Building Capacity to Support Sustainable Devt Activities
OUTSIDE THE BOX BY ALEX OTTI
Development is an ever-present idea that continues to evolve as human society reaches new possibilities and comes to a new sense of awareness of its strengths, opportunities and environmental advantages. The theory of development has preoccupied economists, policy makers and a wide range of other professionals for centuries. Improvement or lack thereof, in the living conditions of the various demographics and income groups, was the first layer of interest in the study of development. As society began to advance, scholars turned attention to other equally important frontiers of fulfillment beyond the material well-being of the populace. This era opened new vistas of attention in the quest to understand the evolution of our progress as social justice, respect for the fundamental rights of citizens, democracy, and transparent governance systems began to count as important development metrics. Evidently, the understanding of development will continue to expand as researchers break new grounds into the dynamic nature of individual and social aspirations.
The principle of dynamism drives the study of development across epochs, supporting the understanding that nothing is static. Adam Smith, James Steuart, David Hume, and John Stuart Mill, whose thoughts and ideas pioneered the subject of development studies, focused extensively on the principles of wealth distribution and the best path to eliminating poverty and lack among the majority within the community. As the subject continued to expand, scholars began to look beyond just material comfort to draw attention to how the principles of equality, freedom and justice resonate with the ideals of development across broad frontiers. These expanded parameters influenced the policy decisions of leaders who sought to improve the material well-being of the citizens while also addressing the challenges of inequality through deliberate initiatives that are aimed at reducing the gap between the haves and have-nots.
Through a careful analysis of the above insights and scholarly philosophies on the path to attaining improved living conditions for the general population, one finds that not much attention was paid to the future, the generations that will be here when we are gone.
In addition to the scant regard paid to the needs of future generations, another major failing of the regular economic development philosophy of the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries was the blatant disregard for the condition of the environment and its continuing capacity to sustain man’s financial activities beyond the immediate. Although T. R. Malthus did call attention to the dangers of explosive population growth vis-à-vis limited food supply in a 1798 essay, future scholars were only able to highlight the loopholes in the theory, especially as technology and discovery of new lands further increased food supply even as population grew. This seeming paradox raised unsettling questions about the postulations of the British scholar and, of course, the validity of his theory.
Although the 1972 book The Limits to Growth by Meadows et al. discussed the uncertain fate that awaits humanity when, ultimately, exponential economic and population growth are eventually confronted by the reality of finite resource supply, the work was greeted with cynicism as many scholars accused the authors of promoting pessimism. Subsequently, Beyond the Limits, published in 1992 in an attempt to address the criticisms raised in the 1972 edition, was met with even fiercer criticisms as cynics argued that the projections were misleading and incorrect. These criticisms clearly showed that interests in the planet’s future and the limits of natural resources were very peripheral to mainstream economic development theorists’ consideration.
Things would however take a new turn in the development circuit as fresh perspectives around the subject of sustainability began to move into mainstream debates. The publication of a Gro Harlem Brundtland report in 1987 titled Our Common Future opened a new vista for scholarly discussions and debates around the subject. This report gave the first standard definition of sustainable development as one that meets the needs of the current generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
The Brundtland report and the interest it generated formed the background for the interactions at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Participants reached a consensus that sustainable development must be made a priority of the International Community, recommending that national strategies be realigned to reflect the new global consciousness on the dynamics of sustainable development, including the new framework’s economic, social, and environmental demands. A 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa (Rio+10), reviewed the progress recorded in the efforts at achieving sustainable development and developed new strategies for pushing the agenda mainly through a multi-stakeholder partnership framework. A subsequent summit (Rio+20) in 2012 held in Rio de Janeiro highlighted the importance of the Green Economy and the urgency of developing an institutional framework to drive the agenda on a global scale.
The development of the core elements of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) framework, which came to the fore in 2015, started at the Rio+20 Summit. The SDGs are built around a set of clearly defined global goals related to protecting the environment and addressing the international community’s political and economic challenges. Featuring 17 critical areas of focus designed to build on the progress made through the Millennium Development Goal (MDGs) framework, which ran from 2000 through 2015, the SDGs architecture sought to drive a global agenda to eradicate poverty and end the menace of hunger, amongst other carefully articulated objectives consented to by world leaders in September 2015.
The priority of attacking poverty and hunger is proof that the primary concerns of improving the living conditions and welfare of the general population remains ever present, like in every other economic development model. The superiority of the sustainable development framework is, however, found in the attention it gives to measures aimed at protecting the environment, including the push for cleaner, renewable energy, climate action, and responsible production and consumption.
The sustainable development framework generally offers a global perspective on social, economic, and environmental policies, considering the present and future needs. The recognition of the importance of biodiversity, the appreciation and imperative to protect indigenous cultures, the cultivation of economic and social equity, and the importance of robust governance mechanisms dedicated to solving problems and making good use of the resources of the earth collectively add to the appeal as a more robust and all-encompassing paradigm for long term economic and social development in all parts of the world.
Its wide acceptance notwithstanding, the sustainable economic development paradigm has also been strongly criticised by scholars who describe it as vague and lacking in specificity. It has also come under attack for lacking critical milestones that can be quantitatively measured, which further lends credence to the views of those who criticise it for vagueness.
Abia, one of the five states in the South-east region of Nigeria, has a population of about 4.8 million people and a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of about US$7.1 billion. Abia has two important urban locations — Umuahia, the State capital, and Aba, the commercial nerve centre. Aba is also one of the most crucial trade destinations in West Africa. Farming and trading are the predominant occupations of our people. Abians are also known for producing high-quality fashion products and several other household and industrial goods that are sold in markets across Nigeria and West Africa.
We bought into the sustainable development framework long before assuming office in May 2023. Our campaign manifesto was built around the sustainable economic development model because we noted that it holds great potential to drive the development of the various communities in the State and ultimately make the future more prosperous through the prudent use of resources. Additionally, it clearly focuses on building systems that support our people’s economic and political aspirations.
Permit me, however, to share my views on the subject matter of climate change as it relates to clean energy and net zero emissions for purposes of intellectual honesty and presentation accuracy. While we agree that the reduction of carbon footprint is unavoidable, we contend that the deadlines set by countries in Europe and America may be a little too aggressive and unrealistic for Africa. We also note that the cost of reaching net zero emission in countries like Nigeria who rely on oil and gas to run their economy may be extremely high. We see gas as a cleaner hydrocarbon quite unlike coal and believe it should pass as a transition fuel in the march towards net zero emission. This argument is eloquently canvassed in my article titled “Can Renewables Change the Future of Gas?” (Thisday Newspapers, September 13, 2021). Again, in my column in the wake of COP 26, titled “Of Glass Houses, Stones and Glasgow,” published in THISDAY Newspapers of November 22, 2021, I had maintained that all the regions and nations of the world are not on the same development pedestal with respect to climate responsibilities. In Africa for example, our development realities still revolve around hygiene issues as scores of millions of people around the continent wake up each morning preoccupied with concerns about where the next meal will come from. Challenges of unemployment, poverty, and access to basic amenities including clean water, quality road networks, and stable electricity still dominate social and political discourses across the continent.
In another 2021 article, I shared a depressing report from the World Bank which ranked Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, as being the largest energy-deficient country in the world with more than 40% of the total population lacking access to grid electricity. The implication is that active production is hampered as machines and other resources lie idle across factories and production centres. This perhaps explains Africa’s record of low emissions at just 3.8% of the global total.
My argument at the time, as it would be today, is that while we shall do well to keep our eyes on the future and work closely with our global partners for an emission-free world eventually, it would not be realistically prudent to immediately follow the same trajectory as those who have since conquered the existential development challenges we are still grappling with today. Our task as leaders is to constantly appraise the state of affairs in our society and make decisions that will be in the long-term best interest of our people, taking cognisance of available resources, and competing needs of the populace. Again, we have to state that an honest appraisal of our development reality imposes a certain burden on us as leaders of the developing world to adopt initiatives that will improve the socio-economic development of the general population, prioritising programmes that address the challenges of mass poverty, hunger, unemployment and limited access to education and health services.
Dr. Otti, OFR, is the Executive Governor of Abia State. He was on the editorial board of THISDAY Newspapers between 2016 and 2022 and maintains the column, ‘Outside The Box’
To be continued.
