Content area
Full text
Introduction
Sustainable development (SD) per se is a complex phenomenon. It is generally distinguished as the means of satisfying current needs without reducing the capacity of future generations to satisfy their own needs. The universal idea contains three central pillars: environmental sustainability, economic growth, and social inclusion [1]. The discounted profit maximisation and sustainable preferences lead to two different sets of values which do not match. Historically, Chichilnisky [2] advocates a framework that neither the present nor future should dictate each other. Both the approaches raised by Chichilnisky [2] reflect a lack of trade-off, which is the root cause of the contradictions regarding SD in the world. Jabareen [3] present a detailed 7-pointer conceptual framework of sustainable development. Instead of delving further into the 7-pointer concept of sustainable development, it suffices to say that SD cannot be viewed in bits and pieces. Instead, a holistic perception is necessary. Morelli [4] presents a working definition of SD, “maintenance of natural capital concomitantly including social and economic sustainability”.
The discussion above highlights that SD may be accepted and appreciated worldwide. However, the execution of its tenets on the ground, despite all the unanimity bandied about, depends on several factors. They are: (1) the situation of the economy (developed or emerging); (2) the status of the environment in the country; (3) the growth rate (or growth rate per capita); and (4) the governance structure of the country (democracy or autocracy). Hence, it is pointless to expect unanimity in adopting SD concepts by all countries. However, finding common ground and factual logic based on tenable research may provide doable solutions. Research on the mutual association, dependence and dynamics of growth, environment and the four factors enumerated above can surely provide facts as the way forward on the issue.Such research may be the beginning, not the end.
However, the authors do not find studies covering all aspects discussed above. The literature on the environment and the nation’s growth is usually skewed towards popular EKC theory [5]. Voluminous literature is devoted to proving [6, 7] or rejecting it [8, 9–10]. In other words, it is apt to deduce that this issue is still debatable. The debate situation will prevail in the future too. The diversity and innumerable factors hold sway...