[Explainer Series] The Introduction of Sustainable Development

In 1983, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) was formed, and in 1987, the commission chairwoman famously published a report titled Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report. This is where the most popular definition of sustainable development comes from: development that meets the present needs without preventing future generations from doing the same. Central to this argument is the idea that the pursuit of economic growth, achieved via exploitation of natural resources, is not sustainable. Natural resource limits must be protected to support a particular standard or level of human well-being and for the benefit of future generations.

Therefore, sustainable development is firmly against the quest for economic growth at any cost and highlights both the strengths and limitations of human activity. Consequently, sustainable development begins with ecological sustainability and encourages a more holistic perspective on economics and ecology. The introduction of this concept has led to several debates on matters relating to the environment and development.

However, even though popular opinion suggests that a balance must be maintained between the two concepts mentioned above, that balance is still quite far from being achieved. Interestingly, many perspectives indicate several worldviews on the relationship between the environment and economic growth. These worldviews can be categorized as anthropocentric and biocentric.

Anthropocentrism and biocentrism are age-old scientific traditions that have led to different approaches to sustainable development. Anthropocentrism holds that humans are above nature in terms of hierarchy; therefore, humans have the right to conquer it. This view has strong religious and secular influences and mainly gained support in the industrial era. On the other hand, biocentrism opposes the pursuit of wealth as a goal and instead focuses on improving the non-material aspects of the global lived experience. This perspective states that consumption should not be excessive; it should be based on human need rather than greed (i.e. economic growth achieved by exploiting natural resources).

Various approaches to sustainable development and related policy can be personified as a “ladder.” On the "ladder" are the ideal approach, strong sustainability, weak sustainability, and the treadmill approach.

The Ladder Approach

At the highest level of the "ladder" is the ideal approach, also known as the "ecological approach" or pure sustainable development, as characterized by the deep ecology movement. In this approach, humans balance what they take from the earth’s ecosystems with what they give back. Thus, due to humans living within finite ecological capacities, there will be zero economic growth, quantitatively speaking—except for growth permitted in developing countries and more impoverished areas of developed countries. However, zero growth is allowed in highly developed areas.

This approach is biocentric and recognizes the value of non-human life. What sets this approach apart is that it suggests development indicators focusing on quality of life and criticizes current systems of measuring development. This model is not widely favored, as it is considered too eccentric.

Following this is the "strong" sustainable development approach. It states that economic growth is not, in fact, a prerequisite for environmental protection. Rather, environmental protection is a prerequisite for economic development. For this to happen, a new type of economic development must be pursued—one that focuses more on the ecological paradigm.

With this approach, political and economic policies aim to preserve the productive capacity of environmental resources that require protection—such as rainforests—or potentially improve eroded soils. Additionally, markets must be regulated, and the state must intervene where necessary to grow local economies and sustain local environments. In terms of state intervention, fiscal, environmental, economic, and social sector policies are needed to positively impact social and economic change. In essence, this approach discourages quantitative growth and calls for a shift toward qualitative growth, still within the context of sustained economic growth.

Beneath that level on the ladder is “weak” sustainability. The main goal of this approach is to find harmony between economic growth and environmental concerns. It promotes two core elements of sustainability. The first is that resources and the environment must be used sustainably. The second is the traditional objective of economic growth—namely, the sustainable development of real GDP per capita over time.

Under this approach, the primary driver of environmental policy is maintaining economic growth while accounting for environmental costs. This sets it apart from the more "traditional" economic growth model. It can be said that this approach is anthropocentric, as it holds that the creation of material wealth cannot be separated from environmental wealth, which is made possible through technical manipulation by administrators. These administrators have access to innovative tools, including ecological impact assessments and cost-benefit analysis, among others. This approach is prevalent and has strongly influenced many current environmental policies.

From MDGs to SDGs

The UN adopted the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in September 2000 as a call for a global partnership to reduce poverty. Kofi Annan introduced the eight objectives to focus on. The MDGs were effective in that the development agenda they encouraged led to positive international progress in reducing global poverty; rates reportedly dropped by 50%.

Although the themes of the MDGs were already being addressed beforehand, they had not been conceptualized as coherent global goals. However, critics have debated the overall effectiveness of the MDGs. They argue that there was a severe imbalance in the global progress of the goals. Some countries focused on specific objectives while neglecting others.

The main reason for this outcome is that the MDGs were largely designed for implementation by the Global South, even though countries in the Global South contributed minimally to the formulation of the goals themselves.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were created to build on and improve the work begun by the MDGs. They consist of 17 objectives and mainly differ from the MDGs in that they apply to all UN member states—not just developing countries. Their success depends on the empowerment of local governments, decentralized cooperation, and vertically integrated action.

Progress monitoring remains an immense challenge to the universal implementation of the SDGs. However, the fight to achieve them continues and is championed across both the Global North and the Global South.

Moliehi Mafantiri is a registered Candidate EAP and an environmental scientist interested in climate policy. She writes this in her capacity as the Supporting Contact Point, LCOY South Africa 2025, representing the Global Shapers Community: Tshwane Hub.