Introduction

Nowadays, the current economic, environmental and social problems the world faces are
the result of inefficient human activities (Shah, Anup, 2011). Many positions exist around
these problems and how they need to be handled. Environmentalists defend the idea of
preserving natural resources and decreasing the level of contamination. Economists
support the idea that development and economic growth are crucial for poor countries to
achieve the basic standards of life (Mitcham, C. 1995). In order to shorten these
differences, “sustainable development” emerged as the result of two main documents,
“The World Conservation Strategy” and “Our Common future” issued in 1980 and 1987
(Mitcham, C, 1995), as a development that tries to meet our needs with the available
resources without compromising the needs of future generations (Our Common Future,
1987).

Throughout this essay, the concept of sustainable development will be discussed and the
instances in which this term has been criticized. However, it will also bring up some
examples to demonstrate that the adoption of sustainable development by governments,
industries and individuals is giving positive results and despite the non-compliance of
some targets, progress has been observed. The essay aims to point out the connection
between sustainability and well-being, and to what extent they are not synonymous.
Finally, it will state some conclusions about the relevance and use in today’s world of this
term.

Sustainable Development and its critics

According to the Report “Our common future” “Sustainable development is development

that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations
to meet their own needs” (Our Common Future, 1987). But to what extent is this
development true and sustainable? In order to illustrate and explain the rejection of the
term three main criticisms will be mentioned, but counterexamples will also be cited to
highlight the term’s growing relevance.
Firstly, some authors agree this word is an “ambivalent cliché”, “plastic word”,
“something fashionable” (Mitchan, C. 1995) (Lélé, M. 1991) (Orton, D. 1990) because its
broad significance can have several interpretations and connotations, depending on which
field it is used in. It has also become famous and enjoyed “universal approbation”,
(Mitchan, C. 1995) due to the importance given to the publication in 1987 of Our
Common Future. However, this term can result in confusion since each academic
discipline gives the interpretation it needs and ignores other factors that might
complement the sustainable development. For example, economists just look at the cost-
benefit activities and the resources optimization, just monetary profits; while ecologists
promote the preservation and management of the natural resources (Frazier, J. 1997),
leaving behind social factors and people’s need to generate economic resources to survive.
Similarly, this word does not have the same meaning for rich and poor people, if it is
looked at from the perspective of purchasing power (Frazier, J. 1997). For the wealthy it
means maintaining or maybe increasing their levels of consumption to maintain their life
styles, for poor people it might represent the opportunity to enjoy the basics like water and
food supply, adequate shelter, health and education services (Fraizer, J. 1997).

Secondly, the word sustainable development is regarded by some authors as the perfect
excuse to continue growing and consuming in order to sustain current life styles (Mitchan,
C.1995) or status quo (Fraizer,J. 1997) and the excuse for bureaucracies to reinforce their
political power (Boehmer, S. 2002). This necessity of steady growth is reflected in one of
the paragraphs from The Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Development. “...The international economy must speed up world growth while
respecting environmental constraints.” (UN Report of the World Commission, 1987) In
other words, to achieve sustainable development, it will be necessary to increase the
production in industries since the population will continue growing and demanding goods,
which will result in more waste and more pollution (Fraizer,J. 1997). Opponents of
sustainable development argue that this kind of behaviour is not sustainable since people
and manufactures continue exploiting resources to satisfy their needs; and what they point
out is that those industries, who were guilty for the environment degradation, are now the
key players to take forward the sustainable development (Trenor, P. 1997). In fact,
sustainable development policies need to be designed and executed by elites, by
politicians (Trenor,P. 1997), since they have the economic resources and the political
power to do it. However, business pressure groups are always behind politicians decisions.

A third point that boosts criticism over the term Sustainable Development, is the fact that
this term focuses its attention on human welfare, and put the environment in second place
as a factor of this development. This view is considered as resourcist (Green Web, 1990),
because other living beings are not considered as part of this sustainability, they are just a
source of food, entertainment and money that needs to
be sustained so it can be used by human beings. The
Brundtland’s Report cites the following “...foremost
our message is directed towards people, whose well-
being is the ultimate goal...” In fact as long as the
population continues growing; space for other living
species will be reduced (Green Web, 1990). This is the case of Ecuador; the mangrove
called “Estero Salado” located in Guayaquil has been removed by land invasions. People,
who look for places to live, destroy and pollute everything around this ecosystem so they
can build their houses.

Despite the criticisms of sustainable development, this term has triggered a change in
people’s, and industries’ behaviour, and now politicians take it into consideration before
making any policy. A clear example of how the implementation of sustainable
development principles is giving positive results is New Zealand, where energy efficiency
plans have been developed and overall a close collaboration between the government and
the population has been reached. For example, home insulation is a great campaign carried
out by the government which tries to persuade people to consume less energy in heating
space. Government is giving incentives to encourage people to make their houses warmer
and through campaigns points out the economic and health benefits this can bring (EEC
Strategy, 2007). Citizens are also committed to change their consumption habits to
achieve the goal of decreasing the levels of energy consumption. This is the result of
following sustainable development principles. They are giving the opportunity to next
generations to have a clean environment and overall they are promoting the current well-
being of their citizens. Another great example is the household waste-management
initiative that is taking place in Malaysia. The waste is transformed into “vermicompost”
and it is used as an organic fertilizer in the agriculture sector. In doing this, the Malaysian
government tries to put into operation the concept of sustainable development, by
reducing the waste and avoiding the methane to be released in the air (greenhouse gas).
Moreover, it is promoting food security and avoiding the soil degradation, so it is taking
care of their present needs, but at the same time taking care of the soil preservation for
next generations. (Jalil, A. 2010).

Referring to the connection of sustainability and well being, well-being can be defined as
the objective conditions that help people to be happy (Kuhlman, T. 2010), while
sustainability is the capacity of the planet to endure, to preserve its natural resources and
continue enjoying the world people know until now (Katerini, E. 2010). In other words,
sustainability is the tool for achieving well being, if there are enough resources in the
world, people will satisfy their needs and government will be able to provide the necessary
goods and services so people will have a positive perception of their life. Despite the
connection of these two terms, they can be differentiated in three ways. Firstly,
sustainability is a mechanism to preserve resources, while well-being is a human
perception of what is considered a good way of living. Secondly, when talking about time
frame, well-being is something perceived at the present time, and sustainability projects
itself ahead in time, as something that has to be done in order to get results in the future.
Thirdly, well-being focuses more its attention on current social and economic issues
(money to cover needs, living in a nice neighbourhood, having a good job, products and
services availability). Whereas, sustainability’s focal point is an environmental issue: the
preservation of resources, so industries and people can use them in order to provide a good
perception of living.

Conclusion

In conclusion, sustainable development is the current trend in every country, and its main
objective is to satisfy present and future needs, without disturbing the environment.
However, there are many criticisms of this term, especially because it has been built in
terms of the economic theory (Mitchan, C. 1995) and the desire of nations of growing
more is depleting the resources. But in practice, the term is working and governments
along with the community and businesses are making an effort to preserve the
environment, so children can inherit what their parents have enjoyed. This term has raised
awareness in politicians, industries and population, and several programs that have been
carried out in various areas are being developed on behalf the sustainable development.
So, it is possible to conclude that sustainable development is relevant and it use in today’s
world is essential. People’s activities are being ruled by its principles, and policy making
decisions are mainly designed to accomplish it; every positive or negative action that
people take now, will have big impact on the future. Overall, Sustainable Development
has promoted a big change in attitudes towards the environment and lifestyle, and that is a
big step human-kind has taken since the Industrial Revolution. Thus, the term is rejected
in several forms, it still keeps relevance.
References
1. Jackson, T. (2009) Prosperity without Growth: The Transition to a Sustainable
Economy. London: Sustainable Development Commission. Chapter 3.
Redefining Prosperity.
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publications/downloads/prosperity_without _growth_report.pdf

2. Orton, D. (1990) Sustainable Development: Expanded Environmental

Destruction, Green Web Publications. Green Web Bulletin No. 16.
http://home.ca.inter.net/~greenweb/GW16_Sustainable_Development.pdf

3. Mitchan, C. (1995).The Concept of Sustainable Development: its origins and

Ambivalence. Technology in Society Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp.311-326.

4. Frazier, J. (1997) Sustainable Development: modern elixir or sack dress?

Environmental Conservation Journal, Volume. 24, No. 2, 182-193.
http://journals.cambridge.org.helicon.vuw.ac.nz/action/displayFulltext?
type=1&pdftype=1&fid=38156&jid=ENC&volumeId=24&issueId=&aid=38155

5. Lélé, S. (1991) Sustainable Development: A critical review, World Development

journal, Vol.19, No. 6, pp. 607-621.

6. Treanor, P (1997) Why Sustainability is wrong?

http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/sustainability.html

7. Boehmer, S. (2002) The geo-politics of sustainable development: bureaucracies

and politicians in search of the holy grail, Geoforum Journal, Volume. 33, No. 3,
Pag. 351-365.
 8. Jalil, A. (2010) Sustainable Development in Malaysia: A Case
Study on Household Waste Management. Journal of
Sustainable Development, Volume. 3, No. 3, September 2010.

9. Kulhman, T. and Farrington, J.(2010), What is sustainability? MDPI journal, Vol.

2, No. 11, Pag. 3436-3448. www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

10. New Zealand Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy 2007, Action plan to
maximize energy efficiency and renewable energy, October 2007.
http://www.eeca.govt.nz/sites/all/files/nzeecs-07.pdf

11. Shah, Anup (2011) “Climate Change and Global Warming”, Global Issues Web
Site (Social, Political, Economic and Environmental Issues That Affect Us All).
http://www.globalissues.org/

12. Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and
Development, World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987.
Published as Annex to General Assembly document A/42/427, Development and
International Co-operation: Environment August 2, 1987. Retrieved, 2007.11.14
http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm

13. Katirnis E, 2010. Sustainable Development or Sustainability. Greece, 2010.

http://www.ictcomenius.eu/Workshop/Topic_6_Greece_EN.pdf

Counting Words:
1605 words Total Essay
84 words (references)
1521 words (essay)