Sustainable Production System

Eco-development versus Sustainable Development

Clément Morlat

• Editorial: Wiley-ISTE
• Año: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781119720157
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Économie
• Categoría: Développement durable

Wealth is no longer just an ability to live well in a world shaped by human activities. It is also an ability to push back or defer the limits of a world in biological and climatic closure. This book examines the theoretical conflicts and the power plays which often oppose the socio-political and technical-financial practices of recognition of what intervenes in the production of this wealth – i.e. of what has value. It lays down the principles of a contributory modeling method, allowing debates around the concept of development; the building of scenarios; the negotiation of their implementation; and a cross-sectoral reading of their social, ecological and economic costs. This method, called Dynamic Modeling of Cost Systems, is based on a territorial communication device which articulates political, contractual and accounting innovations using deliberative and normative digital tools. It combines different local representations of value, in order to approach wealth through an integrated analysis of micro-, meso- and macro- issues.

1
Economics and Imbalances

1.1. Capturing power

The founding definition by Brundtland et al. (1987) – “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” – emphasizes the idea of a capacity, which is embedded and renewed over time. One of the fundamental questions raised by the concept of sustainable development is the place of the economy in the renewal of this capacity over time.

On its website, INSEE, the French national statistics office, offers another definition of sustainable development, which emerged from the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992: “Economically efficient, socially fair and ecologically sustainable development.” What meaning should be given to this definition? Is sustainable development an adaptation to the margin of economic development? Is it a question of adding social equity and ecological sustainability to the list of criteria that, in the history of thought, came to qualify economic development¹? Or is it a question of rethinking development itself?

An animal species develops; we speak of vegetative development for plants; a city can also be considered as being in development, or – in a figurative sense – a social organization, such as a sect. But when the term development is used without a qualifier, it most often refers to economic development.

The epistemology relating to a sustainable development economy needs to be clarified. A possible beginning point is to look at the origins of this economic approach. Several elements that characterize the concept of sustainable development were already present at the heart of another concept – eco-development. Some still consider the latter as the most suitable reference for analyzing the sustainability of relations between social, ecological and economic aspects.

1.1.1. From eco-development to sustainable development

1.1.1.1. A change in reference frame

The idea of eco-development was proposed by Maurice Strong at the Stockholm Conference² in 1972. For Ignacy Sachs, who later made the concept popular, this eco-development “implies a hierarchy of objectives: first the social issues, then the environment, and finally only the search for economic viability, without which nothing is possible. Growth must not become a primary goal, but must remain an instrument at the service of solidarity between present and future generations” (Sachs 2002, p. 7). Ecological integrity is thus considered necessary to achieve the goal of social well-being. And economic viability – an essential condition for development – remains a means and must be within the physical limits of the biosphere.

This anchorage of development within the physical limits of the world implies a temporal anchorage. The ecosystem – its viability and its time for renewal – would become the planner’s paradigm. Human activities would adapt, “the time horizon would be calculated in decades and even centuries” (Sachs 1988, p. 40).

This adaptation would not be to the detriment of the populations. Eco-development involves a certain level of economic, environmental and social policy planning to ensure that human beings are given a central place.

Figure 1.1. Systemic approach to eco-development (Sachs 1978, p. 22)

For Diemer (2013), thinking of eco-development means “starting by setting clear objectives for food, housing, access to care and education, linking them to social groups and ensuring that the necessary production is done in harmony with the environment”.

Table 1.1. The five criteria of eco-development (Sachs 1997, pp. 84–85; Berr 2013)

Social	An acceptable level of social homogeneity
	Fair distribution of income
	Full employment or job security providing an acceptable standard of living
	Equitable access to natural resources
Economic	Balanced development of the different sectors of the economy
	Food security
	The ability to constantly modernize the production equipment
	A sufficient degree of autonomy in scientific and technological research
	Integration into the national market while respecting national sovereignty
Ecological	Protection of the renewal capacities of natural assets
	Control of the limits on the use of non-renewable resources
Cultural	Change in continuity (balance between respect for traditions and innovation)
	The possibility of designing a national program independently: personal autonomy, endogeneity (rather than blind trust in foreign models), self-confidence combined with openness to the world
Territorial	Balancing rural and urban development (reversing trends that favor the allocation of public funds to urban areas)
	Improving urban landscapes
	Fight against regional disparities
	Implementation of environmentally sound development strategies for environmentally sensitive areas

Let us return to the concept of sustainable development. Its most well-known representation, the interface of the three “spheres” – or “pillars” – proposed in Rio in 1992, shows the relations between the economic, ecological and social spheres in a very specific way – almost orthogonal to what eco-development suggests. While the two approaches can be described as systemic, the interface proposed in Rio places the three fields at the same level of challenge and means, while eco-development ranks them into interrelated, interlocking levels, distinguishing demand (social), supply (economic) and environmental quality.

Figure 1.2. Interfaced representation of the three “pillar” domains of sustainable development

The criteria and objectives of eco-development are also reminiscent of the seventeen global sustainable development goals (SDG) that replaced the eight millennium development goals (MDG) adopted by UNDP in 2000³.

Table 1.2. The seventeen sustainable development goals (UN 2015)

1	N poverty
2	Zero hunger
3	Good health and well-being
4	Quality education
5	Gender equality
6	Clean water and sanitation
7	Affordable and clean energy
8	Decent work and economic growth
9	Industry, innovation and infrastructure
10	Reduced inequalities
11	Sustainable cities and communities
12	Responsible consumption and production
13	Climate action
14	Life below water
15	Life on land
16	Peace, justice and strong institutions
17	Partnerships for the goals

The proximity of these two sets of criteria, which are separated by 20 years, is striking. Some eco-development criteria are more assertive regarding the means to be implemented (balance in innovation and tradition, possibility of designing a national program independently, etc.). However, identifying what fundamentally distinguishes them from the SDGs is not easy if we simply look at these two sets of criteria statically. The history of the propagation of the two concepts to which they are associated facilitates the understanding of phenomena that led to the installation of one at the expense of the other.

1.1.1.2. Spaces for the propagation of concepts

In October 1974, a symposium of experts from UNEP⁴ and UNCTAD⁵ met in Cocoyoc, Mexico, following the work initiated in Stockholm two years earlier. It dealt with the organization of resource use, the environment and development, in an approach strongly influenced by the logic of eco-development.

The Cocoyoc final declaration calls for combating underdevelopment by stopping the overdevelopment of the rich, encouraging developing countries to build on their own strengths in order to gain self-confidence and learn to no longer be dependent on rich countries. In response, United States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger urged⁶ UNEP to remain focused on the issue of clean-up (Sachs 2007, p. 264). The eco-development project will then gradually be replaced at the forefront of the world political scene by the concept of sustainable development.

For Stengers (1989, pp. 21–22) “The propagation, or attempted propagation, of concepts does not take place in an indifferent, homogeneous space, but in landscapes structured by issues well known to the actors of these opera...

Índice

• Cover
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• 1 Economics and Imbalances
• 2 Information Structures Production
• 3 Communication Renews Rationalities
• 4 Accounting: The Figure in Dialogue
• 5 Contractualizing: The Value in Act
• 6 Development, Changing the Compass and the Map
• Conclusion
• Postface
• References
• Index
• End User License Agreement