10 January 2020
A historical perspective on the impact of sustainability issues in science, and how they have been incorporated into policy-making and international sustainability policy.
“Unless special action is taken, human resource use and emissions will continue to increase as a consequence of growth in population and human activity. Importantly, this “human footprint” – if unchecked – will grow beyond the carrying capacity of the globe, that is beyond what the globe can provide on a sustainable basis. If such expansion into unsustainable territory is allowed to happen, decline – or collapse – in human resource use and emissions become unavoidable”.
(Meadows et. al., 1972, p. 26-27)
The above statement was published in 1972 by the Club of Rome in the book “Limits to growth”. It was the first warning on climate change by a non-governmental organization (NGO). Imposing limits to industrial growth was “a novel and even controversial idea at the time” (Meadows et. al, 1972, p.1), whereas today it seems to be the starting point.
The Club of Rome consisted of an international group of businessmen and scientists that used a scientific method for analysing different scenarios to predict environmental outcomes from 1900 to 2100 (Meadows et. al, 1972). The mission of the Club was to “promote the understanding of the global challenges facing humanity and purpose solutions through scientific analysis, communication and advocacy” (Club of Rome, 2019).
From the example of the Club of Rome one can conclude that factual scientific data has been the basis for creating awareness of the sustainability issues we are facing today.
Fig. 1: World model with “unlimited” resources (Meadows et al., 1972, p.133)
In order to practically influence and determine major decisions and actions, policies – that depend largely on scientific research – had to be designed and implemented (Dilling & Lemos, 2011). However, successfully implementing scientific conclusions – like those of the Club of Rome – directly into policy-making is extremely difficult and requires long time horizons (Klauer et. al., 2013).
“It ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new.”
(Machiavelli, 1515, chapter 6)
Machiavelli’s quote gives an idea of the opposing interests of different parties, i.e. conservative and progressive. From the perspective sketched by Machiavelli, it seemed that early international sustainability policy was faced with a strategic dilemma in an attempt to address contradictions between ecology and economy in the industrialized society: either (1) reforming the world economy by enforcing caps to meet with ecological requirements of bio-capacity, or (2) reforming sustainability principles to meet with economic requirements of growth (Gómez-Baggethun & Naredo, 2015).
In order to appropriately cope with the consequences of sustainability issues (e.g. “Limits to growth”), reaching consensus on both the nature of the issue and the solution is essential (US Congress House, 1972). The emotional quality of a policy idea determines its attractiveness, which is called valence. When a policy idea matches the mood of a target population it generates strong attractiveness – or high valence – and has a greater potential to influence policy change (Cox & Béland, 2013).
L' oil crisis in the 1970s caused uncertainty and fear for the future. An increasing uncertainty regarding economic circumstances results in a growing public support for sustainability against globalization, as sustainability offers a way to carefully plan and preserve what seems threatened from globalization (Butler, 2017). Therefore, the valence of sustainability suits better to this public fear (Cox & Béland, 2013).
International sustainability policy
The United Nations Conference on Human Environment – hosted in Stockholm in 1972 – acknowledged “Limits to growth” and emphasized the urgency to avert comprehensive ecological degradation (UN, 1973). The preamble of the summit declaration put public planning and regulation forward to take action to halt the process of ecological degradation. It stated that “governments will bear the greatest burden for large scale environmental policy and action” (US Congress House, 1972, p.21).
After the conference, the UNEP – the United Nations Environmental Program – was established to monitor the process above and maintain consensus (Ivanov, 2018). The UNEP aimed at incorporating environmental concerns into economic goals and defined eco-development as follows:
“Development at regional and local levels, consistent with the potentials of the area involved, with attention given to the adequate and rational use of natural resources, technological styles and organizational forms that respect the natural ecosystems and local social and cultural patterns.”
(UNEP, 1975)
This definition inclined towards strategy (1) of the strategic dilemma, aiming at reforming the world economy. In the subsequent years, “eco-development” was commonly used within both the development and environmental policy domain (Gómez-Baggethun & Naredo, 2015). The definition was an indispensable part of the Cocoyoc symposium on “Patterns of Resource Use, Environment and Development Strategies” that was organized by UNEP and UNCTAD (the United Nations Commission on Trade and Development). The symposium concluded the Cocoyoc Declaration, which stressed environmental limits and social justice:
“We reject the unilinear view which sees development essentially and inevitably as the effort to initiate the historical model of the countries that for various reasons happen to be rich today. […] The task of statesmanship is to guide the nations towards a new system more capable of meeting the inner limits of basic human needs for all the world’s people and of doing so without violating the outer limits of the planet’s resources and environment.”
(UNEP/UNCTAD, 1974, Article 2)
Despite the prevailing view that ecological requirements of bio-capacity had to be respected, the U.S. rejected the entire Cocoyoc declaration days after the symposium, reversing all results. In fact, the term eco-development was banned and could not be used anymore in official international conferences (Galtung, 2010; Naredo, 1996).
Instead, the American president Ronald Reagan together with the British conservative prime minister Margaret Thatcher imposed liberal radicalism in the late 1970’s, when the oil price declined and the fear for economic uncertainty was diminished (Butler, 2017). Government intervention was replaced by liberalisation, deregulation and privatisation, with major consequences for the environment and international sustainability policy (Mak, 2019).
In 1983, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) was established, an independent commission focusing on environmental and developments issues. In 1987, “Our common future” or the “Brundtland report” was presented, in which WCED defined sustainable development as follows:
“A development model able to meet the needs of present generations without compromising the capacity of future generations to meet their own needs.”
(WCED, 2018)
The WCED moved away from the UNEP’s principle of reforming the world’s economy by respecting ecological requirements of bio-capacity. Instead, international sustainability principles had to suit economic requirements of growth, i.e. strategy (2) of the above mentioned strategic dilemma. In fact, it became a general principle in sustainability conferences that economic growth and liberalization of international trade are good for the environment (Arrow et al. 1995).
“By shifting the focus of the problem from growth to poverty and by presenting the former as the solution to the latter, sustainable development [liberated] growth from the stigma that had plagued it over the 1970s to be reframed as a necessary step towards the solutions to environmental problems.”
(Gómez-Baggethun & Naredo, 2015, p.389)
This paved the way to turn the social market economy of the 1970s and 1980s into a capitalist market economy of the 1990s, and into a neo-liberal and hyper-globalized economy of the new millennium (Mak, 2019). (Mak, 2019).
A radical change in international sustainability policy is needed to tackle the economic roots of ecological and social decline, and make up for the previous lost decades (Gómez-Baggethun & Naredo, 2015). However, only economic uncertainty seems able to reawaken society’s awareness of the unsustainability of capitalism, explaining the rise of sustainability after the credit crisis (Cox & Béland, 2013).
Conclusion
The above changes in international sustainability policy related to growth reflect the adaptation of international environmental governance to the dominant expansive economic policies.
Bibliografia
Arrow, K., Bolin, B., […] Perrings, C. & Pimentelet, D. (1995, 28 April) Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment. Science 268 (5210), pp. 520.
Butler, C.D. (2017, April). Limits to growth, planetary boundaries, and planetary health. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 25, pp. 59-65 Retrieved on 3 January 2020, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.08.002
Club of Rome (2019). Home. Retrieved on 7 December 2019, from https://www.clubofrome.org/
Cox, R.H. & Béland, D. (2013, April). Valence, Policy Ideas, and the Rise of Sustainability. Governance 26 (2), pp. 307-328. Retrieved on 24 December 2019, from https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12003
Dilling, L., Lemos, M.C., (2011). Creating usable science: opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Global Environmental Change 21 (2), pp. 680–689
Galtung, J. (2018, 29 March). The Cocoyoc Declaration. TRANSCEND Media Service. Retrieved on 29 December 2019, from https://www.transcend.org/tms/2010/03/the-cocoyoc-declaration/
Gómez-Baggethun, E. & Naredo, J.M. (2015, 22 May). In search of lost time: the rise and fall of limits to growth in international sustainability policy. Sustainability Science 10 (3), pp. 385–395. Retrieved on 24 December 2019, from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0308-6
Ivanov, A. (2018, November). The Internationalization of the Environmental Protection and Creation of the United Nations Environment Program. Horizons Series A. Vol. 22, pp. 7-20. Retrieved on 28 December 2019, from https://doi.org/10.20544/HORIZONS.A.22.1.18.P01
Klauer, B., Manstetten, R., Petersen, T. & Schiller, J. (2013, 23 April). The art of long-term thinking: A bridge between sustainability science and politics. Ecological Economics 93, pp. 79-84. Retrieved on 24 December 2019, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.018
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The Prince. Retrieved on 3 January 2020, from https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1232/1232-h/1232-h.htm
Mak, G. (2019, November). Grote verwachtingen In Europa – 1999-2019. Atlas Contact: Amsterdam
Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L. & Randers, J. (1972) Limits to growth. Universe books: New York
Naredo, J.M. (1996). Sobre el origen, el uso y el contenido del término sostenible. Retrieved on 5 January 2020, from http://www.buyteknet.info/fileshare/data/ambides_lect/Sostenible.pdf
UN (1973, November). United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm Conference). Downloaded on 24 December 2019, from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/milestones/humanenvironment
UNEP (1975). Report of the Governing Council. Downloaded on 24 December 2019, from https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/17274/75_0304_GC3_Report_K7510025.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
UNEP & UNCTAD (United Nations Development Programme/United Nations Commission on Trade and Development) (1974). Patterns of resource use, environment and development strategies. Cocoyoc. Mexico, October 8–12, 1974
United States Congress House (1972). Report on the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. Downloaded on 3 January 2020, from
https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=zfEDx9M-TfgC&rdid=book-zfEDx9M-TfgC&rdot=1
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987). Our Common Future. Retrieved on 29 December 2019, from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf
White House (2009, 9 March). Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies 3-9-09. Retrieved on 14 December 2019, from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/memorandum-heads-executive-departments-and-agencies-3-9-09
