Check |isbn= value (help).

47. ^ Dyllick, T. & Hockerts, K. 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11(2): 130–141

48. ^ Daly, H. E. 1973. Towards a Steady State Economy. San Francisco: Freeman.

49. ^ Cohen, B. & Winn, M. I. 2007. Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1): 29–49.

50. ^ Schaltegger, S. & Sturm, A. 1998. Eco-Efficiency by Eco-Controlling. Zürich: vdf.

51. ^ DeSimone, L. & Popoff, F. 1997. Eco-efficiency: The business link to sustainable development. Cambridge: MIT Press.

52. ^ a b Dyllick, T. & Hockerts, K. 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11(2): 130–141.

53. ^ Networld-Project (1998-02-09). "Environmental Glossary". Green-networld.com. Retrieved 2011-09-28.

54. ^ ISC Environmental Education (Part-II). Goyal Brothers Prakashan. 2010.

55. ^ chairman of the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE)

56. ^ Euro92.com, "L'économie politique du développement durable", John Baden, document de l'ICREI

57. ^ . "”The expression “sustainable development” is a magic formula, linked to the emotions but without any concrete contents nor exact definition. And precisely thanks to that, it carries a broad consensus. Its attractive power lies in the impressions and the emotions linked to it, and not in the concrete contributions from a deep analysis."" Missing or empty |title= (help).

58. http://en.wikipedia.com