Work83 - N/a PDF

Preview

Summary

N/a...

Description

The difference between these concerns in relation to issues such as, population growth, environmental degradation and technological developments in the past and today is that in the distant past, these changes all took place at a relatively slow pace, making the changes often imperceptible during an individual life span (Meadows, 1994). Moreover, the slow pace of change also meant that there was reasonable time for either the problems to disappear or for solutions to be found (Bossel, 1999). This however, has not been the case during the past two centuries. Issue of SD arises as the rate of the above mentioned changes exceeds the ability of the earth’s response rate. It is now generally accepted that the current development patterns are contributing to the regular degradation of resources and mounting world poverty. The ability of the present economic and social transformation patterns to address the needs of the population into the future, providing higher standards of living has therefore, been brought under serious doubt (Elliot, 1999). Herein, SD moves beyond from being a mere environmental movement, bringing concerns of social and economic wellbeing into the equation as well. In this sense, some authors (such as Elliot, 1999) view SD as an alternative development pattern to meet the needs of the global community. Since the early 1970s, efforts have been made at an international level to develop a world approach to SD (see Appendix 1). The next section goes on to discuss some of these key developments at the international level. 2.2.1 International Policy Developments The UN Conference on Human Environment (UNCHE) (also known as the Stockholm conference) in 1972 was the first to acknowledge and bring into prominence the polarisation between the need for economic development and environmental concerns between the developing (i.e. 'southern') and developed (i.e. 'northern') countries. The Chapter 2▐ SD and the Construction Industry 15 ‘southern’ countries have emphasised the fact that they are not willing to accept limits to growth that the ‘northern’ countries have not enforced themselves (Langhelle, 1999). This was evident for example, in the opposing views of ‘pollution’ expressed by Sweden (in relation to the pollution of their lakes) and India (Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India, stating that 'poverty is the worst pollution'). Despite these differences the conference was a noteworthy success, as it managed to bring the environmental issues to the international arena for the first time (Dresner, 2008; Kates et al., 2005). In 1974, the ecumenical study conference on ‘Science and Technology for Human Development’ held by the World Council of Churches came up with the idea of a ‘sustainable society’ (Dresner, 2008). Their main emphasis was on social concerns rather than environmental concerns with calls for equitable distribution and democratic decision making. However, the council also identified the importance of physical sustainability by recognising the need for functioning within the limits of the earth’s carrying capacity (Dresner, 2008). Most of these ideas were later taken up by the Brundtland Commission and was used in describing their own concept of ‘SD’ (see section 2.3). The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) or The Brundtland Commission was formed in 1984 and constituted of 22 members representing both the developed and developing world. The Commission was tasked with formulating ‘a global agenda for change’ incorporating, inter alia, proposals and recommendations for long term strategies for achieving SD (WCED, 1987). The Commission’s report 'Our Common Future' therefore, laid out the most widely quoted definition of SD to date, as a proposed ‘new development path’ for sustaining human progress into the distant future (see section 2.3). The report is acknowledged for providing a political opening for the concept of SD to evolve (Daly, 1991). By the late 1990s, SD had gained recognition surpassing the boundaries of various environmental organisations (Elliot, 1999). Contributing to this wide spread recognition was the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) or the ‘Earth Summit’ held in 1992. The summit, which took place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, had the central aim of identifying the main actions to be undertaken towards SD in the future. The realisation of the need for highest level consensus to achieve this resulted in Chapter 2 ▐ SD and the Construction Industry 16 the gathering of heads of state for the first time to consider the environment (Elliot, 1999). As a

result, the conference was attended by representatives of 178 national governments, including over 100 heads of state, as well as, numerous representatives of non-government organisations. The conference also marked the first instance, where the need for strategies for SD for countries was recognised. At the summit, the heads of government from around the world adopted Agenda 21, calling all countries to develop national SD strategies. Afterwards, in 1997, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) led to the development of the Kyoto Protocol, which was an international and legally binding agreement aimed at reducing the emission of GHGs. The protocol is based on the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’. Therefore, a heavier burden has been placed on the industrialised countries recognising that they are more responsible for the current high levels of GHG emissions through more than 150 years of industrial activity (UNFCCC, 2012). The protocol requires its parties to implement policies and measures to minimise the adverse effects of climate change, international trade and social, environmental and economic impacts on other parties. A major feature is that the protocol presents a binding target for reducing GHG emissions. During its first commitment period from 2008 to 2012, this target was set to an average of 5% against the 1990 levels for 37 industrialised countries and the European community (UNFCCC, 2012). In the G8 summit held in 2009, this was converted to a global long-term goal of reducing global emissions by 80% or more for developed countries by 2050. In 2002, the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) was held in Johannesburg, South Africa. The summit delivered three main outcomes; a political declaration, a plan of implementation and the establishment of numerous partnership initiatives around the key commitment areas of sustainable consumption and production, water and sanitation, and energy (DEFRA, 2011b). To the criticism of some parties, the focus was given mainly to the implementation of existing agreements with the cooperation of the private sector rather than the formulation of new mandatory agreements. Since then a steady flow of organised movements in the form of international conferences, treaties and action plans have continued (see Appendix 1 for a more Chapter 2▐ SD and the Construction Industry 17 comprehensive list of these international level conferences). The latest amongst these was the Rio+20 conference held in June, 2012, which marked the 20th anniversary of the ‘Earth Summit’. According to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, this conference has affirmed the fundamental principles of SD and renewed the essential commitments towards it (UN Department of Public Information, 2012). The final agreements of the conference, which were put forward in a document entitled ‘The Future We Want’ called for a wide range of actions including, launching a process to establish SD goals, establishing a new forum for SD and recognising the importance of voluntary commitments towards SD (United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, 2012). Likewise, the realisation that the sustainability of the human society is at stake has now made SD into an issue, which is rarely out of international and national level discussion. While the majority recognise the concept to be of utmost importance, it remains poorly understood and the source of much debate and disagreement (Blair and Evans, 2004; Daly, 1991; Halliday, 2008; Hopwood et al., 2005). The following sections go on to discuss some of the different attempts at defining SD as well as some disagreements and debates surrounding the concept. 2.3 DEFINING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT The need for a fairly detailed definition for SD has been stressed by many authors (see Pezzey, 1992, Kates et al., 2005). According to Elliot (1999), definitions play the important role of providing a basis for developing the means to achieve SD in future. Following the different international developments discussed in the previous section, as well as academic interest, a large number of definitions of SD are now in circulation. Indeed, some authors have observed the number of available definitions to be over 200 (see Parkin, 2000). The range and diversity of these definitions indicates that SD is a concept that ‘everyone agrees, but no one defines consistently’ (Pezzey, 1992). One of the most commonly cited definitions of SD has been put forward in the report of the Brundtland Commission. As mentioned in section 2.2, the Commission envisioned a new

development path that, ‘sustained human progress not just in a few places for a few years, but for the entire planet into the distant future' (WCED, 1987). Chapter 2▐ SD and the Construction Industry 18 This new path was called 'SD' and it was defined as, ‘development, which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs' (WCED, 1987). Following the years that passed since the report first came out, this phrase has been ‘repeated, misquoted and rewritten’ countless times (Dresner, 2008) giving rise to a plethora of criticisms, arguments and various strategies and policies. One of the often cited criticisms alludes to the simplicity and vagueness of the above statement. However, authors such as, Langhelle (1999), Lafferty (1999) and Dresner (2008) all stress that this criticism is often related to ‘selective reading’ of the text. Dresner (2008) for instance, notes that the paragraphs subsequent to the above stated definition within the report clearly show the complexity and the comprehensiveness of the Commission's notion of SD. Three main aspects are highlighted within this explanation of SD by the Commission. These are;  The focus on needs: The report emphasises that SD requires; ‘meeting the basic needs of all and extending to all the opportunity to fulfil their aspirations for a better life' (WCED, 1987). The report further highlights that ecological and other catastrophes cannot be effectively addressed unless the problem of poverty is first resolved. However, the Commission recognises that just a new form of economic development would not be sufficient to address this issue of widespread poverty. In order to provide an effective sustainable solution, this new form of development would have to be reinforced with political systems that encourage effective participation of citizens in decision making (Dresner, 2008). Consequently, more democracy is called for in international decision making.  The idea of limitations: The limits implied here are those imposed by, (a) the present state of technology and social organisation on the environment, and (b) the ability of the biosphere to absorb the effects of human activities. The report goes on to explain that, ultimately SD is a ‘process of change’ as opposed to a ‘fixed state of harmony’. Political will is paramount in managing this change process within the above mentioned limitations. For instance, the report states that SD requires, ‘...a process of change in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development, and institutional change Chapter 2▐ SD and the Construction Industry 19 are made consistent with future as well as present needs’(WCED, 1987).  The idea of equity: The Brundtland report also emphasises that equity (both intergenerational and intra-generational) is a crucial aspect of SD even at its narrowest definition. Bebbington (2001) notes that this emphasis placed on inter-generational and intra-generational equity is a notion that is often overlooked in subsequent debates on SD....