Unsustainable Development
The notion of "sustainable development" is looking ever more fragile, at least in political terms. Indeed, the rift is growing between advocates of environmental protection and economic development — two key components of sustainable development that the landmark World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987 judged were "impossible to separate." Consider the barely veiled ...
The notion of "sustainable development" is looking ever more fragile, at least in political terms. Indeed, the rift is growing between advocates of environmental protection and economic development -- two key components of sustainable development that the landmark World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987 judged were "impossible to separate."
The notion of "sustainable development" is looking ever more fragile, at least in political terms. Indeed, the rift is growing between advocates of environmental protection and economic development — two key components of sustainable development that the landmark World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987 judged were "impossible to separate."
Consider the barely veiled antipathy of "Striking a Balance," a report issued last summer by Conservation International (CI), a U.S.-based environmental group working to protect biodiversity in more than 30 countries. "As poverty has become the overarching focus of development assistance," write CI’s Nicholas Lapham and Rebecca Livermore, "biodiversity is increasingly framed in terms of its relation to poverty reduction…. [I]t appears to be diminishing support for shorter-term conservation investments." They go on to lament that "[b]iodiversity funding is now driven heavily by social and economic objectives, which are not necessarily synonymous with objectives such as avoiding extinctions or protecting unique or biologically diverse landscapes." As proof of this shift, environment advocates note how the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank have shifted their development agendas by creating "poverty-focused" environmental programs. But the report also goes on to point out that inconsistent reporting and expanding definitions of biodiversity assistance make it impossible to track real trends in conservation funding.
So is sustainable development unsustainable? Charles Geisler, a professor of rural sociology at Cornell University, views the rift as less of a death knell for sustainable development than a call for development advocates to treat each interest separately. "[These groups] are very aware that the development program is extremely limited and probably can’t carry its own weight without including the environmental goals." Geisler thinks that a new modus vivendi is in the cards, noting how the two groups "seem to be looking for more of a third way." Maybe they’ll find a new buzzword while they’re at it.
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
