.

Teaching and Learning Resource (TLR)

1. Title

The Contested Nature of Sustainable Development Part 3: Critical Readings

2. Keywords

Sustainable development, economics, sociology, philosophy.

3. Introduction

Sustainable development is a “metafix” that will unite everybody from the profit-minded industrialist and risk-minimizing subsistence farmer to the equity-seeking social worker, the pollution-concerned or wildlife-loving First Worlder, the growth-maximizing policy maker, the goal-oriented bureaucrat, and therefore, the vote-counting politician.(1)

Sustainable development has emerged in the last decade or so as apparently one of the most important goals of public policy. Most of the world’s governments have now endorsed one or more of the several international agreements on sustainable development produced at, and subsequent to, the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED).(2) In so doing they have committed themselves, amongst other things, to producing their own national strategies for sustainable development and promoting the development of similar strategies at the level of local government. This activity in the political sphere has taken place within a context of intense lobbying by a wide range of business and non-governmental organisations. Alongside all of this, and interacting with it, the subject of sustainable development has been investigated by large numbers of academics, approaching the subject from a wide range of disciplinary and intellectual perspectives.

Although there is apparently widespread agreement that sustainable development is ‘a good thing’, there is actually much disagreement as to what it actually means. Contained within this disagreement are disputes concerning, for example, the science of environmental change, the economics of resource management, the environmental impact of different technologies, and the efficacy of different policy instruments. In addition, there are debates of a more fundamental philosophical, ethical and socio-political nature, as indicated by the following quotation:

As a social goal … sustainability is fraught with unresolved questions. Sustainable for how long: a generation, one century, a millennium, ten millennia? Sustainable at what level of human appropriation: individual households, local villages, major cities, entire nations, global economies? Sustainable for whom: all humans alive now, all humans that will ever live, all living beings at this time, all living beings that will ever live? Sustainable under what conditions: for contemporary transnational capitalism, for low-impact Neolithic hunters and gatherers, for some space-faring global empire? Sustainable development for what: personal income, social complexity, gross national product, material frugality, individual consumption, ecological biodiversity?(3)

4. Aim

The aim of this TLR is to provide students with an opportunity to engage critically with academic analyses which seek, from a range of perspectives, to explore in some detail the contested and problematic nature of sustainable development. The TLR is part of a series which, collectively, are intended to provide students with a critical understanding of sustainable development. (See Section 13 – Links with other TLRs.)

5. Learning outcomes

After using this TLR, students should:

• be aware that the concept of sustainable development has been subjected to a number of academic critiques from a range of disciplinary perspectives;
• have a critical understanding of the principal arguments deployed in at least one of these critiques;
• be able to make contributions to debates on sustainable development that are informed by the critique(s) they have studied.

6. Pre-requisites

Students should already be familiar with the concept of sustainable development; and, in particular, appreciate that there are many different interpretations of, or approaches to, sustainable development. They should also, preferably, have studied a sample of these competing approaches, such that they are aware of at least some of the (at times quite fundamental) ways in which they differ. Where this is lacking, the following TLR might be used prior to this one:

• Sustainable Development Part 1: Analysing Prescriptive Texts

Students should have at least an elementary knowledge of environmental ethics and/or values. Where they do not have this knowledge, the following TLRs might be used prior to this one:

• Introduction to Personal Environmental Values
• Approaches in Environmental Ethics
• Guidelines for the Analysis of Environmental Values in Texts

In addition, it would be helpful if students were familiar with the idea that the production of knowledge can be view as a process of making ‘knowledge claims’, and had had at least some experience of thinking critically about such processes. Where this is lacking, the following TLRs might be used prior to this one:

• Classifying Knowledge Claims
• Evaluating the Credibility of Knowledge Claims

7. How to use TLR

This TLR is based around three readings (see Section 9 – Stimulus Material). This could be managed in a number of ways – which may, but need not, involve using the generic study questions provided in the Appendix as a framework for their analyses. For example, they could be asked to work independently, in pairs or in small groups. The could be asked to report back on their work orally (eg as individuals giving presentations to peer groups or pairs/groups giving presentations to the whole class) or in writing (eg in the form of individual essays or group reports). Students would get most out of the exercise if they were given the opportunity to analyse at least one of the readings themselves and to discuss all three of the readings.

It goes without saying, of course, that students should be fully briefed with regard to the nature of the activity they are to undertake, the expected learning outcomes, any associated assessment, and so on. Ideally, they should also be given an opportunity to reflect upon the learning activity (what they have actually learnt, the value of what they have learnt, etc) – in addition to discussing the substantive products of their analyses.

8. Instructions to students

As directed by tutor.

9. Stimulus Material

This TLR is based around the following readings:

• Beckerman, Wilfred (1994) Sustainable Development: Is it a Useful Concept? Environmental Values, 3, 191-209. [Claims that ‘strong’ interpretations of sustainable development are flawed because they: fail to distinguish between positive knowledge claims (eg concerning whether or not a particular practice is technically sustainable) and normative ones (eg concerning whether or not it is desirable); assume that ‘needs’ are fixed; propose that present generations have a moral duty to preserve all species of flora and fauna for future generations regardless of cost (especially to those most in need in the present – concluding that ‘strong sustainability’ is “morally repugnant”. Claims that ‘weak’ interpretations, which aim to maximise human welfare and permit “man-made capital” to be substituted for “natural capital” cannot be distinguished from traditional welfare economics – concluding that ‘weak sustainability’ is “logically redundant”. Would be challenging for students without at least some knowledge of economics.]

• Palmer, Clare (1994) Some Problems with Sustainability. Studies in Christian Ethics, 7, 52-62. [Analyses some practical and conceptual difficulties associated with the contested concept of sustainability. Briefly identifies problems concerning sustainability in relation to resource use, population, consumption and pollution – mainly deriving from the inherent uncertainty associated with knowledge claims in these areas. Goes on the examine in some detail a number of problems concerning sustainability in relation to intergenerational justice, intragenerational justice and the environment – mainly deriving from ambiguities of an ethical nature. Would be challenging for students without at least some knowledge of ethics.]

• Redclift, Michael (1993) Sustainable Development: Needs, Values and Rights. Environmental Values, 2, 3-20. [Discusses sustainable development in relation to modernist (ie post-Enlightenment) conceptions of ‘progress’. Presents a constructivist critique of the concept of ‘needs’, and the significance of environmental economics and science. Would be challenging for students without at least some knowledge of sociology / social theory and, in particular, of the realist-constructivist debate in epistemology.]

The following reading might also be used, although it is likely to be much more difficult than the three above for most students. Nevertheless, it is of interest because of its focus on the processes by which ‘knowledge’ concerning sustainable development is produced, and its analysis of knowledge as a form of power.

• Timothy Luke (1995) Sustainable Development as a Power/Knowledge System: The Problem of “Governmentality”, pp21-32. In Frank Fischer and Michael Black, eds, Greening Environmental Policy: The Politics of a Sustainable Future. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. [Analyses the politics of sustainable development in terms of competing ‘discourses’ produced by different groups and coalitions (including governmental, non-governmental and business organisations), each with its own set of interests, values and ways of ‘knowing’ about the world. Thus, the politically dominant account of sustainable development can best be viewed as a governmental strategy – in response to encircling “grids of ecological alarm” – in which states and their agencies produce and disseminate a particular way of ‘knowing’ about ‘environmental problems’ and how to ‘solve’ them – with the result that existing power structures are largely preserved. Would be very challenging for students without at least some knowledge of social theory and, in particular, of discourse theory.]

Other readings could be used in addition to, or instead of, these readings – at the discretion of the tutor.

10. Degree stage

It is anticipated that this TLR would be most appropriate for use with students at level 3. However, it could be used at level 2 provided that the students satisfied the pre-requisites (see Section 6), and that the activity was presented in an appropriate manner.

11. Resource requirements

The TLR has no special resource requirements.

12. Preparation

To be decided by the tutor.

13. Links with other TLRs

This TLR has been designed as part of the following series:

• The Contested Nature of Sustainable Development - Part 1: Analysing Prescriptive Texts
• The Contested Nature of Sustainable Development - Part 2: Analysis of Key Issues
• The Contested Nature of Sustainable Development - Part 3: Critical Readings

The first of these TLRs is intended to serve as a ‘primer’ on sustainable development, which may but need not be followed by one or more of the others – used in whatever order seems most appropriate in any particular learning and teaching situation.

14. Follow-up activities

Ideally students should read in full any of the texts that they were not required to read during the course of this exercise.

They might also be given a follow-up exercise based on a series of articles that appeared in the journal Environmental Values following publication of Beckerman's critique of sustainable development – including a reply to his critics from Beckerman himself. The references for these articles – in order of their publication – are as follows:

• Skolimowski, Henryk (1995) In Defence of Sustainable Development. Environmental Values, 3, 191-209.
• Daly, Herman (1995) On Wilfred Beckerman’s Critique of Sustainable Development, Environmental Values, 4, 49-55.
• Jacobs, Michael (1995) Sustainable Development, Capital Substitution and Economic Humility: A Response to Beckerman. Environmental Values, 4, 57-68.
• Beckerman, Wilfred (1995) How do you like your Sustainability Sir? Weak or Strong? A Reply to my Critics Environmental Values, 4, 169-179.
• Common, MS (1996) Beckerman and his Critics on Strong and Weak Sustainability: Confusing Concepts and Conditions. Environmental Values, 5, 83-88.

Students could simply be invited to read these articles. Alternatively, the articles could be used as a basis for a more formal learning activity, such as a series of seminar presentations and discussions.

In addition, see Section 13 – Links with other TLRs.

15. Recommended reading

There is a huge and rapidly expanding academic literature on sustainable development – produced by scholars across a wide range of disciplines. It is not possible to list the innumerable books and articles that they have published, or the many internet sites on which some of this material is now available. However, it is possible to identify at least some of the journals in which articles on sustainable development frequently appear:

• Environmental Politics
• Environmental Values
• Local Environment
• Sustainable Development

Many different kinds of organisation also publish in this area (in print and on their own internet sites), including:

• Local authorities and associated bodies, such as the Local Government Management Board (based in London);
• National governments, governmental departments and bodies, and QUANGOs;
• International governmental bodies, such as the European Union and the United Nations;
• Political parties;
• Businesses and business organisations, such as the Chamber of Commerce and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development;
• Pressure groups, such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace.

In addition, material on sustainable development can sometimes be found in the mass media (print-based and broadcast).

Appendix

Sustainable Development Part 3:

Critical Readings

Study questions

Read the following questions prior to reading the text you have been given. Then read the text and answer the questions.

1. What are the key points of the author’s critique of sustainable development?
2. What arguments does the author advance in support of his/her critique?
3. To what extent do you agree with the author’s critique?

Notes:

(1) S. Lele (1991) Sustainable Development: A Critical Review. World Development, 19(6), p613. Cited in A. Dobson (1996) Environment Sustainabilities: An Analysis and a Typology. Environmental Politics, 5(3), p401.

(2) For example, Agenda 21 and the conventions on climate change and biodiversity.

(3) Timothy Luke (1995) Sustainable Development as a Power/Knowledge System: The Problem of “Governmentality”, pp21-2. In Frank Fischer and Michael Black, eds, Greening Environmental Policy: The Politics of a Sustainable Future. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.