Visions of sustainable development


At the beginning of Chapter 5 of the J Suming reading, there is a quote stating that “Most discussions of sustainability focus on implementation and ignore whet the world of our dreams would look, feel and smell like”. I have a personal philosophy which drives me in my work and is the reason why I want to work in international development. However, I have never considered it in terms of sustainability. Having now considered this, I have come up with the following vision.

My sustainably developed world is one in which:
• Everybody has the ability to achieve their potential irrespective of the circumstances into which they are born.
• All forms of life can exist harmoniously and symbiotically, without threat of unnatural depletion or extinction.

I realise that this is quite broad and I have deliberately avoided being explicit. For me, visions are like a guiding principle that propels and underpins the policies and programmes that drive progress towards its realisation. I’ve written this in the hope that it will encourage others to consider and share their own visions.


4 Responses to “Visions of sustainable development”

  1. chikaj Says:

    One particular definition of Sustainable development that I find lucid is that of the Brundtland Report (1987) as follows:
    “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
    Your concept of a sustainably developed world is really insightful and quite in line with that defined above. I find both definitions wholly inclusive. Brundtland Report considers the needs of the present and the future and yours equal opportunity for present and future generations ( in other words ensuring that the opportunities of future generations is not hampered by the activities of the present).

  2. Mampa Diatezua Says:

    My inspirations came from the book of Diamond, J. (2005)-Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed; New York, Viking Books.

    Everyone must know that “sustainable development” is a notion, which binds to defend and hold the soil as it is, if not better. There is a program set up by the United Nations in alignment to complete this goal. The cause that this assembly was conceived was because numerous nations were concerned about the world evolving too developed. So the Un determined that it would step in and try to save and maintain the earth.
    To discuss this, Allen (1980) places ahead his delineation of sustainable development as “development that is expected to accomplish lasting approval of human desires and enhancement of the value of human life”. The significant saying to address in this delineation is ‘likely to achieve’. This notion in idea can be productive and applied effectively, although we can critically talk about the notion in periods of what and who is to be engaged, with relevance to the world that we reside in today. Certain obligations have to be come to by all, for example firm promise from both evolved and evolving countries. Is it likely to competently request a conceptual sustainable development events in the world today? Are the evolved nations arranged to consign and eager to address the human and ecological difficulty with full aim of explaining the problem? These inquiries are to be addressed with relative to the notion of sustainable development with specific quotation to evolving countries.
    To resolve, it desires to be said that approaching up with development programmes and conceiving sustainable development notions is many simpler than applying them to our everyday world situation. The number of inequalities that lie between evolved and evolving nations are so large that it is fundamentally unlikely that sustainable development can competently be achieved. The growing difficulty and annoyance origins from the outcomes that these summits have failed to achieve. Many nations that are currently in despairing need of help are getting poorer and poorer with numerous programmes been assembled to explain this problem.

  3. diatezuam Says:

    I am adding comments about visions of sustainable development.

    This can be seen as a form of development that ensures that economic growth, rising living standards, and other types of development can be maintained for the current and the future generations.
    Sustainable development is domestically acceptable, economically sound, eco-friendly, and culturally sensitive. It embraces the regular types of development-economic, political, social infrastructure, health, and education development-and makes certain that progress in these aras can be continued. Moreover, it includes the replenishment and development of cultural and social resources as well as traditional material ones. It is a form of development that tries to improve the present without compromising the future. The principle of sustainable development recognizes that today’s human beings deserve a reasonable standard of living and that future generations should be given the same opportunity (Blood, 2000).
    Sustainable development refers to a process of societal advance embodying a more equitable and environmentally aware pattern of development that requires a careful integration of economic, social, and environmental objectives. Since the 1990s, the concept has increasingly been endorsed by governments and official bodies, and it has gradually emerged as a new international norm qualifying the sort of change that is to be regarded as authentic development.

  4. diatezuam Says:

    My third comment concerning visions of sustainable development.

    The conventional approach in thinking about the nature of “sustainable development” is to focus on how to achieve long-run economic growth, as measured by increases in real per capita income. That is certainly a relevant issue, but a more fundamental question is: “Growth for whom?” State-led development may achieve growth, but only by suppressing economic and personal freedom (Habermas 2007 99). In this article, I argue that such illiberal growth is inconsistent with sustainable development understood in the liberal sense as an expansion of choices open to individuals. The collapse of the Soviet system of comprehensive central planning is a stark reminder that institutions that protect property rights and increase opportunities for exchange are more likely to advance human development than those that deny fundamental rights to liberty and property.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: