The Process of Sustainable Development: Change in Emphasis from Egocentric Values to Envirocentric Values.
1998 Series 1 Number 27 Page 1
John Frederick Maskell wrote his doctoral thesis (U Waterloo) in 1998. It analyzed ‘sustainable development.’
[See < The process of sustainable development, change in emphasis from egocentric values to envirocentric values (uwaterloo.ca) >. Ed.]
He relied heavily on the Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (also known as the Brundtland Report), entitled Our Common Future, which popularized the phrase.
[See < Our Common Future – Wikipedia >. Ed.]
John gave this Executive Summary, which he extracted from the report:
“Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable—to ensure it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (p. 8)…It is not a fixed state of harmony, but rather a process of change (p. 9)…No single group blueprint of sustainability will be found. Each nation will have to work out its own concrete policy implications (p. 40)…Without reorientation of the attitudes and emphasis little can be achieved. We have no illusions about quick fix solutions (p. 309)…The transition to sustainable development will require a range of public policy choices that are inherently complex and politically difficult. Reversing unsustainable policies will require immense efforts to inform the public and secure its support (p. 326)…To achieve the goals of sustainable development involves very large changes in attitude space (p. 335).”
Dr. Maskell provided several diagrams and charts in the paper.
He concluded that “[s]ustainable development is like a forest of trees which can be encouraged to grow by nurturing their roots rather than grafting on new leaves and branches. Nurturing the roots of sustainable development means enhancing the values of individual people and the families, organizations, and groupings within which they live, work, play, and relax.”
[Sustainable development is a phrase that can mean almost anything to a person and its context can be changed to suit any situation. Within Our Common Future, the phrase actually has dozens of apparent definitions. Indeed, the definition usually quoted (as at the start above) is fundamentally flawed in that it does not define ‘development.’ It is quite clear to this observer that no modern forms of human disturbance of natural ecosystems—arguably exactly what development entails—can be sustainable. Ed.]
Leave a Reply