диссертация (1169188), страница 91
Текст из файла (страница 91)
In its common meaning, sustainabledevelopment rested on three pillars: economic growth, social equality andprotection of the environment. However, the abovementioned authors note, for thelast two decades sustainable development has begun to be predominantlyinterpreted in the environmental context.The development itself has been understood as economic growth552 (thedifficulty of the legal definition of this notion is discussed below).
This reflectedthe approach of developed states with a high level of welfare, and to some extent anumber of rapidly developing states. The issue, however, was due to the fact thatthat path was accompanied by a degradation of natural resources and the biosphereas a whole.
The social component of development was removed to the background.In parallel with an economy-oriented understanding, another understandingthat was conceptually new was forming – of development as the expansion ofhuman possibilities. It was reflected in the 1991 Human Development Report. Thekey components of the concept, according to the champions of this approach are:equal opportunities for all members of society; a sustainable state of suchopportunities for current and future generations; giving people the opportunity totake part in development and derive benefits from i.553552Drexhage J. and Murphy D.
Sustainable Development from Brundtland to Rio 2012. Background Paper preparedfor consideration by the High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability at its first meeting, 19 September 2010.International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), 2010.553http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/256/hdr_1995_en_complete_nostats.pdf401This understanding of development was put forward earlier by Amartya Sen,a prominent economist and philosopher, and a Nobel Prize laureate. He claimedthat economic growth necessitates social reforms, such as improving education andhealthcare. They precede economic development and constitute its preconditions.His book ‘Collective Choice and Social Welfare’ published in 1970, had a greatinfluence on the social-oriented concept of development; there, he discusses thetopics of human rights, societal attitudes, availability of information.
Sen paidgreat attention to the issue of gender equality, stating that if it is not achieved,development will come to a deadlock.554Although the meaning of the concept of development expanded in the 21stcentury, economic growth remains in first place. At the same time, in its currentformat, it covers many other strata of life as well: reducing inequality, improvingkey living standards, promoting integrated sustainable management of naturalresources, etc.
(“The future we want”, GA Res. 68/288 (2012)). The presentinterpretation of the concept can be found in the UN General Assembly’s“Sustainable Development Goals” adopted on 25 September 2015 (official name:“Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”). Thiswas preceded by lengthy debates and consultations. Eventually, a document wasadopted, setting out 17 broad tasks that cover, together, 169 more specificobjectives. Essentially, these goals and tasks remained unchanged from when theywere proposed by the UN GA Working Group on Sustainable Development Goalson 12 August 2014.These 17/169 items, in effect from 1 January 2016, constitute the globalagenda for the next 15 years, whose implementation is expected to involve notonly governments, but transnational companies, charities, the public, NGOs,scholars and students around the world.
The document, of course, does not coverall, but, according to its authors, covers the bulk of the problems modern society isto resolve so that development can become sustainable.554https://www.britannica.com402It is important to note the general trend of the concept’s evolution.Originally, it had a certain core idea that made it novel and distinctive, andconcordant with the UN Charter Preamble. The idea of caring for futuregenerations is, without doubt, a noble and appealing one. What it impliesspecifically was more or less clear largely in the context of the use of naturalresources. It accrued a practical meaning in the context of climate change.555As to the document under review, under the “heading” of sustainabledevelopment, it reveals a long list of diverse problems and tasks that concern theworld community and that absolutely need to be resolved. But it is evident that theinitial idea itself – on caring for future generations – ended up effectively lost.But even the 17 goals and associated sub-goals outlined in the document areviewed as unspecific and unattainable in the legal literature.
In this context, it isinteresting to look at Ingo Keilitz’s article “The Trouble with Justice in the UnitedNations Sustainable Development Goals 2016-2030”.556In that publication, the author is reviewing only one section (Goal 16) andassociated performance targets, and not the entire ‘package’ of “SustainableDevelopment Goals”. He characterizes the document as a certain indicator ofprogress in the environmental governance and as providing provisional parametersfor future performance of the sustainable development targets. The key problem,according to him, is the lack of conceptual clarity and also imprecise definitions ofthe goal. The second problem is that the ambitious goals set are hard to translateinto specific measures and, consequently, meaningful development results.
Theauthor chose Goal 16 for analysis, since he believes that the problems he hasidentified there are more tangible. And indeed, Goal 16 covers issues such as theconsiderable reduction of all kinds of violence, putting an end to exploitation andtrafficking of children, corruption, etc. How one can weigh success in these555See, e.g., Moomaw W.R., Verkooijen P., Agarwal P. The Future of the Paris Climate Agreement: Carbon Pricingas a Pathway to Climate Sustainability.
/ The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs. Power in Partnerships. Cooperationin a Fragmented World. Winter 2017, Vol 41:1, P. 69–78. The price for hydrocarbons, according to the authors,makes the most of the efforts towards sustainable development and affects all of its components: the environment,the economy and the society.556William & Mary Policy Review, Vol. 7:21.403spheres, and how does the achievement of certain positive results affect achievingsustainable development? And would 15 years be enough for a substantial shift inresolving these issues? In my opinion, if we try to answer these questions, we willsee that it is hard not to agree with Ingo Keilitz in his general view on thedocument.It appears that the concept of sustainable development, having becomeglobal by the growing scope of problems to be resolved (which keep multiplying),has lost any clear shape.
That transformation was, it seems, inevitable in view ofthe initially incorrect, from the philosophical standpoint, understanding ofdevelopment. The concept rests on a narrow, one-sided interpretation ofdevelopment as some constant progressive movement without sudden variations.However, from the philosophical perspective, development is a qualitative changewhich, firstly, cannot happen only evolutionarily, and, secondly, can be bothprogress and redress.
It becomes clear then, that ensuring some sustainabledevelopment, while understanding it to mean constant improvement of welfare andliving conditions, all the more so on a global scale, is unlikely.At the same time, the idea of sustainable development may remain relevant,it would seem, at the regional and sub-regional levels, where states have commonproblems and interests and where it is, in principle, easier for them to set specifictargets they could resolve together to achieve success in specific areas. If it islegitimate to talk about the fragmentation of global space (a thesis proffered,according to Russian and foreign publicists, by the high ranking Russian andChinese officials at the “One Belt One Road” meeting in Beijing in May 2018),then it is logical to talk about the fragmentation of globalist concepts.In the Arctic context, where problems of social development, conservationof the ecosystem and efficient ecological use of space and natural resources of theArctic Ocean seas are intertwined especially acutely, including in relations404between Arctic and non-Arctic states,557 the sustainable development concept558has practical value.
This is due to the legal, natural, social and economicpeculiarities of this part of the Globe:- according to experts, undeveloped oil and gas reserves in the Arcticamount to approximately 90 bln. barrels of oil, 1.670 trillions of ft3 of natural gas,and 44 bln. barrels of gas condensate. Development of the hydrocarbon reserves ofthe Arctic shelf in the immediate future will result in a drastic increase ofanthropogenic pressure on the fragile environment in high-latitude regions;559- at present, Arctic states are substantially increasing their exploration of seaoil deposits.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
