The Brundtland Report

The universal definition of Sustainability, defined in the Brundtland Report back in 1987 and quoted by Mulder (2007) is “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.

Environmental change is a logical certainty, and progressively a lived human concern. However, it is not yet what everybody should call social-global problem in one voice. It's not an essential almost we shape our social practices, nor a sufficiently huge social standard to go about as an imperative on our conduct. Around the planet there is developing energy to characterize environmental change as a security issue and thus as a motivation topping issue that merits noteworthy consideration and assets. Calls for movement are developing - yet at the same time outlined activities to address the issue has a cost or weight that will hamper business and go about as a drag on the economy.

The occurrence of globalization, sustainable development, and the ecological footprint are all seemingly connected in today’s environmental capacities. To further understand these environmental processes, one must divulge into these individual environmental concepts to properly understand their facilitations. Furthermore, according to professor Vamvakas “a major theme of Sustainable development is the alternative to the destruction of the world environment by the economic imperative of globalization” (Vamvakas, 2014).

The future of our planet has been a great concern for the global community for many years. In their article ‘Can a Collapse of Global Civilisation be Avoided?’ Paul and Anne Ehrlich explore the current ecological and socio-cultural trends that they believe, if left untreated, will lead to the inevitable collapse. Unlike past civilizations, the modern global community has the knowledge, skills and technologies to solve the several pressing issues Ehrlich presents in this article. So what are those issues?

In the decade of the 1970s, the United Nations organized several important meetings on the human environment to study a very serious problem . We humans are destroying the world around us . We are using up all of our natural resources . We must learn to conserve them, or life will be very bad for our children and our grandchildren .

“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. (Brundtland Report,

Environmental issues can be difficult to resolve. With many different sources and countless resulting effects, it can be a challenge to pinpoint the best solution to fix the issue. Once it has been brought to the attention of decision makers, one must choose a perspective from which they will analyze the problem. Will they look at it from an anthropocentric point of view, in which first & foremost, people’s interests are taken into account? Or will they analyze it from an ecocentric perspective in which the current state and developing future of the environment is the first priority? Once this has been decided, they must then choose who will manage the process of resolving the issue. This leads to my topic for this paper which will be discussed

In places such as South America where deforestation is prominent, nations should conserve and protect more land. For the sake of water quality, it is right for the agriculture industry to cut back on the use of harmful fertilizers and pesticides. In countries where many forms of air pollution are unregulated, it is ethical for these nations to set more restrictions on pollutants such as PM. Just as with other air pollutants, it is right for countries to regulate greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide in order to slow the rate of climate change. While these decisions are ethical, nations will not make them without a cost. Connections between modern industries and pollution are prominent, and change will be difficult. For this reason, governments must break down the wall separating conservation and advancement. Although some may believe they will have no effect on climate change, the United States should take greater steps in becoming a global leader of environmentalism. Looking ahead, by neglecting to protect the environment, the future will hold destructive costs. Like a bomb counting down to its last minutes, the world does not have much time left. Overall, if humans continue to place business before the environment, there will be no turning

This book helped me better understand the mechanics of international development and increased my interest in the subject. I then moved on to reading "Big World, Small Planet". The book, by Johan Rockström, opened up my eyes to many crucial environmental problems and made me even more aware of how they affect social issues. Furthermore, the book helped me gain a deeper understanding on the problems and solutions regarding environmental issues.

The environmental movement has drastically changed over the last few decades, encompassing science, political activism and our social conscience. It is one of the fastest growing political and social movements in the world. Since the mid 1970s, this international movement has engaged the global community indluding many countries, the business world, media, and non-governmental organizations, all who have pushed for increased regulations and compliance towards protecting the environment. Nations within and outside of the UN have been pressured into pursuing a more sustainable future.Our ability to adapt, as well as to compromise, will direct the result of how we will survive in the future. States will have to cooperate and understand problems other nations are facing, and be able to commit to wanting a sustainable earth. Environmental norms are changing due to the overwhelming social push to reduce global warming, causing people to bandwagon to fight for environmental sustainability. Unfortunately, the motives for this movement are not always clear. While citizens of developed countries appear to have the right justifications for saving our planet and are attempting to address, global warming resulting in climate change, this heated political issue has provided NGO’s, governments (state actors) and corporations a platform to demonstrate interest in social issues, but also an opportunity to capitalize of for their own financial or political gain.

Table of Contents Introduction............................................................................................................................ 2 I. The development of global, European and national policies relating to sustainability. 2 1. Changing attitudes of public, politicians and businesses to the environment since 1945 .................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Brundtland definition of ‘sustainable development’ .................................................. 4 3. The international and UK policies to sustainable development since Earth Summit of 1992

The Earth Charter began in the late 80s, when a group known as “the Brundtland Commission launched what was called Our Common Future Report to guide the transition to sustainable development” (“History”, 2009). In the early 90s, two gentle men by the name of Maurice Strong and Mikhail Gorbachev along with the assistance of the “Dutch Government developed an Earth Charter as a civil society initiative by working through the organizations founded by themselves…” to later draw on hundreds of international documents (“History”, 2009). Before the Earth Charter became a

Currently in today’s news it pays to scare the population. The mass populous is guaranteed to continue to read or watch the news if they think our world is coming to an end. Bjorn Lomborg writes this article in direct defense of his positive outlook on our earth’s state. Lomberg’s approach to fixing the earth’s environment is to not just how we can affect the future, but how we can help humanity and the earth now.

The targets supporting the achievement of the goal can be measured, are indeed being measured but fail to provide built in incentives or sanctions should these targets not be met or fulfilled. The idea is to put a stop to deforestation, restore land and water ecosystems, protect the planet’s biodiversity and various species. Key to the success of the goal is the target to significantly increase financial resources to support conservation, sustainable development and ensure equitable sharing and access to resources. Although these targets can be measured, the accuracy of the data can be called into question because government sources are not always the most trustworthy. Some geographical areas of the world have shown to have skewed the facts (“Spot the Rancher”). The failure of the Kyoto accord and the Canadian tar sands illuminate the uphill battle the UN faces in attaining their goal. As long as elected officials choose to favour economic growth and profit over sustainable development and equality the goal will not be achieved and the targets are irrelevant.

In the new millennium, there has been an exponential growth in the number of books and papers on this subject. This would undoubtedly be due to the fact that the Brundtland report in 1987 (WCED, 1987), did not explain exactly how the sustainable