Towards Sustainable Development for Local Authorities

8/10/2019 Towards Sustainable Development for Local Authorities

1/164

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES SERIES NO.5

Towards

European

Environment

Agency

Sustainable

Development for Local

Authorit ies

C o p e n h a g e n 1 9 9 7

Approaches xperiencesandSources


2/164


3/164

European Environment Agency

Towards

Sustainable D eve lop m en t for Local Authorities

Approaches, Experiences and Sources


4/164

Cover

design:

MaliniMehra,

IMS A Amsterdam,

The Netherlands

Note

T h e d e s i g n a t i o n s e m p l o y e d a n d t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f

mater ia l in th is publ ica t ion do not imply the express ion

of any opin ion whatsoever on the par t o f the European

C o m m i s s i o n o r t h e E u r o p e a n E n v i r o n m e n t A g e n c y

concern ing the legal s ta tus of any country or ter r i tory ,

and the boundaries shown on maps do not imply official

endorsement or acceptance .

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.

I t can be accessed throu gh the Europa server (h t tp : / /e urop a.eu . in t

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities , 1997

ISBN 92-9167-073-1

EEA, Cop enhag en, 1997

Reproduct ion is au thor ized , provided the source is acknowledged

Printed in Germany

Printed on recycled and chlorine-free bleached paper

O

European Envi ronment Agency

Kongens Nytorv 6

D K - 1 0 5 0 C o p e n h a g e n K

D e n m a r k

Tel: +45 33 36

71

0 0

Fax: +45 33 36

71

9 9

E-mail: [email protected]

H o m e p a g e : h t t p : // w w w . e e a . e u . i n t


5/164

Towards

Sustainable Development for Local

Authorities

Approaches, Experiences and Sources

Prepared for the European Environment Agency

b y

Malin i Mehra

An ne-M et te Jrgensen (co-author )

Ins t i tu te for Environment and Sys tems Analys is ( IMSA Amsterdam)

Van Eegh ens t raa t 77

NL-1071 EX Amsterdam

The Ne the r lands

October 1997


6/164


7/164

Towards Susta inable D evelop me nt for Local Authorit ies

Foreword

Towards Sus ta inab le Deve lopmen t f o r Loca l Au tho r i t i e s Approaches ,

Exper iences and Sources

The European Environment Agency (EEA) has the mandate " to provide the Community and the Member

States with objective, reliable and comparable information at the European level". Among the different

goals, the EEA shall p rov ide informat ion for environm enta l po l icy developm ent an d imple men ta t ion and

ensure broad dissemination and accessibili ty. Important principles in this context are: pooling,

s t ructur ing and netw orking of ex is ting informat ion and kn ow how .

Local authorities have a key role to play in the transition to more sustainable ways of l iving. Local

authorities and organisations can therefore be important clients for EEA products and services . This

report introduce s the his tory, interpr etation s and deve lop me nt of the sustainab ili ty deb ate and de scribes

the efforts of local authorities making the sustainable development concept operational. The report

add resse s read ers w ho are trying to locate their com mu nity 's efforts in sustain able deve lop me nt in the

wider European and global perspective. Because of the dynamic development within this f ield, the report

can only be a snapshot of cur rent developm ents , focus ing on EU countr ies . Hopeful ly , an upd ated

version of the book will cover more examples and initiatives in Southern European Countries , Central

and Eastern Europe, as well .

The report can be seen as a cont ribution from the Agenc y to the Sustaina ble Cities and Tow ns Project

co-ordinated and supported by the European Commission (DG XI). This project is a follow-up of the

Com miss ion ' s Green Paper on the Urban E nvironm ent . Par t ic ipants in the pro jec t inc lude EU M emb er

States , a range of international organisations ( l is ted in the information source directory) and the

Commission Directorates General. Important components in the project are the Sustainable Cities and

Towns Campaign, the Sustainable Cities Policy Report and the Good Practice Databases. Other highlights

in the f ield of urb an susta inabili ty are the Europea n Conference on Sustainable Cities & Tow ns, Aalbo rg

1994 (adoption of the Aalborg Charter) , and the Second European Conference on Sustainable Cities &

Tow ns, Lisboa, 1996 (adoptio n of the Lisboa Action Plan).

The development and finalization of this publication has involved many

contributors other than the authors . The report has also been reviewed by the EEA's National Focal

Points and Scientific Com mitte e. The EEA is grateful for all these contribu tions and w ou ld like to thank

all the individuals and organisations involved.

I hop e that this publication w ill prov e useful to its read ers in increasing their access to approa che s,

experiences and information so urces within the area of sustaina ble dev elo pm ent at the local level.

Dom ingo J imnez-Belt rn

Executive Director

European Environment Agency


8/164

A c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s

A numb er of people have he lped w ith th is publ ica t ion a t var ious s tages . They include

Roger Levett who provided a r igorous review of the draft and many insights and

sugges t ions . Wouter van Dieren , David S tanners , David Gee, and Er ic den Ha me r

who offered valuable commentary. Jan Juffermans who was a mine of information

and a lways generous wi th h is advice . Ingvar Andersson a t the European

Environment Agency who provided encouragement a t a l l the r ight moments . Severa l

colleagues, past and present, at IMSA helped to get the project on the rails and keep it

on track. They include Henk Viss, David Rosenberg and Sarah Blau. In particular ,

grateful thanks go to Eva Klok for her assis tance with the layout and word processing;

to Joke Jongejan for help in researching a nd g athe ring m aterial for Part II ; and to

Tamm o Oegem a for provid ing re l iab le feedback and su ppor t . F inal ly man y thanks go

to all those who have provided information for Part II and other segments of the

report.

Mal in i Mehra

Amsterdam, October 1997


9/164


C o n t e n t s

Foreword 5

Acknowledgemen t s 6

In t roduc t ion 10

Purp ose of the repo rt 10

Structu re and organiz ation of ma terial 11

P A R T I

L o ca l A u t h o r i t i e s M o v i n g T o w a r d s S u s t a i n a b l e D e v e l o p m e n t 13

1 M a k i n g se n se of su s t a i n a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t 1 5

Taking the long view: sustainabili ty in evolutionary and

ecological persp ectiv e 16

The evolu tion of sustain abili ty i tself 20

Conflicts and controv ersies 21

2 To wa rds a pos i t ive po l i cy con tex t fo r sus t a inab i l i ty? 29

The intern ationa l context 29

The Europ ean context 37

3 Re sp on din g to a ne w pa ra d igm : the cha l l eng e for loca l au th or i t i e s 45

Sus ta inable c i ties and Sus ta inable com mun it ies 45

Local autho rities : the chan ging gov erna nce context 48

Local autho rities in Euro pe: a varieg ated land scap e 57

Res pon ding to the challenges 62

4 P rac t i s ing sus ta inab i l i ty : cha l l eng es and inn ov a t ion s 67

Interna l challenge s and the need for a ne w professionalism 67

Dem ocrat is ing local govern men t : achieving the ' imposs ib le ' 68

Ecological footprinting: reconn ecting th e effects

of environm enta l degra dat ion wi th the causes 71

Ur ban agricu lture: not only food for thou ght, bu t also action 74

Put t ing i ta l i together 76

Conc lus ion 77

A n n e x 1 : C o m p a r i n g c o m p e t i n g p a r a d i g m s 7 8


10/164

PART II

Se lec ted Reso urces for Loca l A uth or i t i es 85

Us er ' s Note s 86

5 Selec ted Li tera tu re 87

Category 1 -G o o d Practice Guid es 87

Category 2 - Sus ta inable Urban Dev elopm ent 88

Category 3 - Sus ta inable Co mm unity Deve lopme nt 89

Cate gory 4 - Strategies for Sustainab le De velo pm ent 89

Cate gory 5 - Local Ag end a 21 and related guid es 90

Ca teg ory 6 - Tools 91

C a tego ry 7 -R efe r ences 92

6 Selec ted Inte rne t S i tes 93

7 Resou rce Di rec tory 95

Mult i la tera l Organizat ions 96

In ternat ional Projects and Cam paigns 97

In ternat ional Mu nic ipal Associa t ions 99

Interna tional Cities , Tow ns and Villages N etw ork s 100

Internat ional Organizat ions . . . 101

Ca nad ian Rou nd Tables 104

Bus iness and Indus try Ne two rks 105

Ur ban agric ulture / Bioregionalism 106

Europ ean Mu nicipal Associa t ions 107

Eu rope an M unicipality-R elated Projects and Ca m paig ns 109

Eu rope an Specialist Cities Ne tw ork s 112

Europe an Profess ional Ne two rks and Organisa t ions 114

Europ ean Foun dat ions and Research Ins t i tu tes 115

Europe an NG O Netw orks and Organizat ions 117

Europe an Union and Europea n Com miss ion Bodies 119

Europ ean Com miss ion Bodies 120

Na tiona l Resources 121

Eu rope an Com missio n Sector-specific Financial Instru me nts 149

Europ ean Com miss ion Program mes 151

Sustainabili ty Go od Practice Da tabase s 154


11/164

Towards Susta inable D evelop m ent for Local Au thorit ies

Figures

Figure1 Global Con sum ption Inequal i ty

Figure 2: Global Incom e and Wealth Disparit ies

Figure 3: The Four-C apital Mo del

F igure 4 : Sus ta inable Dev elopm ent The World Bank 's Ne w T hinking

Figure 5 The City as Ecosystem

Figure 6 The Ecological Foo rtpring (Phil Testemale)

Figure 7: The Ecological Footp rint of the N eth erla nds (Phil Testemale)

17

19

24

25

43

72

73

Tables

Table 1:

Table 2:

Table 3:

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

Indicators of Global Environmental Stress (a partial l is t ing)

Fr iends of the Ear th ' s Environmenta l Space Approach

The Four Main Drivers of the Sustainable Cities/

S us tainab le C omm un i t i e s M ovemen t

Ecopol is S tra tegy Frame work

Nu m ber of Munic ipal i t ies ac t ive in Local Agend a 21

(circa5/96)

Territorial Organization of EU Local Authorities

Strengths and Weaknesses of Local Government Institutions

Compar ing Average Consumption in Canada, the USA, India

and the World

18

28

47

48

52

58

69

7 4

Boxes

B o x i :

Box 2:

Box 3:

Box 4:

Box 5:

Box 6:

Box 7:

Box 8:

Box 9:

Box 10:

Box 12:

Box 13:

Box 14:

Box 15:

Box 16:

Box 17

Box 18

Box 19

Box 20

Box 21

Box 22

Box 23

Box 24

Box 25

Scient is ts ' Warning to Humani ty

Caring for the Earth 'sP rinciples for Sustainable L iving

(Selected) Definitions of Sustainable Development Our Common Future

Environmenta l Funct ions

Changing Product ion and Consumption Pat terns :

Agenda 21 Outl ine

Agenda 21's Chapter 28 on Local Authorities

Best Practices: the five lessionsS

HABITAT IIThe 12 Best-Practice Award Winners

The World Assembly of Local Authorities (WACLA)

Chattanooga, Tennessee: 'Belle of the Sustainable Cities Ball '

Curitiba, Brazil: A Laboratory for Sustainable Urban Development

Sus ta inable Communit ies .

Two Views from Opposite Sides of the Atlantic

The European Sus ta inable Ci t ies and Towns Campaign

The Local Agenda 21 Experience.

Successes from Three Different Localities

Key Lessons Learned from Gloucestershire 's

Vision 21

Exper ience

The Berlin Charter

Environmenta l Budget ing

A Sample of Tools and Measures for Local Authorities

Guiding Social and Economic Principles for Sustainable Development

Guiding Management Pr incip les for Sus ta inable Development

Canadian Round Tables

Sustainabili ty and City Design

Six to Twelve New Planets N eeded

19

2

22

24

27

32

33

35

36

37

44

44

49

5

54

54

57

61

64

65

65

66

66

71


12/164

I n t r o d u c t i o n

Purpose of the repor t

This book is intended as a guide to the

newly evolv ing paradigm of sus ta inable

deve lopm ent in the context of the Europ ean

Union. I t seeks to provide a background to

the local and global debates on

sustainabili ty for those who are new to this

subject area. I t is prim arily add resse d to:

local au tho rity officials w ho do not

necessar i ly work in environmenta l

dep ar tm ents , bu t are keen to learn abou t

sus ta inable development and i ts

relevance to their work; and

local auth oritie s ' social part ners and

in teres ted community groups .

Sus ta inable developm ent is perceived by

ma ny to be an imposs ib le concept

impossible to define and impossible to put

into practice. W here it has entered into

mun ic ipal d iscourses and ins t i tu t ional

consciousness i t is primarily associated with

environmenta l management . As th is repor t

seeks to demonstrate, the concept is far

more than that. Sustainabili ty is about more

than just planting trees , curbside recycling

and rescuing wildlife (vital though these

are). I t is more than greening 'business as

usual ' . I t is about transforming

politics

and

community development.

Politics, in the

original sense of the word meaning city

managemen t . C ommun i ty deve lopmen t , a s

in developing co mm unit ies sus ta inably :

ensuring quality of life for current

genera t ions wi thout depr iv ing fu ture

generations, and peoples elsewhere, of their

r ight to a clean and healthy planet.

Sus ta inable developm ent as a concept and a

pa rad igm is indicative of a his toric shift that

is occurring in all of our societies albeit at

varying rates , levels of commitment, and

visibili ty. The sustainabili ty movement is

described by some as the counter-culture

m ove m ent of the 1990s. At i ts broa dest, i t

b r ings together h i ther to d ispara te

aspira t ions for democracy , comm unity ,

peace , d ivers ity , huma n r ights , ge nder

equality, social and economic justice. It

s tands prevai l ing or thodoxies of economic

growth , an thropocentr ic wor ldviews and

materialis t values on their head and calls for

a new social contract. Over t ime it implies

nothing less than a restructuring of our

relationship to the planet and to all l iving

beings. This agenda is challenging and will

be difficult, but it is also compelling,

necessary, and possible.

Local authorities have a s ignificant some

argue crucial role to play in the transition

to more sustainable ways of l iving. This

report introduces the his tory and

development of the sustainabili ty debate. I t

explains the changing macro policy context

of relevance to municipality action and

describes the efforts of local authorities

themselves to provide leadersh ip in

reorienting policy and practice towards

sustainabili ty.

What the report is not . .

There is already much good practice on the

gro und in the area of local sustainabili ty.

Several recent 'good practice ' guides have

demons tra ted th is and provided a great

service to those looking for concrete

examples and information. There are also

many excellent publications on the

management and p lanning chal lenges of

des igning sus ta inable human se t t lements .

Such resources , and m any more , are

referred to in Part II.


13/164


What the report is...

This report does not seek to duplicate such

efforts. It is intended as a

companion

to such

works. I ts s tarting point is that many recent

publications, in their concern with the

concrete and the policy-relevant, gloss over

the wider conceptual, polit ical, and

behavioural diff iculties presented by the

new sus ta inabi l ity pa radigm . This repor t is a

modest contribution to f i l l ing this gap. I t

provides a macro view of sustainabili ty

history, concepts, conflicts, policy

interpretations and actions related to the

local-level concerns of local authoritie s and

their comm unit ies . I t addresses the reade r

who is trying to locate her or his

community ' s ef for ts in the wider European

and global perspective. I t profiles some of

the innovat ions and campaigns that are

provid ing a f ramework for pan-European

action on local sustainability. Finally, it is a

networking guide, offering a resources

section to facili tate communication and

informat ion exchange.

Caveats

As with any work of this nature some

caveats are in o rder.

The report makes no pretence to be

comprehensive in i ts overview of

develo pme nts : in the sense of being both up -

to-date and a l l -encompass ing . W hile it has

tr ied to be current, i t provid es at best a

snapshot of recent developments . There is a

high rate of obsolescence in this field, with

new initiatives coming 'on s tream' faster

than can be kept up wi th .

Secondly, the report focuses on the countries

of the Europe an Un ion and , wh ere re levant ,

refers to experiences in other countries and

regions . Here , however ( in common with

other publications of this type), the report

suffers from an unevenness in the coverage

of EU countr ies : No r thern Europ ean

examples p r edomina te , and Med i t e r r anean

countr ies remain comparat ively

underexposed. I t is hoped that this s ituation

will change before long in view of the rise of

recent initiatives in Southern European

countr ies , and wi th improved

communicat ions and informat ion exchange. '

Addi t ional ly , a l though Centra l and Eas tern

Europe co untr ies being outs ide the EU do

not feature in this report, i t is hoped that

future editions of this or s imilar guides

might extend their focus to this important

region.

Finally, although efforts have been made to

add publ ica t ions in European languages to

the Selected Literature section in Part II, the

report has relied primarily on English-

languag e publ ica t ions . The inevi tab le

l imita t ions of th is are ackno wledg ed.

Reco mmended rea ding co mpa nio ns

As ment ioned above, th is repor t should be

read in tandem with o ther re levant

publications. The EEA itself has published

several specialis t and popular interest: on

Env i ronmen ta l Managemen t S ys tems and

tools and the landmark Dobris Assessment

(Urban Environment sec t ion) . In addi t ion ,

the following three publications are

par t icu lar ly notewor thy as companions to

this Guide:

European Sustainable Cities

report (1996),

and the Good Practice Guide

2

(forthcoming). Both are publications of

the European Commiss ion ' s Sus ta inable

Cities project;

Sustainable Lifestyles: Strengthening the

Global Dimensions toLocal Agenda 21. A

Guide to

Good Practice,

Towns and

Deve lopme nt , 1995;

Town and Country Planning,

UK.

Th e

Gaia

Atlas of Cities: New Directions for

Urban Living. Gaia Books Ltd. 1996.

The Sus ta inable Europ ean Ci t ies and Towns

Cam paign is anothe r recom men ded source

of informat ion on current de velopm ents .

Struc ture and organiza t ion of

ma te r ia l

This report is s tructured in two roughly

propo r t ionate par ts . Par t I compr ises four

chapters and in t roduces the background to

thinking, policy and practice on sustainable

development. Part II is a three-part

resources section guiding the reader to

information sources mentioned in the text


14/164

and others of relevance to local authorities

and their social partners .

Part i

Chapter1of Part I sets the discussion of

sustainabili ty in ecological perspective. I t

demonstrates the ecological and social need

for change in patterns of human

development , p roduct ion and consumption .

The chapter a lso out l ines the develo pme nt

of the notion of sustainable development. I t

demons tra tes how th is new paradigm is a

hotly contested one, and flags some of the

controversies and flashpoints . Chapter 2

steps to the macro policy level and discusses

the developm ent of in ternat ional and

Europea n U nion pol ic ies on sus ta inable

deve lopmen t vis--vis their relevance for

local-authority action. Chapter 3 in t roduces

the sus ta inable c i t ies /sus ta inable

comm unit ies m ovem ents . I t looks a t the

factors behind the developm ent of the new

sustainabili ty agenda for local authorities

and rev iews the European landscape for

local authorities identifying some of the

oppor tun i t ies and obs tac les . The cha pter

profiles some initiatives by local authorities ,

NGOs (Non-Governmenta l Organizat ions ) ,

and o thers .Chapter 4 discusses three areas

touched on in the previous chapter in

greater depth. The first calls for a 'new

professionalism'. It argues that if local

autho rities are to be successful mob ilisers of

thei r commun it ies then changes in

administrative culture and professional

atti tu des w ill also be in order. The other two

areas concern tools and options with

( largely) untap ped potent ia l for adv ancing

sustainabili ty goals . These tools urban

farming and the ecological footprint are

gaining in popularity with local authorities

and community groups . They epi tomise the

principle of elegance: simple yet offering

significant positive multiplier effects.

Part II

The three-part resources section contains a

selected literature section, a listing of useful

internet addresses , and a detailed chart of

organizat ions , ne tworks , programmes and

European Commiss ion funding sources

concerned with promoting sus ta inable

development. This section is intended to be

an il lustrative notcomprehensive lis ting

of l i terature or organizations active in the

area of sus ta inable developm ent . A

reference section is included to guide the

reader to more specific sources of

information.


15/164

P A R T I

Local A utho r i ties M ov ing

Towards Sus ta inab le Deve lopment

A journey ofathousand m iles begins with one step...

'


16/164


17/164

Towards Susta inable D evelop m ent for Local Authorit ies

1

Humanity must live within the carrying

capacity of the Earth. There is no other

rational option in the longer term... .

Because of the way we live today, our

civilisations are at risk.

Caring for the World.

A

Strategy for Sustainable

Living. 1991:3

M a k i n g s e n s e

of sus ta inable

d e v e l o p m e n t

Sustainabili ty is the buzzword of the

1990s. Everyone from European policy

mak ers , to urban p lan ners and re tai l

execut ives seem to have adopted the

term. It is the in-vogue prefix for

anyth ing f rom corporate environmenta l

repor ts to travel agents ' package- tou r

promotions . To paraphrase economis t

Mil ton Fr iedman , we are a ll com mit ted

to sus ta inable development now.

But what may be an adver t iser ' s d ream

can be a local authority 's nightmare. Is

the concern with sustainabili ty just a

passing fad? Or does it signify an

emergent cultural revolution? Do we all

mean the same thing by sustainabili ty or

sus ta inable development? Do we a l l

share the same premises and have the

same goals? Or will different

interpretations and different agendas

result in conflicting policy

interpretations, priorit ies and practices?

Given the welter of confusion

surrounding the concept , many local

authorities might be forgiven for

dismissing the validity or util i ty of the

concept as an unnecessary complica t ion

for their work.

This chapter unpacks the concept of

sustainabili ty. Writ large, the concept

alludes not only to the ecological crises

at hand but to wider social, polit ical,

and cu l tura l chal lenges which wi l l

require the development of new

me thods , sk il l s, and a t t i tudes . This

chapter argues that clarity on the

subject, and the values, premises and

agendas that l ie tucked behind it , is

essential to the accomplishment of

sustainabili ty goals . To a large degree

this area of critical analysis has been left

neglected in the s tampede to jump

aboard the sus ta inable development

bandwagon. Cr i t ics argue that for

sus ta inable development to be regarded

merely as the

summum bonum

of human

existence is to render i t meaningless .

The trade-offs and choices implicit in

the 'search for sustainabili ty ' must be

made t ransparent to genera te

widespread popular suppor t for the

need for transformation. There will no

doub t be winners and losers in the

process and th is mus t be communicated

honestly to prevent future conflicts .

These and o ther themes are touched on

in this chapter and recur in the rest of

the text.

This chapter concerns i tself with the

questions: What are the issues driving

the sus ta inabi l i ty movement? What are

the controversies? And what do they

mean? It paves the way for a

consideration in the next chapter of the

different traditions behind, and the

approaches adopted by , thesustainable

citiesa nd sustainable communities

movemen ts .


18/164

Taking the long v iew:

sus ta inab i l i ty in

evolu t ionary and ecologica l

pe r spec t ive

In evolutionary terms there is no such

thing as sustain abili ty at least as far

as our species is conce rned. Of the

different forms of life that have

inhabited the Earth in i ts four thousand

million year his tory, 99.9% are no w

extinct. Against this backdrop, the

human enterpr ise wi th i t s roughly

300,000-year his tory barely merits

a t ten t ion . As Mark Twain , the Am er ican

novelis t once remarked, if our planet 's

his tory were to be compared to the

Eiffel Tower, human his tory would be a

mere smear on the very tip of the tower.

Human ecological impact

B ut wh i l e mode rn hum ans (homo sapiens

sapiens)mig ht be insignificant in

evolu t ionary terms , we are by no mea ns

insignificant in terms of our recent

p lanetary impact . A1986 s tudy

estimated that 40% of the product of

terrestr ial plant photosynthesis the

basis of the food chain for most animal

and bird l ife was being appropriated

by humans for their use. ' More recent

studies estimate that 25% of

photosynthesis on continental shelves

(coastal areas) is being used to satisfy

h u m a n d e m a n d .

4

Human app rop r i a t ion

of such natural resources is having a

profound impact upon the millions of

o ther species which are a lso de pen dan t

upon them. Ecologist , William Catton

has estimated that current rates of

human resource extraction are 10,000

times the rates of natural resource

regenera t ion; these are showing no

signs of abating.

M ore wo rryin g s ti l l is the fact th at

human impact appears to be p lac ing the

planet itself into reverse gear. One of the

basic tenets of evolution is that the

generation of new forms of l ife outs tr ips

the extinction of older species by a w ide

margin thus ensuring s trong biological

diversity. Scientis ts believe, how ever,

that for the first observable time in

evolutionary his tory, another species

homo sapiens sapiens has u pset this

balance to the degree that the rate of

species extinction is now estimated at

10,000 times the ra te of species rene wa l. '

Hu ma n beings , jus t one species am ong

millions, are l i terally crowding out the

other species we share the planet with.

Evidence of human interference with

the natural world is vis ible in practically

every ecosystem from the presence of

CFCs in the s tratosphere to the

artificially changed courses of the

majority of r iver systems on the planet.

I t is argu ed that ever s ince the y

abandoned nomadic , ga therer -hunter ' '

ways of life for settled societies some

10,000 years ago, humans have

cont inual ly manipula ted thei r na tura l

world to meet their needs. While this

observ ation is a correct one, the rate, the

scale and the nature of human- induced

global change particularly in the

post-industrial period is

unprecedented in the his tory of l ife on

Earth. There are three primary reasons

for this.

Firs tly, mechanisation of both industry

and agriculture in the last century

resulted in vastly improved labour

productivity which enabled the creation

of goods and services . Since then,

scientif ic advance and technological

innovat ion powered by ever-

increasing inputs of fossil fuels and their

der ivat ives have revolu t ionised

every indus try and created many new

ones .

The subsequent development of

wes tern consumer cu l ture , and the

satisfaction of the accompanying

disposable mentality, has generated

material f lows of an unprecedented

scale. ' The Wuppertal Institute estimates

that humans are now responsible for

moving greater amounts of mat ter

across the planet than all natural

occurrences (earthquakes, s torms, etc.)

put together.


19/164


20/164

Tab le 1 : Ind ica tors o f G lo ba l En vi ron me nta l S t re ss (a pa r t i a l l i s ting)

F o r e s t s

Deforestation and degradation remain the main issues. 12.1 million hectares of forest were lost every year in

the decade 1980-1990. The largest losses of forest area are taking place in the tropical moist deciduous forests, the zone

best su ited to hum an sett lem ent and a gr iculture; recent es t imates suggest that near ly tw o- th irds of tropical deforestat ion

is due to farmers clearing land for agriculture. There is increasing concern about the decline in forest quality associated

with in tensive us e of forests and un regula ted access .

S o i l As much as 10% of the ear th ' s vegetated surface is now at least moderate ly de gra ded . . . . Trends in so il quali ty

and ma nag em ent of ir r igated land raise ser ious questions about longer- term sustainabil i ty . It is es t imated that about 20%

of the worl d ' s 250 mill ion hectares of ir r igated land are already de grad ed to the poin t whe re crop produc tion is ser iously

reduced .

Fresh Water Some 20% of the world's population lacks access to safe water and 50% lacks access to safe sanitation. If

current trend s in water use pers is t , two- th ird s of the wo rld ' s p opula tion could be l iv ing in countr ies exper iencing

mo dera te or h igh w ater s tress by 2025.

M a r i n e f i s h e r i e s 25 % of the world ' s ma r ine f isheries are being f ished at their ma xim um level of productiv ity and

35 %

are overfished (yields are declining). In order to maintain current per capita consumption of fish, global fish

harvests must be increased; much of the increase might come through aquaculture which is a known source of water

pollu tion , wetland loss and mangrove swamp destruction .

B i o d i v e r s i t y Biodivers i ty is increasingly coming under threat f rom development, which destroys or degrades

natural h abitats , and f rom pollu tion f rom a var iety of sources . The f irs t compre hensive g lobal assessmen t of b iodivers i ty

put the total number of species at close to 14 million and found that between 1% and

11%

of the wor ld ' s species may be

threatened by extinction every

decade.

Coastal eco systems, which host a very large propor ti on of mar ine species , are at

great r isk with perh aps one - th ird of the world ' s coasts at h igh potential r isk of degra dation and anothe r 17% at m odera te

risk.

A t m o s p h e r e

T he In te rgovernmen ta l Pane l on C l imate C hange ' s Second Assessment Report has es tablished that

hum an activ ities are having a d iscernib le influence on g lobal cl imate. CO, emissions in most industr ial ised countr ies

have risen during the past few years and very few countries are likely to stabilise their greenhouse gas emissions at 1990

levels by 2000 as required by the Clim ate Cha nge convention .

T o x i c c h e m i c a l s Abou t 100,000 chemicals are now in commercial use and their potential impacts on hu ma n health

and ecological function represent largely unkn ow n r isks . Pers is tent organic pollu tants are now so widely d is tr ibuted by

air and ocean currents that they are found in the tissues of people and wildlife everywhere; they are of particular concern

because of their high levels of toxicity and persistence in the environment.

H a z a r d o u s w a s t e s Pollu tion f rom h eavy me tals , especial ly from their use in indus try and minin g, is also creating

ser ious health consequences in man y par ts of the worl d . Incidents and a ccidents involving uncontro lled radioactive

sources continue to increase, and particular risks are posed by the legacy of contaminated areas left from military

activ it ies involving nuclear mater ials .

W a s t e Domestic and industr ial waste production continues to increase in both absolu te and per capita terms,

wo rldw ide. In the develope d w orld , per capita waste gene ration has increased threefold over the past 20 years ; in

develo ping c ountr ies , it is h ighly l ikely that waste gen eration w il l doub le dur i ng the next decad e. The level of aware ness

regarding the health and environmental impacts of inadequate waste d isposal remains rather poor ; poor sanitat ion and

waste m ana gem ent infrastructure is s ti ll one of the pr incipal causes of death and d isabil i ty for the urban poor .

Source: United Nations, 1997.

Report of tiwSecretary-General Overall Assessment

o f

Progress Achieved since UNCED

(advance unedited

text).


21/164

Towards Su sta inable Deve lopm ent for Local Authorit ies

Recent human development pat terns

have not only affected ecological

sys tems but are a lso rap id ly changing

social systems. Arguably two of the

most powerful forces of societal change

in mo dern t imes have been:

colon ialism , w ith its lastin g legacy of

unequal polit ical and economic

re la t ions between and with in

countries; and

scientific and techn ologic al

development , which has changed

virtually every aspect of

contemporary life.

These and other forces have contributed

to a highly polarised world where

disparit ies in wealth and income (see

Figure 2), power and s tatus , are

deepening and cont inue to be marked

by differences in,inter alia, gender, race

and ethnicity, and national origin.

Viewing the human predicament in

ecological and evolutionary perspective

is fundamen ta l to an unde rs tand ing of

the significance of current

changes. Taking the long view

shatters the complacency of

bus iness -as -usual a t t i tudes tha t

'unsustainabili ty ' is just a phase

humani ty is go ing through.

Despite the complexity and

uncertainty of global changes,

there appears to be scientific

consensus (see Box 1) on most of

the following three points :

first, the m ag ni tud e of the

impact tha t hum ans , a juveni le

species in evolutionary terms,

are exerting on life-support

sys tems;

second, as Gaia theoreticians

who view the planet as aself-

regula t ing sys tem poin t out :

the Earth is indifferent to

humans, i t will ult imately

recover, even though the time-

scale will be eons;

the need for chan ge to ensu re a

future for human beings.

B o x i :

S c i e n t i s t s ' W a r n i n g to H u m a n i t y

The scientific consensus on the seriousness of global

environmental concerns is not illusory. To prove this point, in

1993,58 of the world's most prestigious Scientific Academies

issued the

World

Scientists'

Warning

to

Humanity

(a fragment of

which ap pears here). The docum ent w as signed by over 1,600

leading scientists including more than half of all living

Nobel laureates in science. TheWarningasserted the collective

voice of the scientific community against the views of a small

but vocal minority of 'contrarions' w ho dispu te the existence of

environm ental crises.

...thereis nodoubt that thethreatto theecosystem islinked to

population size

and

resource

use.

Increasing greenhouse

gasemissions,

ozone depletion

and

acid

rain,

loss

of

biodiversity,deforestation

and

loss

of

topsoil

shortages

of

water food

and

fuel indicate

how the

natural systems

are

being pushed ever closer

to

their limits... .

We theundersigned

senior members

of the

world's scientific

community,hereby warn

all

humanity

of

what liesahead.Agreat

changein

our

stewardship

of the

earth

and the

life

on

it

is

required

if

vast misery

is to

be avoided

and our

global home

on

this planet

is not

to beirretrievablymutilated

12

.

Figure 2:

Richest 20

Second 20

Third 20

Fourth 20

Poorest 20

Globa l I ncome and Wea l th Dis pa r i t i e s

8 2 . 7

World Income:

8 2 . 7

World Trade: 8 1 . 2

Commercia l lending:9 4 . 6

Domesticsaving:8 0 . 6

Dom estic Investment: 80.5

1 1 . 7

2 . 3

1 . 9

Distr ibut ion o f wor ld

i n c o m e a n d e c o n o m i c

a c tiv ity 1 9 8 9 -

p er cen tag e o f w o r ld

to ta l (qu in t i les o f

p o p u la t i o n r an ked b y

i n co m e)

W o r l d in c o m e 1 .4

W o r ld t rade 1 .0

C o m m e r c i a l l e n d i n g 0 .2

C o m m e r c i a l s a v i n g s 1 .0

D o m e s t ic in v e s t m e n t 1 .3

Source UNDP 1992


22/164

The evolu t ion of

sus ta inabi l i ty i t se l f

While Our Common Future, the report of

the World Commiss ion on Environment

and Development (commonly known as

the Brundt land Commiss ion) is widely

credi ted wi th having popular ised the

concept of sustainable development, i t

does in fact have a longer l ineage. The

year 1972 was a

watershed in marking

both the f irs t International

Conference on the

Human Env i ronmen t in

Stockholm and the

publication of the

provocat ive repor t

Limits

to Groivthby the Club of

Rome which h ighl ighted

the imminent threat of 'overshoot ' (a

systems-analysis term for exceeding the

carrying capacity).

77nswe know.Tlieearth does

not b elong to m an; man be longs to the

earth. Tins we know. All things are

connected like the blood ivhich mutes

onefamily. All thingsareconnected.

Chief Seathl

Box 2:

Car ing for the Ear th ' s

Principles for Sustainable Living

1.

Respect and care for the comm unity of life

2.Improve the quality of life

3.

Conserve the Earth's vitality and diversity

4.Minimise the depletion of non-renewable resources

5.Keep within the E arth's carrying capacity

6. Change personal attitudes and practices

7. Enable communities to care for their ow n environm ents

8. Provide a national framework for integrating

development and

conservation

9. Create a global alliance

Source: Caring for theEarth. AStrategy for Sustainable

Living. IUCN/UNEP/WWF. (1991). Gland, Switzerland.

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s a

steady s tream of books and reports

began to appear , p reoccupied w i th the

ques t ion of environment and

development . This s t ream would turn

into a deluge in the sustainabili ty-

friendly 1990s.

T he W orld Conservation Strategy, the

manifesto published collectively by the

World Conservat ion

Union (IUCN), the

Uni ted Nat ions

Environment

P rog ramme (UNEP

set up after the

Stockholm

conference), and the

World Wide Fund

for Nature (WWF),

stands out as an early but at the t ime

largely overlooked international

attempt at mobilis ing public action to

address emergent environmenta l

challenges (see Box 2).

More recently, environmentalis ts have

argued that the intellectual his tory of

the concept of sustainabili ty can be

traced back to the terms 's tationary ' or

's teady-state economy' used by 19th-

century polit ical economists .

13

For John

Stuart M ill, the 19th-ce ntury polit ical

economist, ' s tationary ' was not a s tatic

concept but referred to a balance

between product ion and natura l

resources implying equality of access to

natural resources for successive

genera t ions .

These concerns are not only to be foun d

in dissident western intellectual

traditions but can be traced in the oral

his tories of indigenous cultures . For

example, the principle of inter-

generational equity is captured in the

Inuit saying, 'we do not inherit the

Earth from our parents , we borrow it

from our children' . The Native

American 'Law of the Seventh

Generation' is another i l lustration.

According to this , before any major

action was to be undertaken its potential


23/164


consequences on the seventh genera t ion

had to be considered. For a species that

at presen t is only 6,000 genera tions old,

and whose current polit ical decis ion

makers operate on time scales of weeks,

or f ive years at most, the thought that

o ther humans have based thei r decis ion

making systems on time scales of 300

years seems inspiringly sage but

polit ically inconceivable.

Conf l ic ts and controvers ies

At the beginning of this chapter the

observat ion was made that sus ta inable

development is not a self-evident

concept but a polit ically contested one.

Despite a plethora of varying

definitions, at i ts core, sustainabili ty

refers to three s imple concerns:

the need to arrest env ironm enta l

degradat ion and ecological

imbalance;

the need not to imp ove rish future

genera t ions ;

the nee d for qua lity of life and e qui ty

between current genera t ions .

A dde d u p , these core concerns are an

unmistakable call for transformation.

Business-as-usual is no longer an

option. Social insti tutions including

economic systems and polit ical

ar rangements cannot cont inue as

they are. This is not an agend a for the

faint-hearted. Litt le wonder then that

ever s ince Our Common Future

popular ised what had h i ther to ex is ted

on d isc ip l inary margins or NGO

agendas, there has been an avalanche of

books, reports , and articles on the

subject, addressing sustainable

development f rom every conceivable

angle." In the ensuing war of definition,

almost 300 different interpr etation s of

the concept have been identif ied (see

Box 3). These differing som etim es

conflicting interpretations are not

accidental. They are the products of

conflicting worldviews, differing

ideologies , varied disciplinary

backg rounds , oppos ing knowledge

trad i t ions , va lue sys tems and ves ted

interests .

Such differences in understanding and

approach make consensus towards

common agendas d i f f icu l t . Fur thermore ,

in a sharply divided world it is not

uncommon for the r ich and powerful to

have one agenda; and the poor and

under-pr iv i leged to have another .

Wh y the need for conceptual clarity?

But why does this ma tter? Is i t not futile

to quibble over conceptual definitions

when the key issue is to devise

strategies and set targets to put the

concept into practice?

While action is urgently needed,

unders tanding the concept and agreeing

upon pr incip les for ac t ion is paramount .

Two examples br ing th is poin t hom e.

The first is from Canada, one of the first

countr ies to embrac e ' sus ta inable

development ' as official national policy.

In 1992 a three-volume survey of how

Canadian munic ipal i t ies were

attempting to translate sustainabili ty in

the urban context found a spectrum of

def in it ions of sus ta inable deve lopm ent

formulated by municipal officials . The

author concluded that the exercise

underscored how 'poor ly the concept i s

unders tood and put to pract ice , despi te

all the rhetoric s ince the Brundtland

repo r t . .

...

operationalising the concep t (of sustainable

development) is no simple

task.

Firstly, scientific know ledge about

critical natural environmental thresholds and imp acts on

ecological

systems is uncertain. Secondly,

because

the concept challenges

established practices and po wer relations,there are forcesseeking not

merely to avoid its rise to public policy prom inence, b ut, for vested

economic an d po litical interests, to impose particular interpretations

on it.

Healy and Shaw,

Regional Studies, 1997/772


24/164

The second example comes from the UN

Secretary-General 's review of global

progress on sus ta inable development

since UNCED. The report notes that one

of the constraining factors to further

progress has been that: ' ... not all

Governing Bodies of international

organizat ions , even with in the UN

sys tem, have the same unders tanding of

the concept of sustainable development.

Some have adopted programmes of

environmenta l ly sus ta inable

development, others have called for

sus ta inable human development whi le

others have talked of conservation or

other types of environmental plans. This

has led to some confusion regarding the

core issues of su stainab le

development . '

1

'

Evidently, clarity abou t the concept is

crucial when it comes to selecting

which

issues

are to be emphas ize d ,

xvhose needs

and interests are to be priorit ised, and

who is to be involved in the decis ion

making. This in turn informs what

Box3: (Se lec ted) Def in i t ions o f Sus ta inab le Deve lopment

Our Common Future ( B r u n d t l a n d C o m m i ss i o n R e p o r t ) , W o r l d C o m m i ss i o n o n

E n v i r o n m e n t & D e v e l o p m e n t , 1 9 8 7

1. Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the abilityo ffuture generatio

meet their own needs.

2. ... sustainable development is not a fixed stateof harmony, butrather a process of change in which the exploitation ofresources,t

orientationofthe technologicaldevelopment and institutional change are made consistent with future as well as presentneeds.

Caringfor the Earth(IUCN, WW F, UNEP, 1991)

Sustainable development means improving the quality of life while living within the carrying capacityofsupportingecosystems.

Maastricht TreatyonEuropean Union(Article 2, Treaty on Europ ean Unio n, 1992

(Sustainable development is) a harmonious and balanced development of economicac tivities,sustainable and non-inflationary grow

respecting the

environment.

European CommunityFifth EnvironmentalActionProgramme (CEC, 1993)

(Sustainable development is) continued economic and social development xoithout detriment to the natural resources on the quality

which human activity and further developmentdepend.

International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)

Sustainable development is development that delivers basic

environmental

social and economic services to all residents

o f

a comm

without threatening the viability

of

the

natural

built and social systems upon which the delivery

of

these servicesdepends.

Tlte GreenEconomy,M icha el Jacobs (1991:79-80)

Sustainability means that the environment should be protected insuch a condition and to such a degree that environmental capaciti

(the ability of the environment to perform itsvarious functions) are maintained overtime: atleast at levels which give future generati

the opportunity to enjoy an equal measure of environmental consumption.

lueprintf ora Green Economy( BlueprintV ).David Pearce,et al(1989), Earthscan, London

WeakSustainability: Only the aggregate of stocks of capital, regardless of their type, has to be held constant for future

generations; these forms of capital are completely substitutable for each other. 'It is the aggregate quantity that matters and

there is considerable scope for sustituting man-m ade w ealth for natural env ironmental a ssets' (Pearce

etal

1989:48)

SensibleSustainability: No further decline is accepted for known critical natural stocks, while for others substitution between

natural and man -made capital is allowed for.

Strong

Sustainability: The overall stock of natural capital should not be allowed to decline.

Absurdly StrongSustainability: No substitution is permitted between the various kinds of natural capital stocks; each stock

has to keep to at least its current level.

a C 3


25/164

T o w a r d s S u s t a i n a b l e D e v e l o p m e n t f or L o c a l A u t h o r i t i e s

Ecology teaches us that there are no

environmental solut ions to

environmental problems, except over

geological time scales. There are only

economic, social and political solutions

because the causes of environmen tal

degradation are economic, social and

political by nature.

Charles Secrett,

Fr iend s of the Ear th

f r a m e w o r k i s t o b e s e t a n d w h a t p o l i c i e s

a n d i n s t r u m e n t s a r e t o b e e m p l o y e d .

S u c h c o n s i d e r a t i o n s m a t t e r b e c a u s e t h e

d e f i n i n g o f i s s u e s a n d t h e n e g o t i a t i o n o f

in te r es t s i s no t an apo l i t ica l p rocess , i t i s

a n i n t e n s e l y p o l i t i c a l o n e . S e v e r a l

a n a l y s t s h a v e e m p h a s i s e d t h i s p o i n t : ' . . .

t h e r e a l i s a t i o n o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y

s u s t a i n a b l e s t r a t e g i e s i s n o t s i m p l y a

p r o b l e m o f t e c h n o l o g y o r e c o s y s t e m i c

u n d e r s t a n d i n g , b u t o f p o l i t i c s ,

i n s t i t u t i o n s a n d t h e a r t i c u l a t i o n a n d

i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f p u b l i c p o l i c y ' . "

T w o c o n t r o v e r s i a l e x a m p l e s s e r v e t o

i l lu s t r a te th i s po in t o f the power o f

d e f i n i t i o n a n d , s u b s e q u e n t l y , p o l i c y

f o r m u l a t i o n .

W iiat is more unsustainable: population

growth or car growth?

The f i r s t case r e la tes to those two

f a v o u r i t e b o g i e s o f m a n y

e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s : p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h

and car s .

1

"

P o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h r a t e s , i n r e l a t i o n t o

a v a i l a b l e r e s o u r c e s , h a v e l o n g b e e n h e l d

t o b e a k e y s o u r c e o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l

d e g r a d a t i o n . P o p u l a t i o n c o n t r o l h a s

t h e r e f o r e b e e n a c e n t r a l f o c u s o f m a n y

There is not one environmental

crisis, affecting everybody in the same way.

There are

many different crises, and the one

each

o f us experiences depends on a number

of

facts about uswhere

zee

live, how much

money we have, (and) what generation we

belong to.

Michael Jacobs

The Green Economy,

1991:20-21 ~

i n t e r n a t i o n a l a i d p r o g r a m m e s , w h i c h

u s e a n a s s o r t m e n t o f i n c e n t i v e s a n d

i n d u c e m e n t s t o l o w e r f e r t i l i t y i n p o o r

c o u n t r i e s .

C a r g r o w t h , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i s

g r o w i n g f o u r t i m e s a s f a s t a s t h e h u m a n

p o p u l a t i o n . T h e r e a r e , h o w e v e r , n o

p o p u l a t i o n c o n t r o l p r o g r a m m e s fo r

c a r s .

T r af fi c g r o w t h t a r g e t s a r e s e l d o m

s e t ( o r s e r i o u s l y i m p l e m e n t e d ) a n d

p o l i c y m a k e r s s e e m i n c a p a b l e o f

a r r e s t i n g t h e i n e x o r a b l e g r o w t h i n

p r i v a t e v e h i c l e s . E x p e r i e n c e h a s s h o w n

t h a t r e s t r i c t i o n s h a v e b e e n o p p o s e d b y

t h e a u t o m o b i l e i n d u s t r y a n d w e s t e r n

c o n s u m e r s a l i k e a s a n a t t a c k o n f r e e

t r a d e a n d p e r s o n a l f r e e d o m s

respec t ive ly . C r i t ics charge tha t i t i s

t h e r e f o r e e v i d e n t l y e a s i e r t o c o n t r o l t h e

fe r t i l i ty o f the poo r in Sou thern

c o u n t r i e s t h a n t h e m o b i l i t y o f c a r -

d e p e n d e n t c o n s u m e r s i n N o r t h e r n

c o u n t r i e s .

2

" S u c h p o l i c y c h o i c e s b e g t h e

q u e s t i o n : w h o s e i n t e r e s t s a r e b e i n g

s e r v e d , a n d a t w h o s e c o s t ?

W hose Common Future?

T h e c a s e o f

Our Common Future

is also

i n s t r u c t i v e h e r e .

W h i l e t h e r e p o r t i s c r e d i t e d f o r

c a t a p u l t i n g t h e i s s u e s o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l

d e g r a d a t i o n a n d u n e q u a l d e v e l o p m e n t

o n t o t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l s t a g e , i t w a s a l s o

p r o f o u n d l y c r i t i q u e d f o r i t s a m b i g u i t y

a n d u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o d r a w o u t t h e

p o l i c y i m p l i c a t i o n s o f i t s o w n a n a l y s i s .

I t c o n d e m n e d t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t

o f e c o n o m i c g r o w t h ; b u t c a l l e d f o r m o r e

g r o w t h . I t d e p l o r e d g r o w i n g i n e q u a l i t y

i n t h e w o r l d ; b u t w a s s i l e n t o n r e s o u r c e

d i s t r i b u t i o n .

2 1

C r i t i c s c h a r g e d t h a t t h e r e p o r t s o u g h t t o

b e ' a l l t h i n g s t o a l l p e o p l e ' , o b s c u r i n g

rea l wor ld i s sues o f power , con f l ic t , and

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . W h i l e s o m e p e o p l e

iden t i f ied i t w i th the message o f

e c o l o g i c a l i n t e g r i t y , e c o n o m i c

t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a n d s o c i a l j u s t i c e , o t h e r s

iden t i f ied i t w i th the p ro m ise o f

s u s t a i n e d g r o w t h , t h a t i t w a s p o s s i b l e t o


26/164


27/164


states: ' the conflict between current

economic growth pat terns and

sustainabili ty constraints hardly needs

to be argued : i t is the wh ole ba sis of th e

environmental cris is . If current patterns

of economic growth w ere s imply to

cont inue ... environm enta l degrad at ion

will get worse' .

2

'

In recent years there has been s trong

criticism of mainstream (neo-classical)

economics for i ts short-s ightedness on

environmental and social (e.g. equity,

gender and culture) factors . This fail ing

is not only inefficient, it leads to the

'externalis ing' or passing on to

society or future ge neratio ns of

environmental and social costs .

Economic indicators such as GN P hav e

also come under fire for their

inadequacies in guiding ecologically

viable economic policy. Above all it is

the

nature

of growth , and the demands

of a consumer culture for i t ' the

notion that the role of a human being is

to maximise his or her consumption'

2 6

that are irreconcilable with ecological

objectives of respecting biospheric

integrity in a context of rising

popula t ion , r i s ing consumer ism, and

ris ing environmental s tress .

2

'

It is this last issue that remains one of

the central flashpoints in the

environment-economy l ink . Pos i t ive

s teps towards a more balanced and

ecologically sound relationship are,

however , be ing m ade. For exam ple , the

develo pme nt of indus tr ia l ecology with

its focus on a circular rather than a

linear economy, has found a receptive

ear in progressive industry circles .

Strides are being made in several areas

to increase resource and energy

productivity (make 'more with less ' ) by

factors of 4 to 10.

28

These are being

advocated by research institutes , lobby

ing associations

2

' and the European

Commiss ion to reduce both ' input ' and

' throughput ' in the economy.

The discipline of economics itself is

s lowly being transformed by

pract i t ioners br inging in new th inking

on ecological and social connections. For

example, recent theoris ing has focused

on the need to main ta in a nd enhance

'natural capital ' : the objective being to

live off the income rather than deplete

stocks (see Figure 3, the F our-C apital

model) .

More genera l ly , the environment-

economy link has become part of

polit ical debate; i t has even become

fashionable to talk in terms of the 'triple

bot tom l ine ' : environment , economics

Figure 4: Susta inab le Dev elopm ent:

T he Wo r ld B a nk's N ew T hink ing

Objectives of environmentally

sustainable development

Economic objectives

Growth

Equity

Efficiency

Social objectives

Empowerment

Participation

Social mobility

Social cohesion

Cultural identity

Institutional

development

M

cological objectives

Ecosystems integrity

Carrying capacity

Biodiversity

Global issues

How an economistseesi t

Economic objectives

Growth

Efficiency

Social objectives

Equity

Poverty reduction

Ecological objectives

Natural-resource

management

Source: Adapted fromtheWorld Bank, 1994:2

and equity. Institutions such as the

World Bank have also established units

to s tudy the challenges of

environmenta l ly sus ta inable

development (see Figure 4).


28/164

Equity

While much progress is be ing ma de to

improve resource efficiencies, far less

progress has been made to improve

resource dis tr ibution. Currently, just

one-fifth of the global population is

consum ing three-quar ters of the ear th ' s

resources (Figure 1). If the re ma ining

four-fifths were to exercise their right to

grow to the level of the rich minority it

would result in ecological devastation.

So far, global income inequalities (see

Figure 2) and lack of purchasing power

have preven ted poorer countr ies f rom

reaching the s tandard of l iving (and also

re s ou rce cons um pt ion /w as te emis sion)

of the industrialised countries .

Countries such as China, Brazil , India,

and M alays ia are , however , ca tch ing u p

fast. In such a situation, global

consumption of resources and energy

needs to be drastically reduced to a

point where i t can be repeated by future

generations. But who will do the

reducing? Poorer nations want to

produce and consume more . Yet so do

richer countries: their economies

demand ever greater consumption-

based expansion. (Parallel conflicts of

interest can also be found at the local

and national level.) Such s talemates

have prevented any meaningful

progress towards equi tab le and

sustainable resource dis tr ibution at the

interna tional level. These issue of

fairness and dis tr ibutional justice

remain unresolved, but high on the

polit ical agen da. Box 5 and Table 2

describe som e of the efforts m ad e

towards a resolution of these conflicts

by the UN, governments , NGOs, and

others .

In summary, sustainabili ty is not aself-

evident concept. I t has both biophysical,

social and economic dimensions. The

social dimensions are the most

polit ically contested and the

assumptions lying behind talk of

environment , development , equi ty , and

sustainabili ty need to be interrogated

before a commonality of interests can be

assumed.

1

" In practical terms this means

that depending on the in terpre ta t ion ,

policy choices could favour (one or in

combination): technocratic solutions;

( re)d ist r ibut ive m easures ; market-based

ins t ruments ; ind iv idual value and

lifestyle c hang es; or wide-sca le

economic and institutional reform.

The next chapter looks at the rapidly

changing in ternat ional and European

environmental policy context in the

post-Brundtland era and how it is

inf luencing the munic ipal agenda.


29/164


B ox 5 : C h a n g i n g P r o d u c t i o n a n d C o n su m p t i o n P a t t e r n s :

Eff ic iency and Suff ic iency Revolut ions

Poverty and environmentaldegradation areclosely interrelated. W hile poverty results in environmental stress, the

majorcauseofglobalenvironmental deterioration is an unsustainable pattern of consumption and production,

particularly in the industrialized c ountries, which aggravates poverty and imbalances.

Achieving sustainable development will

require

efficiency in production and changes in consumption in order to

optimize

resource

use and minimize the

creation

o f waste. This w ill

require

reorienting patterns of developmen t in

industrialsocieties which havebeen copied in much ofthedeveloping

world.

Proposals

in Agenda 21

call

fo r

greater

attention to issnes around consumption and for new national

policies

to

encourage the shift to sustainable consumption patterns.

1

These passages from Agenda 21 are the result of intense polit ical negotiation at the Rio Earth Summit

(1992) between Nor thern and Southern countr ies . Their impor tance has been underscored by thei r

recurrence in a lmos t every major UN conference docu me nt s ince UN CED . The chal lenge is sued to

industrialised countries in these passages is clear, but underestimated, even in the Agenda 21 text.

Leading European researchers estimate that resource efficiencies of more than 90% over the next 50

years are needed to meet grow th in dem and with out caus ing ecological co llapse . Others ad d that th is

'eco-efficiency revolution' must be matched by a 'sufficiency revolution' to meet global resource equity

goals .

The response to these passages has been var ied : in ter -governm enta l ins t i tu t ions such as the OECD and

the CSD have es tab l ished w orking group s . NGO s, such as Fr iends of the Ear th , World Wide Fun d for

Na ture , and A NPE D have m obi l ised cam paigns . Ins t i tu tes such as the USD have engineered g lobal

electronic discussion forums. Energy and design pioneers at the Wuppertal Institute and the Rocky

Mountain Institute have promoted products based on Factor 4 resource and energy efficiencies . By and

large , the response of nat ional governm ents an d in dus try h as been mark ed by a pr ior i t i s ing of the

efficiency in production

half of the challenge.

Change s in the culture of consumption

(the sufficiency

revolution) has proved harder to tackle and governments have been chided for ducking their

respons ib i l i t ies . Here leadersh ip by the Norwegian government in organiz ing a (now year ly) minis ter ia l -

level gatherin g on the subject in Oslo in 1994 has been crucial to setting an official dialo gue in m otion .

The 'Os lo process ' has p laced the is sue on govern me nta l ag enda s and som e including the Uni tes

States , the world 's largest consumer have established committees to s tudy the issue of changing

consumption pat terns .

The role of municipal authorities and their associations in the official debates has so far been marginal.

Some are now beginning to take up the issues at the international and local level.

Section 1, Cha pter 4 of Ag enda

21,

emphasis added

< n C 3


30/164


31/164

Towards Susta inable D evelo pm ent for Local Authorit ies

The in te rna t iona l con tex t

2

Towards a pos i t i ve

policy context for

sus t a inab i l i t y?

The preceding chapter has argued that

the scale of our environmental and

social challenges is profound and that

the s takes are very high. However, as

the variety of interpretations of

sus ta inable development demons tra tes ,

percept ions of the problems vary and

this affects whether and what type of

corrective actions are taken . In recent

years a number of high-level

international conferences on

sustainabili ty-related issues have been

held. These conferences have shaped the

in ternat ional pol icy environment and

catalysed a s imilar process of policy

development at the regional level. They

have a lso provided a new context and

rationale for local authority action on

sus ta inable development . This chapter

discusses the impact of two significant

international conferences: the Rio Earth

Summit and Habitat II . I t then analyses

the European environmenta l po l icy

context, including the Maastricht Treaty

of the European Union, and the efforts

of the European Commission to define a

new sustainabili ty agenda for urban

authorities .

For all i ts internal contradictions, noted

in the last chapter , the Brundtland

Commiss ion repor t Our Common Future

marked a watershed in in ternat ional

del ibera t ions on the environment ,

economy, and equity nexus. The

repor t ' s message of human surv ival a t

threat succeeded in attracting polit ical

attention in a way in which other

equal ly signif icant UN -sponsore d

reports had failed, such as North-South:

A Programme for Survival (Brandt

Commission report, 1980) and

Common

Security: A Programme for Disarmament

(Palme Commission, 1982) had failed to.

The process that Our Common Future set

in motion provides the context for much

of current policy-making and legis lation

on sustainabili ty issues.

The immedia te outcome of Our Common

Future was the Uni ted Nat ions '

Conference on Environment and

Development (UNCED), held in Rio de

Janeiro in 1992. Popularly known as the

'Earth Summit ' , this event was the

largest and most celebrated

international conference ever organized

by the UN. The a t tendance was

unpre cede nted: 178 countr ies ; 120

Heads of State;8,000 journalis ts ; and

more than 30,000 people at the official

governmenta l summit and para l le l

NGO Global Forum. The Ear th Summit

resulted in five official documents:

Rio Declaration

Age nda 21

Biodiversity Con venti on

Cl imate Conve nt ion

Forest Principles .

The conference also established two

limited funding mechanisms for Eastern

and Southern countr ies :

the Global Env ironm ent Facili ty

(GEF), administered jointly by the

World Bank and UNEP, to support

programmes in the focal areas of

biodiversity, climate change,


32/164


33/164


34/164

Box 6:

A g e n d a 2 1 O u t l i n e

Chapter 1 . Preamble

Sect ion 1: Social and Economic D imen sions

Cha pter 2 . In ternational cooperation to accelerate

sustainable development in developing countr ies and

related domestic policies

Cha pter 3 . Com bating p over ty

C hap te r 4 . C hang ing consumpt ion pa t te rn s

Chapter 5 . Demographic dynamics and sustainabil i ty

Chapter 6 . Protecting and promoting human health

C hap te r 7 . P romot ing sus ta inab le huma n se t t lemen t

deve lopmen t

C hap te r 8 . I n teg ra ting env i ronmen t and deve lopm en t

decis ion-making

Section 2: Conse rvation and Manag eme nt of Resources

for Development

Chapter 9 . Protection of the atmosphere

Chapter 10 . In tegrated approach to the p lanning and

management of land resource

Chapter 20 . Environmentally sound management of

hazardous wastes , including prevention of i l legal

in ternational traf f ic in hazardous wastes

C h a p t e r

21 .

Environmentally sound management of so lid

wastes and sewage-related issues

Cha pter 22 . Safe and environm entally soun d m anag em ent

of radioactive wastes

Sect ion

3:

Strengthening the Role of Major Groups

Chapter 23 . Preamble

Chapter 24 . Global action for women towards sustainable

and equ i tab le deve lopme n t

C h a p t e r

25 .

Children and youth in sustainable

deve lopmen t

Chap ter 26 . Recognizing an d s trengthen ing the ro le of

indigenous people and their communities

Chapter 27 . Strengthening the ro le of non-governmental

organizations: Par tners for sustainable development

C h a p t e r

28 .

Local author i t ies ' in i t iatives in supp or t of

Agenda 21

Cha pter 29 . Strengthen ing the ro le of

workers and their t rade unions

A g e n d a 2 1 :

Earth's Action Plan

C h a p t e r

11.

Com bating deforestat ion

Chap ter 12 . Ma naging f ragile

ecosystems: Combating deser t if icat ion

and d rough t

Chap ter 13 . Ma nagin g f ragile

ecosystems: Sustainable mountain

deve lopmen t

Chap ter 14 . Prom oting sustainable agr iculture and rural

deve lopmen t

Chap ter 15 . Conse rvation of b io logical d ivers i ty

Chap ter 16. Environm entally soun d ma nage me nt of

bio technology

Cha pter 17. Protectio n of the oceans,, all kinds of seas ,

including enclosed and semi-enclosed seas , and coastal

areas and the protection , rat ional use and development of

their living resources

Chapter 18. Protection of the quality and supply of fresh

water resources: Application of in tegrated approaches to

the development, management and use of water resources

Chapter 19 . Environmentally sound management of toxic

chemicals , including preven tion of il legal in ternational

traff ic in toxic and dan gero us prod ucts

Cha pter 30 . Strengthening the ro le of

business and industry

C h a p t e r

31 .

Scientific and technological

communi ty

Cha pter 32 . Strengthening the ro le of

farmers

Sect ion 4: Mea ns of Implementat ion

C h a p t e r 33 . Financial resources and mechanisms

Cha pter 34 . Transfer of environmen tally sound

technology, cooperation and capacity-build ing

Cha pter 35 . Science for sustainable deve lopm ent

Chapter 36 . Promoting education , public awareness and

train ing

Chapter 37 . National mechanisms and in ternational

cooperation for capacity-build ing in developing

countr ies

C h a p t e r 38 . In ternational inst i tu t ional ar rangements

Chapter 39 . In ternational legal instruments and

mechan isms

Cha pter 40 . Information for decis ion -making


35/164

Towards Susta inable Dev elopm ent for Local Authorit ies

Rio'sagendafo rlocalauthorities

Agenda 21 has a particular resonance for

local autho rities . I t ma rks th e f irst major

success of local authorities to have their

new role as key players in the

sustainabili ty debate formally

recognised. I t has been estimated that

almost two-thirds of the actions in

Age nda 21 require the involvemen t of

local government . Agenda 21 devotes an

entire chapter to local authorities as one

of i ts nine 'major groups ' . This chapter

(see Box 7) was itself the result of active

involvement by groups such as the

International Council for Local

Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), the

Uni ted Towns Organizat ion , European

Commiss ion delegates and o thers .

The UNcycleofconferences

The 1990s have been a very busy decade

for international policy making. The

issues have ranged from the use and

management of natura l resources

(UNCED and i ts resu l tan t con vent ions ) ,

to demographics and reproduct ive r ights

(International Conference on Population

and Develop ment , 1994) ; pover ty and

social inequalit ies ( the Social Summit,

1995); the s tatus of women (the Fourth

World Conference on Women, 1995) and

the regulation of global trade (General

Agreement on Trade and Tariffs , 1994).

The results of these conferences will be

contributing to shaping the global policy

agenda in the f irs t decades of the 21st

century.

Although the majority of these

conferences have some bearing on the

kind of societies we will be living in, and

how they wil l be run , two summits s tand

out in their relevance for local

authorities : the UN World Conference on

Social Development or 'The Social

Summit ' (Copenhagen, 1995) and

HABITAT II 'The City Summit ' (Is tanbul,

1996). Both addressed themselves to

concerns faced daily by many local

au thor i t ies : hom elessness ,

unem ploy me nt , c r ime, poverty , socia l

exclus ion , pol lu t ion , was te d isposal ,

traffic congestion, overstretched or

underfunded services , etc. Of the two,

the Social Summit, despite i ts important

focus on development and the threats to

social cohesion and sustainable

l ivel ihoods everywhere , was

compara t ive ly downp layed in

indus tr ia l ised cou ntr ies . Perhap s due to a

Box 7: Age nda 21's Chapter 28 on Local Au thorit ies

Basis for Action

28.1.

Because so many of the problems and solutions being addressed by Agenda

21

have their

roots in local activities, the participation and cooperation of local authorities will be a

determining factor in fulfilling its objectives. Local authorities construct, operate and maintain

economic, social and environmental policies and reg ulations, and assist in implem enting

national and subnational environm ental policies. Asthe levelo fgovernance closest to thepeople,

they play a vital rolein

educating

mobilising and responding to the public to promote sustainable

development.

Objectives

28.2. The following objectives are proposed for this programme area:

(a) By1996 most local authorities ineach country should have undertaken a consultative processwith

their local populations and achieved a consensus on a 'Local Agenda21'for thecomm unity,

(b) By 1993, the international comm unity shou ld have initiated a consultative process aimed at

increasing cooperation between local authorities;

(c) By 1994, repres entativ es of associations of cities and other local autho rities sho uld have

increased levels of cooperation and coordination with the goal of enhancing the exchange of

information and experience among local authorities;

(d)

Alllocal authoritiesineach country should be encouraged toimplement and monitor programmes

which aimatensuring that women and youth are representedin

decision-making

planning and

implementationprocesses.

(emphasis added)


36/164

The Final Text of Habitat U's W orld Plan of Action is

only a gentle starting p oint for beginning to influence national

action s.... If, in a year orso,a handful of countries have adjusted a

handful of

policies

or practices, then probably the event justifies

itself....

An d

beneath

the surface,

there are

the indirect benefits

of

teaching countriespowerful and potentially arrogant countries,

or

poor

and potentially troublesome countries the techniques

of

international democracy.

Richard Best

Chair, Habitat II UK Council

reluctance to admit that issues of poverty

and exclusion were not the sole

prerogative of the poorer countries .

While some local-government

representatives were present at the Social

Summit there was li t t le organized

activity by international local authority

associations. Ha bitat II, in co ntrast ,

a t t rac ted unprecedented local au thor i ty

attention and the two-week conference in

Istanbul marked their polit ical coming of

age.

Habitat II 'The City S um mit'

Officially known as the Second UN

Conference on Human Set t lements ( the

firs t conference being held in Vancouver

in 1976), Habitat II had been organized to

ra ise publ ic awareness ab out the

problems and potent ia ls of human

set t lements , and to seek com mitm ent

f rom the wor ld ' s governments to make

all locales of human habitation healthy,

safe,

just, and sustainable.

3

' At tendance a t

the official conference was beyond

expectation: more than 3,000 government

delegates from 171 countries;

approxim ate ly 600 local-au thor i ty

representatives; over 2,000 accredited

NG O representa t ives ; some 3 ,000

journalis ts ; and representatives of trade

unions , in tergovernmenta l organizat ions

and o ther major groups . Some8,550

people par t ic ipated in the para l le l NG O

Forum which saw over 1,700 meetings

and events .

38

Habitat II addressed itself to two

fundamenta l ques t ions :

H ow can adeq uate shel ter and

livelihoods for all of the world 's ever

growing and pr imar i ly urban

popula t ion be ensured?

Ho w can sus ta in

Date post:	02-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	maitre1959
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Towards Sustainable Development for Local Authorities

Documents