The Policy Context of the Sustainability Discourse

Abstract

This chapter reviews the global discourse and policy of sustainable development since the report of the North–South Commission “Our Common Future” (Brundtland Report) from 1987. Sustainability and sustainable development were controversially discussed in science and politics, but the idea was successfully anchored in national and global policies; public support was at first high, later weakening, and the success was limited, as global assessments showed. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the main deficits that currently impede the sustainability process: the lack of a transition strategy, the unequal development and the asymmetric power relations between countries in the Global North and Global South, and the dilemmas and conflicts in the process.

Appendices: Further Information and Material

1.1 1. Questions and Individual Exercises

1.1.1 Learning Exercise 1: Sustainability as an Essentially Contested Concept

Discuss (individually or in a working group) based on the following criteria the terms sustainability and sustainable development—to what extent can the criteria be applied to these terms?

Collier et al. (2006: 216ff) summarised the main criteria for essentially contested concepts from the writings of Gallie as follows:

• 1. Appraisiveness: this means that the concept designates something or assumes that it exists

• 2. Internal complexity: this means that the concept is complex and its definition has several components 

• 3. Diverse describability: this means the concept can be described in several different ways 

• 4. Openness: this means that the definitions of the concept can change  

• 5. Reciprocal recognition: this means that the concept is seen by the discourse participants as controversial concept 

• 6. Progressive competition: this means that with the continuing discourse the quality of arguments improves

To deepen your understanding of the problems with essentially contested concepts you can read the article of Collier et al. (2006).

1.1.2 Learning Exercise 2: Critical Text Analysis—The Brundtland Report—Aims and Assumptions

Analyse the following statements with regard to coherence, clarity, contradictions, forms of reasoning and value assumptions.

Guiding ideas:

• 1. sustainable development implies limits (regarding the state of technology, the social organisation of natural resource use, the ability of the biosphere to absorb the effects of human activities);

• 2. it can trigger a new era of economic growth (in chap. 2 of the report, ideas for reviving growth and changing the quality of growth are discussed);

• 3. continuing with the present forms of unequal development in a world of endemic poverty will lead to ecological and other catastrophes.

The ambivalent role of technology as creating innovation and growth: The report argues for the use and diffusion of environmentally sound technologies (UN 1987: 65ff) but refers also to new and uncontrollable risks resulting from innovative technologies. That technologies themselves require natural resources for their construction and may have unintended consequences, even in the case of “green technologies” or the use of renewable energy sources, was only critically discussed when the technologies were applied. The ecological and other limits that the report mentions are not specified.

Economic growth has so far not solved the problems of inequality and poverty: sustainable development requires changes of growth to make it less material- and energy-intensive and to create a more equitable impact; mutually reinforcing economic and social development and harmony between humanity and nature have not been achieved (UN 1987, chapter 2, points 35, 41, 81). The idea of a sustainable world economy remains unclear, as does that of growth, and does not demonstrate the changes required to make the global economy sustainable, leaving the impression that sustainability is possible within the current system by demanding “more rapid economic growth in both industrial and developing countries, freer market access for the products of developing countries, lower interest rates, greater technology transfer, and significantly larger capital flows, both concessional and commercial”; the idea is deadlocked in the formula “the international economy must speed up world growth while respecting the environmental constraints” (UN 1987, chapter 3, point 3, point 72, 74).

Possible catastrophes as a result of continued uneven development and growth: Unlike in the “Limits to Growth” report from 1972, these are downplayed in the Brundtland Report. Chapter 8 on industrial development shows the difficulties and dilemmas in seeking environment-friendly forms of industrialisation, following from the premise that many human needs can only be met through goods produced by industry. “Industry is central to the economies of modern societies and an indispensable motor of growth. It is essential to developing countries, to widen their development base and meet growing needs. And though industrialized countries are said to be moving into a post industrial, information-based era, this shift must be powered by a continuing flow of wealth from industry” (UN 1987: 144)—in contrast, however, the report states:

It is becoming increasingly clear that the sources and causes of pollution are far more diffuse, complex, and interrelated—and the effects of pollution more widespread, cumulative, and chronic—than hitherto believed. Pollution problems that were once local are now regional or even global in scale. Contamination of soils, ground-water, and people by agrochemicals is widening and chemical pollution has spread to every corner of the planet. (UN 1987: 147)

1.1.3 Learning Exercise 3: Discussion About the Global North–South Divide (Group Work)

Organise a discussion about the Global North–South divide between two groups: one defending and one rejecting the existence of a permanent North–South divide between rich and poor countries. The group of defenders should prepare their arguments in the form of the “transformation hypothesis”, based on analyses of the modern world system (Wallerstein): that centre–periphery relations are part of the system of modern capitalism and can only be dissolved through its social and economic transformation into a new economic and social system—a transformation that is currently under way. The other group should prepare their arguments for a dissolving North–South divide in the form of the “hypothesis of new industrialisation”: industrialisation continues with late industrialisation (examples from BRICS [Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa] countries) and remains part of the new global economy. In the discussion (30–45 minutes) each group needs to respond to the arguments of the other group, not just defend their own positions. One or two participants will guide the discussion and document the main points (in a flipchart). Another person will write a protocol. In a follow-up discussion all participants will discuss their learning process (with the help of the protocol).

Introductory statement for the discussion:

With the advent of modern society and the European colonisation of the Global South, a global divide arose between the rich countries of the North and the poor (colonial, developing) countries of the South. This divide is not simply a geographical phenomenon but a social and economic divide based on the structure of the modern economy and society (some countries in the southern hemisphere, for example Australia and New Zealand, are part of the Global North). This divide can be assumed to be the main reason for the global social, economic and environmental problems to be solved through sustainable development. The controversy about this divide can be expressed in two questions: is this a divide deeply rooted in the modern world system that cannot be overcome without transforming the global economy and society? Or is it a temporary divide that will be dissolved finally with the late industrialisation of countries in the Global South (BRICS countries)? The dispute should also include discussion of adequate statistical indicators for the divide (for example GDP, income levels, human development index) and changing forms of the divide: its old forms (industrial/non-industrial countries: Stettner 1982, discussing the Brandt Report of the North South Commission: Brandt 1980) and its new forms (for example global digital/technological divide in the knowledge society based on internet-based information technology: Hilbert 2016).

Literature for additional reading on the North–South divide: Caporaso (1980), Thérien (1999), Litonjua (2012), Collier (2015), ITU (2019)

(A similar dispute is described as an exercise in Chap. 2 , with different theoretical arguments)

1.2 2. Additional Reading (recommended to deepen your knowledge about the theme of the chapter):

Books about the policy and governance discourse of sustainable development: Worldwatch Institute (2013), Purdy (2015)

The scientific discourse of sustainable development: books in environmental sociology—Burns and Schaefer Caniglia (2016); political ecology—Peet et al. (2010); environmental economics—Harris and Roach (2018); ecological economics—Daly (1996)

Handbooks: sustainability and social science research—Leal Filho et al. (2018); history of sustainability (Caradonna 2018)

Important scientific journals with policy-related sustainability research (international, peer reviewed): “Environment, Development, Sustainability” (multidisciplinary); “Environmental Policy and Governance”; “Environmental Science and Policy” (interdisciplinary); “Environmental Sustainability” (multidisciplinary); “Green Technologies and Environmental Policy”; “Journal of Sustainable Development”; “Sustainability” (online journal); “Sustainable Environment Research”