University of Tlemcen

Faculty of law and political sciences

Departement of political sciences

Academic year 2024-2025

Module : sustainable developement and fight against corruption LMD2

Instructor: Dr SIHEM BENRAHOU

Lecture 01:
Sustainable development: concepts

The course focuses on key issues relating to the concepts of development,

sustainability and sustainable development. The issues include the history of SD as
well as the pillars and principles of this concept. The course also presents the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the associated debate regarding the
trade-offs, complementarities, costs and benefits, as well as what can be done to
achieve the “much-talked-about” SD.

Development as a concept, has been associated with diverse meanings, interpretations

and theories from various scholars. Development is defined as ‘an evolutionary
process in which the human capacity increases in terms of initiating new structures,
coping with problems, adapting to continuous change, and striving purposefully and
creatively to attain new goals (Peet, 1999 cited in Du Pisani, 2006). According to
Reyes (2001) development is understood as a social condition within a nation, in
which the needs of its population are satisfied by the rational and sustainable use of
natural resources and systems. Todaro and Smith (2006) also define development as a
multidimensional process that involves major changes in social structures, attitudes,
and institutions, as well as economic growth, reduction of inequality, and eradication
of absolute poverty. Several theories have been put forward to explain the concept of
development. They include the Modernisation, Dependency, World Systems and
Globalisation Theories.
The Modernization Theory of development distinguishes between two main
categories of society in the world, namely the traditional and modern societies. The
theory, according to Tipps (1976), argues that the traditional societies are entangled by
norms, beliefs and values, which are hampering their development. Therefore, in
order to progress, the traditional societies must emulate the culture of modern
societies, which is characterised by accumulation of capital and industrialization
which are compatible with development. In essence, this theory seeks to improve the

1
standard of living of traditional societies through economic growth by introducing
modern technology (Huntington, 1976). This theory is criticised for not taking into
account Sen's (1999) view of development regarding freedoms and self-esteem.
based on Marxist ideology, debunks the tenets of the
Modernization Theory and asserts that industrialization in the developed countries
rather subjects poor countries to underdevelopment as a result of the economic surplus
of the poor countries being exploited by developed countries (Bodenheimer, 1970;
Webster, 1984). The theory, however, fails to clarify the dependency of the less
developed countries on the metropolis in terms of how the developed countries secure
access to the economic surplus of the poor countries.
The World Systems Theory posits that international trade specialization and
transfer of resources from the periphery (less developed countries) to the core
(developed countries) stifle development in the periphery by making them rely on
core countries (Petras, 1981). The World Systems Theory perceives the world
economy as an international hierarchy of unequal relations (Reyes, 2001) and that the
unequal relations in the exchange between the Third World and First World countries
is the source of First World surplus. This contrasts with the classical Marxist Theory,
which posits that the surplus results from the capital-labour relation that exists in
“production” itself. (Bodenheimer, 1970; Reyes, 2001) The World System Theory has
been criticised for overemphasising the world market while neglecting forces and
relations of production. (Petras, 1981)
Similar to the World System Theory, the Globalization Theory originates from
the global mechanisms of deeper integration of economic transactions among the
countries (Portes, 1992). However, apart from the economic ties, other key elements
for development interpretation as far as globalisation is concerned are the cultural
links among nations (Kaplan, 1993; Moore, 1993), In this cultural orientation, one of
the cardinal factors is the increasing flexibility of technology to connect people
around the world (Reyes, 2001). Therefore, open and easy communication among
nations has created grounds for cultural homogenisation, thereby creating a single
global society (Waks, 2006). Political events no longer take local character but global
character. Thus, according to Parjanadze (2009), globalisation is underpinned by
political, economic, technological and sociocultural factors and orientations. Although
these developments theories have their weaknesses, they have paved the way for the
current global development concepts and paradigm, namely “sustainability” and
“sustainable development” (SD)
1.2. Sustainability
Literally, sustainability means a capacity to maintain some entity, outcome or process
over time (Basiago, 1999). However, in development literature, most academics,
researchers and practitioners (Gray & Milne, 2013: Tjarve, & Zemīte, 2016; Mensah
& Enu-Kwesi, 2018; Thomas, 2015) apply the concept to connote improving and
sustaining a healthy economic, ecological and social system for human development.
Stoddart (2011) defines sustainability as the efficient and equitable distribution of
resources intra-generationally and inter-generationally with the operation of socio-
economic activities within the confines of a finite ecosystem. Ben-Eli (2015), on the

2
other hand, sees sustainability as a dynamic equilibrium in the process of interaction
between the population and the carrying capacity of its environment such that the
population develops to express its full potential without producing irreversible
adverse effects on the carrying capacity of the environment upon which it depends.
From this standpoint (Thomas, 2015) continues that sustainability brings into focus
human activities and their ability to satisfy human needs and wants without depleting
or exhausting the productive resources at their disposal. This, therefore, provokes
thoughts on the manner in which people should lead their economic and social lives
drawing on the available ecological resources for human development.
Hák, Janoušková, and Moldan (2016) have argued that transforming global
society, environment and economy to a sustainable one is one of the most uphill tasks
confronting man today since it is to be done within the context of the planet’s carrying
capacity. The World Bank (2017) continues that this calls for innovative approaches to
managing realities. In furtherance of this argument, DESA-UN (2018) posits that the
ultimate objective of the concept of sustainability, in essence, is to ensure appropriate
alignment and equilibrium among society, economy and the environment in terms of
the regenerative capacity of the planet’s life-supporting ecosystems. In the view of
Gossling-Goidsmiths (2018), it is this dynamic alignment and equilibrium that must
be the focus of a meaningful definition of sustainability.
However, as argued by Mensah and Enu-Kwesi (2018), the definition must
also emphasise the notion of cross-generational equity, which is clearly an important
idea but poses difficulties, since future generations’ needs are neither easy to define
nor determine. Based on the foregoing, contemporary theories of sustainability seek to
prioritize and integrate social, environmental and economic models in addressing
human challenges in a manner that will continually be beneficial to human (Hussain,
Chaudhry, & Batool, 2014; UNSD, 2018b). In this regard, economic models seek to
accumulate and use natural and financial capital sustainably; environmental models
basically dwell on biodiversity and ecological integrity while social models seek to
improve political, cultural, religious, health and educational systems, among others, to
continually ensure human dignity and wellbeing (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012; Evers
2018), and for that matter, sustainable development.
1.3. Sustainable development
Sustainable development has become the buzzword in development discourse, having
been associated with different definitions, meanings and interpretations. Taken
literally, SD would simply mean “development that can be continued either
indefinitely or for the given time period (Dernbach, 1998, 2003; Lele, 1991; Stoddart,
2011). Structurally, the concept can be seen as a phrase consisting of two words,
“sustainable” and “development.” Just as each of the two words that combine to form
the concept of SD, that is, “sustainable” and “development”, has been defined
variously from various perspectives, the concept of SD has also been looked at from
various angles, leading to a plethora of definitions of the concept. Although
definitions abound with respect to SD, the most often cited definition of the concept is
the one proposed by the Brundtland Commission Report (Schaefer & Crane, 2005).
The Report defines SD as development that meets the needs of the current generation

3
without compromising the ability of future generations to meets their own needs.
Acknowledging the pervasiveness of WCED’s definition, Cerin (2006) as well as
Abubakar (2017) argues that SD is a core concept within global development policy
and agenda. It provides a mechanism through which society can interact with the
environment while not risking damaging the resource for the future. Thus, it is a
development paradigm as well as concept that calls for improving living standards
without jeopardising the earth’s ecosystems or causing environmental challenges such
as deforestation and water and air pollution that can result in problems such as climate
change and extinction of species (Benaim & Raftis, 2008; Browning & Rigolon,
2019). Looked at as an approach, SD is an approach to development which uses
resources in a way that allows them (the resources) to continue to exist for others
(Mohieldin, 2017). Evers (2017) further relates the concept to the organizing principle
for meeting human development goals while at the same time sustaining the ability of
natural systems to provide the natural resources and ecosystem services upon which
the economy and society depend. Considered from this angle, SD aims at achieving
social progress, environmental equilibrium and economic growth (Gossling-
Goidsmiths, 2018; Zhai & Chang, 2019). Exploring the demands of SD, Ukaga et al.
(2011) emphasised the need to move away from harmful socio-economic activities
and rather engage in activities with positive environmental, economic and social
impacts. It is argued that the relevance of SD deepens with the dawn of every day
because the population keeps increasing but the natural resources available for the
satisfaction of human needs and wants do not. Hák et al. (2016) maintain that,
conscious of this phenomenon, global concerns have always been expressed for
judicious use of the available resources so that it will always be possible to satisfy the
needs of the present generation without undermining the ability of future generations
to satisfy theirs. It implies that SD is an effort at guaranteeing a balance among
economic growth, environmental integrity and social well-being. This reinforces the
argument that, implicit in the concept of SD is intergenerational equity, which
recognises both short and the long-term implications of sustainability and SD
(Dernbach, 1998; Stoddart, 2011). According to Kolk (2016), this is achievable
through the integration of economic, environmental, and social concerns in decision-
making processes. However, it is common for people to treat sustainability and SD as
analogues and synonyms but the two concepts are distinguishable. According to
Diesendorf (2000) sustainability is the goal or endpoint of a process called sustainable
development. Gray (2010) reinforces the point by arguing that, while “sustainability”
refers to a state, SD refers to the process for achieving this state.

Reference:
Justice Mensah | (2019) Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars,
and implications for human action: Literature review, Cogent Social Sciences, 5:1,
1653531, DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2019.1653531 To link to this article:
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2019.1653531