If you have made it past the title of this post, I congratulate you. I mean, you probably think I might be crazy to even have the wish to explain AGAIN what sustainable development is. You see it every single day in the news, you hear about it on the radio, even politicians you don't like won't shut up about it. And there lies the complexity of sustainable development: it confronts us every single day, but only a very few of us would be able to explain what it means and defines what its aims are.
The concept of sustainable development is hard to grasp because every stakeholder (you, the Pope, oil companies or Germany) uses it the way that suits oneself. Nevertheless, I'm still convinced we can try to define what it is and at least where it aims to take us.
** BORING BUT IMPORTANT PART - SKIP IF YOU MUST BUT PLEASE TRY NOT TO **
I think it's important to understand what historical context the concept of sustainable development was born into, as it clearly defines what it is today. It's like you: the year you were born in, and the context you grew up in defines (partly) what you are today.
The terms "sustainable development" were coined in the Brundtland Report in 1987 untitled Our Common Future (written by the former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland if you must know). The definition was the following: "humanity has the ability to make the development sustainable, to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without comprising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs". If I break it down for you, she meant that (Western) societies needed to be more careful about the way they used the planet's resources (oil mainly at this time) if they wanted their children to live properly a few years later.
At the risk of disappointing you, the 1980's were not only the years of Flashdance and Dirty Dancing. The 1980's were seen as a period of unprecedented progress: capitalism was growing stronger, more stuff were made, accessible by an increasing number of people, in more places in the world. Furthermore, more people were lifted out of poverty (apparently) and economic growth was going well in most Western countries, who in turn, tried to help other countries, mainly what is known as BRICS today (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, whose economic growth would be booming as well a bit later).
Obviously, in the middle of this economic-growth-is-amazing frenzy, everybody forgot about the environment, as the pollution was not something that was overwhelming yet (as in, pollution could be seen as much, the way air pollution is seen in China today for instance, which does not mean that it didn't exist). Nevertheless, a few movements started to appear in the 1970's (Greenpeace - 1971 or Friends of the Earth -1969) to remind us that no, the environment was not infinite, and yes, we were messing it up.
So, in this particular context, the Brundtland Report was a real success and everybody important, politicians, the United Nations - for which it was written, scientists, and a wide variety of institutions, said that yes, that was definitely the way to go, enough wasted time, we are going to be SUSTAINABLE.
Thereafter, the term of "sustainable development" was used over and over again, in all possible and imaginable contexts. Today, sustainable development often means that three pillars are taken into consideration: the economy, the environment and society. Sustainable development also merges with terms like "sustainable growth" or "green growth" (today, they're kind of the same).
** WHAT IT REALLY MEANS TODAY **
Well, that, my friend, is an excellent question.
For the purpose of this blog to remain digestible, I will not go into detail into the economic and socio-political history that happened after "sustainable development" was put forward in the world.
As I mentioned above, sustainable development can be used literally in any context and by anybody, anywhere in the world. That does not mean it's used to protect the planet or its citizens. Proof is, since the Brundtland Report was published, the emissions have almost doubled, economic and social inequalities have spiked worldwide (rich people are getting richer and the poor ones are... well, nothing is really happening for them) and we have completely destroyed the planet, sometimes to a point of non-return (more information on that matter in another post - I don't want to lose you).
So yeah, I mean, in the end, you would be right to think "But Mathilde, sustainable development is bullshit then?!" with a tone of surprise.
Well, yeah, it is, partly.
BEWARE THOUGH - The essence of the world and the intention behind it is not. The will and wish to want to leave the planet in a better place for future generations by respecting the environment and each other is a pretty beautiful concept if you ask me. Furthermore, most of the time, the people who used it at the head of the institutions that set our agendas (United Nations, World Bank, European Union) probably meant it, to a certain extent, because it makes perfect sense.
No, the issue nowadays is double. 1) Sustainable development can be used to support projects that are NOT IN ANY WAY good for the planet or for its people and 2) it is completely deprived of its original definition and used so much that people are fed up with it before even knowing what it means. That my friend, is called "greenwashing" and will also be explained further in another post.
Which makes me come back to the beginning of this post: nobody understands what sustainable development genuinely means and yet we hear about it all-the-time. And for the moment, there is nothing we can do about that, apart from learning and do our best.
But now at least, you'll know what it is.