Post‐sustainable development

Abstract

The past 15 years have witnessed the rise of post-development theory as a means of understanding the development discourse since the 1940s. Post-development argues that Intentional development (as distinct from Immanent development -what people are doing anyway), is a construct of Western hegemony. Sustainable development, they argue, is no different and indeed is perhaps worse given that most of the global environmental degradation has been driven by consumerism and industrialisation in the West. Critics of post-development counter by stating that it only provides destruction by tearing apart what is currently practiced in 'development' without providing an alternative. When post-developmentalists do offer an alternative it typically amouints to little more than a call for more grassroots involvement in development and disengagement from a Western agenda. Post-sustainable development analysis and counter-analysis has received remarkably little attention within the sustainable development literature, yet this paper argues that it can make a positive contributrion by calling for an analysis of discourse rather than a hiding of power differentials and an assumption that consensus must exist within a community.A case is made for a post-sustainable development which acknolwedges that diversity will exist and consensus may not be achievable, but at the same time participation can help with learning. The role of the expert within sustainable development is also discussed.

Corporate social responsibility and developing countries

“…Especially when intentional CSR activities on behalf of predominantly Western corporations remain a construct of Western hegemony, corporate initiatives for CSR and sustainable development may indeed be worse, given that most of the global sustainability problems have been driven by consumerism and industrialism in the West and in high growth developing economies like the so called BRIC countries: Brazil, Russia, India and China (Banerjee, 2008;Morse, 2008;Banerjee, 2007). These critical voices argue in the line with Luke (2005) that 'The real political agenda of sustainable development [and CSR; our addition] is obscured for clear reasons that serve important ideological and political purposes' (Luke, 2005: 236).…”

“…Egels-Zandén and Kallifatides describe that the business practice in this case left the underlying principles of the United Nations Global Compact unquestioned, while challenging the local institutions and how life and society is organized there. Their article is thus an important empirical illustration of previous critical writings arguing that sustainable development and CSR is a construct of Western Hegemony and could be seen as ideological movements intended to legitimize and uphold the power of large corporations (Devinney, 2009;Banerjee, 2008;Morse, 2008;Banerjee, 2007).…”

The contested concept of sustainable aviation

“…Recent research suggesting that the relationship between the aviation sector and economic development is not straightforward and the economic benefi ts of aviation are somewhat unevenly distributed (Daley, 2008) may perpetuate this situation. Thus the outcomes of deliberative processes associated with a more refl exive ecological modernization may be uncertain (Morse, 2008) and may not achieve requisite discursive closure for sustainable aviation policy to function properly. While limits to growth and trade offs between economic and environmental performance are pushed to the background in current policy debates, ultimately these may prove diffi cult to avoid for the aviation sector (Kaszewski and Sheate, 2004).…”

Assessing sustainability: a technical fix or a means of social learning?

“…Collaboration is a key element for sustainability, yet changing from individualistic to collaborative is not an easy task (Lozano 2007). What will hold back the utility of AIRS, and other such tools, are the silos of institutions (both within and between stakeholder groups) where policy-makers and managers are tied down, working on more pressing organisational priorities (Morse 2008), and are unable to work in a more holistic manner with other departments and organisations towards a common goal of sustainability. Within the southwest region the South West Sustainability Partnership is an incorporated group of senior executives from various natural resource management agencies and local government who meet bi-monthly to discuss sustainability issues.…”