SD for the next generation

6th October 2013


Related Topics

Related tags

  • Business & Industry ,
  • Management ,
  • Local government



Jerome Baddley says it is time to update the Brundtland commission's 1987 definition of sustainable development

It was more than a quarter of a century ago when the Brundtland commission defined sustainable development as: “Development that meets the needs of the current generation without undermining the capacity of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Given that we are on the cusp of the future generations to which the commission referred, this is a good opportunity to look again at the underlying principles of sustainable development (SD) and ask: Are we succeeding? Is the language right? And has the world has changed sufficiently to require a new assessment of our common future?

Against the tide

For the past 10 years, I have included the Brundtland definition of SD in almost every presentation I have given. It is a small stand against the tidal wave of misuse and abuse of the language and theory of sustainable development. As corporations, politicians and salespeople clothe themselves in many shades of green there is a need to reassert the original message of SD, lest it drift off into a dilution of meaninglessness.

At a recent workshop for public health registrars, one delegate pleaded that we find a new word for sustainability, arguing that the term is “so overused that it is confusing”. This was not the first, and certainly will not be the last, time that view is expressed.

The Brundtland commission’s call in 1987 for humanity to take a long-term view has become deeply eroded by terms like sustainable economic growth, sustainable urban extension and sustainable urban drainage systems. “Unsustainable” is now more likely to mean too expensive in terms of short-term cash flow, rather than permanently damaging to the planet’s life-support systems, be they ecological, environmental or natural resources.

Three generations

I find it increasingly useful to view sustainable development as a process in three generations. The first generation of SD, from the 1970s to the 1990s, saw academic awareness of the environmental limits to growth evolve against a backdrop of international crises related to the extinction of species, resource scarcity (1970s oil price shocks) and the management of toxic waste. An intrinsic tenet of the understanding of SD was that everything is connected to everything else.

Books such as Donella Meadows’ The limits to growth (1972) put numbers on an environmentally degraded future, based on business-as-usual scenarios and potential global responses. Meanwhile, Small is beautiful, written by economist E F Schumacher in 1973, was well ahead of its time in proposing neat social solutions to a consumption-based economy.

Through the first generation of SD the biggest changes were driven by price shocks or crises; each time these arose, the “green” movement gathered credibility. The Centre for Alternative Technology was established in response to the oil price shocks of the 1970s. That decade also saw the US introduce the first feed-in-tariffs in a bid to encourage wind power after rapid fossil fuel price rises.

The poisoning of Bhopal in 1984 forced controls on the international chemical industry. Meanwhile, toxic waste incidents, such as that of the Khian Sea – the cargo ship that travelled the world in the mid-1980s looking for somewhere to dispose its load of toxic waste before dumping most of it in the Atlantic and Indian oceans – led to international legislation on transborder movement of waste. Agenda 21 was spawned by the 1992 Rio Earth summit and looked ahead to the challenges facing the world in the next century.

Now we’re in the second generation of sustainable development – 2000s to the 2020s – we need to ask whether humanity has a reduced capacity to meet its own needs? This is the acid test for the success or failure of the first generation of environmentalists in achieving the goal of sustainable development.

The simplest, yet most powerful way to examine this is through basic economics. What has happened to the cost of limited natural resources? While we may have been able to churn out cheap energy and cheap food to support fast growth in the last generation, can we maintain this into the current generation?

The answer is no. Since 2000 there have been rises in the cost of most core natural resources and commodities. The impact of these has been dramatic. Oil price increases from 2005 were partly responsible for the financial crash in 2008, for example, while the rising cost of food has been cited as one of the key reasons for the social unrest that fuelled the Arab spring.

The change of pace in commodity price inflation since the beginning of the new millennium is a clear demonstration of the failure to adequately address SD.

The next step

The weight of evidence on man-made climate change and resource scarcity is now firmly on the side of the environmentalists and there is a growing arsenal of legal levers and a wealth of financial drivers to instigate and sustain necessary change. However, questions are now being asked about whether the Brundtland definition of SD remains the right definition for sustainability.

In the 1980s, environmentalists had a concerned vision of the future. This future is now a lot closer and uglier, and we appear destined to enter the third generation of SD still having achieved very little. Yet, the current generation has all the tools, evidence, moral leverage and financial motivation it needs to develop effective strategies to prevent future generations suffering a painful decline through resource shortage. As resources become constrained, there are two simple options: cooperate or compete.

Rising costs and the threats of resource shortage provide an opportunity to push for green growth and build a more sustainable future. The role of the second-generation environmentalist is one of building and nurturing investor confidence and steering investment away from fossil fuels, for example, towards permanent structural changes in demand reduction, social expectations and resilient local supply chains.

Perhaps the Brundtland definition could be better worded as: “Development that ensures realistic growth and consumption expectations in the current generation, while ensuring the capacity of future generations to thrive without conflict.”


Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.

Transform articles

New guidance maps out journey to digital environmental assessment

IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network is delighted to have published A Roadmap to Digital Environmental Assessment.

2nd April 2024

Read more

Lisa Pool on how IEMA is shaping a sustainable future with impact assessment

27th November 2023

Read more

IEMA responded in September to the UK government’s consultation on the details of the operational reforms it is looking to make to the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) consenting process as put forward in the NSIP reform action plan (February 2023).

24th November 2023

Read more

Members of IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network Steering Group have published the 17th edition of the Impact Assessment Outlook Journal, which provides a series of thought pieces on the policy and practice of habitats regulations assessment (HRA).

26th September 2023

Read more

In July, we published the long-awaited update and replacement of one of IEMA’s first published impact assessment guidance documents from 1993, Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic.

1st August 2023

Read more

Are we losing sight of its intended purpose and what does the future hold for EIA? Jo Beech, Tiziana Bartolini and Jessamy Funnell report.

15th June 2023

Read more

Luke Barrows and Alfie Byron-Grange look at the barriers to adoption of digital environmental impacts assessments

1st June 2023

Read more

Susan Evans and Helen North consider how Environmental Statements can be more accessible and understandable

1st June 2023

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close