SAB 2912

WATER TREATMENT
ASSIGNMENT
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

AZMAN BIN ARBANGI

AA090014
INTRODUCTION

At the turn of the century, there have been intense cries for the human race to address the
issue of global warming and the impending melt down of earth! Are these mere lip services
or anybody, somebody yet nobody’s issue? Are we doing our bit to save the environment?

Sustainable development is pursued so that we all can have a preferable future that
includes a cleaner environment, a sustained level of economic development without
excessive waste and pollution, and the protection of natural resources and biodiversity. To
achieve this, we need to develop a sense of citizenship in the sustainable development
process through the delivery of quality education, a reappraisal of our core values systems,
and the empowerment of communities to make their own decisions on the future that they
want to see - both for ourselves and our children.

At individual level, each one of us could contribute to a better environment such as taking
public transport, cycling, walking, using energy efficient items, recycle wastes and changing
our lifestyles! At the organization level, the ever-increasing demand for products and
services is taking a toll on the environment. Exploitation of resources and manufacturing by-
products are increasing the stress on the natural world. As consumers, we also tend to eat
too much and use too much energy and water. Along these processes, we also produce too
much food and waste products!

Sustainable Development |2
UNDERSTANDING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Sustainable development is a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while
preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also
for generations to come. The term was used by the Brundtland Commission which coined
what has become the most often-quoted definition of sustainable development as
development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs."

Sustainable development ties together

concern for the carrying capacity of
natural systems with the social
challenges facing humanity. As early
as the 1970s "sustainability" was
employed to describe an economy "in
equilibrium with basic ecological
support systems." Ecologists have
pointed to The Limits to Growth, and
presented the alternative of a "steady
state economy" in order to address environmental concerns. The field of sustainable
development can be conceptually divided into three constituent parts: environmental
sustainability, economic sustainability and socio-political sustainability.

The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development or “Earth Summit”
that was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil had established Agenda 21. The Agenda 21 contains
the blueprint for sustainability in the 21st century. It is also a commitment to sustainable
development as agreed by many Governments of the world. This Agenda, monitored by the
International Commission on Sustainable Development, addresses the development of
societies and economies by focusing on the conservation and preservation of the

Sustainable Development |3
environment and natural resources. Through this Agenda, everyone has roles to assume to
achieve sustainable development as well as involved in the process of deciding on the
environment that affects all of us. Accordingly, to record any success stories of sustainable
development, issues must be tackled on local, national, and international level where
nations must work towards solutions agreeable by all and to protect the integrity of the
global environmental and developmental system.

Besides, the United Nations Population Fund has noted that world population had grew
from 1.6 billion to 6.1 billion during the course of the 20th century. During that time,
emissions of Carbon Dioxide (CO²), the leading greenhouse gas grew 12-fold. With
worldwide population expected to surpass nine billion over the next 50 years,
environmentalists are worried about the ability of the planet to withstand the added load of
greenhouse gases and their impact on eco-systems. Environmental think tank Worldwatch
Institute says the over-riding challenges are to curtail climate change and slow population
growth. Success on these two fronts require other challenges such as reversing the
deforestation of Earth, stabilising water tables, and protecting plant and animal diversity
more effectively.

The Antartica ozone hole was discovered in 1985 by British scientists, Joseph Farma Brian
Gardina and Jonathan Shanklin. They realised that this was due to the build-up of
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) – chemicals used in
aerosol sprays, packaging and air-conditioning
systems. One molecule of CFC can remove up to
100,000 ozone molecules. Life on the planet will not
be sustainable if the ozone layer is destroyed
because damage caused to plants will severely
reduce the global food supply. International action
has been taken to relieve the problem. The 1987
Montreal Protocol required countries to take steps
to eliminate CFCs and other substances that cause
ozone depletion. If CFC levels are reduced

Sustainable Development |4
considerably, particularly in the developing world, the ozone layer will probably fully repair
itself by around 2050.

Agenda 21 suggests that ozone layer can be viewed as a vital resource for life, and should be
protected for the achievement of sustainable development. As such, sustainable
development means inculcating the process of maintaining human needs while preserving
the environment for future generations. It also means we must use the available resources
efficiently so that they will be available for many years to come. Brundtland Commission
that coined the term defined sustainable development as meeting “the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (United
Nations, 1987)1. This is important because failure to do so would bring about problems to
others and reduce each other’s ability to create new things.

The underlying issue of sustainable development is that companies must move beyond
mere “green” that indicates relentless pursuit of short-term profitability towards long-term
sustainability. According to Werbach (2009, p.3) 2, “society increasingly holds global
businesses accountable as the only institution powerful enough to respond at the scale of
the challenges that our planet faces. There is no multinational Government but there are
many cross-border corporations that witness how resource constraints affect markets,
customers, communities and natural habitats. This situation gives companies special
opportunity to lead.”

Sustainable Development |5
ENVIROMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Environmental sustainability is the process of making sure current processes of interaction

with the environment are tailed with the idea of keeping the environment as pristine as
naturally possible based on ideal-seeking manners. An "unsustainable situation" occurs
when natural capital (the sum total of nature's resources) is used up faster than it can be
reloaded. Sustainability obliges that human activity only uses nature's resources at a rate at
which they can be replenished naturally. Naturally the concept of sustainable development
is intertwined with the concept of carrying capacity. Theoretically, the long-term result of
environmental degradation is the inability to sustain human life. That degradation on a
global scale could imply extinction for humanity.

Consumption of renewable State of environment Sustainability

resources
More than nature's ability to Environmental Not sustainable
replenish degradation
Equal to nature's ability to Environmental Steady state economy
replenish equilibrium
Less than nature's ability to Environmental renewal Environmentally
replenish sustainable

Sustainable Development |6
THE IDEA OF CAPITAL IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The sustainable development debate is based on the assumption that societies need to
manage three types of capital (economic, social, and natural), which may be non-
substitutable and whose consumption
might be irreversible. Daly (1991) 4 ,
for example, points to the fact that
natural capital can not necessarily be
substituted by economic capital.
While it is possible that we can find
ways to replace some natural
resources, it is much more unlikely
that they will ever be able to replace
eco-system services, such as the
protection provided by the ozone
layer, or the climate stabilizing
function of the Amazonian forest. In fact natural capital, social capital and economic capital
are often complementarities. A further obstacle to substitutability lies also in the multi-
functionality of many natural resources. Forests, for example, not only provide the raw
material for paper (which can be substituted quite easily), but they also maintain
biodiversity, regulate water flow, and absorb CO2.

Another problem of natural and social capital deterioration lies in their partial irreversibility.
The loss in biodiversity, for example, is often definite. The same can be true for cultural
diversity. For example with globalisation advancing quickly the number of indigenous
languages is dropping at alarming rates. Moreover, the depletion of natural and social
capital may have non-linear consequences. Consumption of natural and social capital may
have no observable impact until a certain threshold is reached. A lake can, for example,
absorb nutrients for a long time while actually increasing its productivity. However, once a
certain level of algae is reached lack of oxygen causes the lake’s ecosystem to break down
suddenly.

Sustainable Development |7
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN ECONOMICS

The Venn diagram of sustainable development shown above has many versions, but was
first used by economist Edward Barbier (1987) 4. However, Pearce, Barbier and Markandya
(1989)5 criticized the Venn approach due to the intractability of operationalizing separate
indices of economic, environmental, and social sustainability and somehow combining
them. They also noted that the Venn approach was inconsistent with the Brundtland
Commission Report, which emphasized the interlinkages between economic development,
environmental degradation, and population pressure instead of three objectives.

Economists have since focused on viewing the economy and the environment as a single
interlinked system with a unified valuation methodology (Hamilton 1999 6, Dasgupta 20077).
Intergenerational equity can be incorporated into this approach, as has become common in
economic valuations of climate change economics (Heal, 2009) 8. Ruling out discrimination
against future generations and allowing for the possibility of renewable alternatives to
petro-chemicals and other non-renewable resources, efficient policies are compatible with
increasing human welfare,
eventually reaching a golden-
rule steady state (Ayong le
Kama, 20019 and Endress et
al.200510). Thus the three pillars
of sustainable development are
interlinkages, intergenerational
equity, and dynamic efficiency
(Stavins, et al. 2003)11.

Arrow et al. (2004)12 and other economists (e.g. Asheim,199913 and Pezzey, 198914 and
1997)15 have advocated a form of the weak criterion for sustainable development – the
requirement than the wealth of a society, including human-capital, knowledge-capital and
natural-capital (as well as produced capital) not decline over time. Others, including Barbier
200716, continue to contend that strong sustainability – non-depletion of essential forms of
natural capital – may be appropriate.

Sustainable Development |8
THE BUSINESS CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The most broadly accepted criterion for corporate sustainability

constitutes a firm’s efficient use of natural capital. This
eco-efficiency is usually calculated as the economic
value added by a firm in relation to its aggregated
ecological impact. This idea has been popularised by
the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development (WBCSD) under the following definition:
"Eco-efficiency is achieved by the delivery of competitively priced goods and services that
satisfy human needs and bring quality of life, while progressively reducing ecological
impacts and resource intensity throughout the life-cycle to a level at least in line with the
earth’s carrying capacity." (DeSimone and Popoff, 1997: 47)17

Similar to the eco-efficiency concept but so far less explored is the second criterion for
corporate sustainability. Socio-efficiency describes the relation between a firm's value
added and its social impact. Whereas, it can be assumed that most corporate impacts on the
environment are negative (apart from rare exceptions such as the planting of trees) this is
not true for social impacts. These can be either positive (e.g. corporate giving, creation of
employment) or negative (e.g. work accidents, mobbing of employees, human rights
abuses). Depending on the type of impact socio-efficiency thus either tries to minimize
negative social impacts (i.e. accidents per value added) or maximise positive social impacts
(i.e. donations per value added) in relation to the value added.

Both eco-efficiency and socio-efficiency are concerned primarily with increasing economic
sustainability. In this process they instrumentalize both natural and social capital aiming to
benefit from win-win situations. However, as Dyllick and Hockerts point out the business
case alone will not be sufficient to realise sustainable development. They point towards eco-
effectiveness, socio-effectiveness, sufficiency, and eco-equity as four criteria that need to be
met if sustainable development is to be reached.

Sustainable Development |9
SOCIAL-POLITICAL SUSTAINABILITY

If environmental protection is concerned with the preservation of our natural environment

and resources, and economic sustainability is concerned with seeking durable growth
solutions therein, then the social-political sphere can be thought of as representative of the
more purely human element in the equation. Social development and social-political
sustainability are intimately related concepts but they are not in fact entirely
interchangeable. It is important that we understand their symbiotic relationship and its
implications for the broader sustainability project.

Social development is a concept that is familiar to most of us in its many and varying forms.
Within any given society there are opportunities to improve and enrich each of its
composite parts in many ways. Of sometimes greater importance is the need to harmonize
relations amongst these various and sometimes opposing elements. Those actively engaged
in the process of social development include agents acting within its institutions to effect
change via established channels. Of more notice, however, are often those who act from
the outside, those who reject the society’s institutions as inadequate, and who advocate
wholesale social and political change as the only true path to social enrichment and
development.

It is in this transformational role that we begin to touch on the realm of social-political

sustainability. Within any given social context, social development can be pursued with the
simple granting of budgets. Financial and human resources are utilized to strengthen and
enrich societies by improving educational opportunities, by embracing the marginalized and
the forgotten, by making improvements to healthcare and hygienic conditions and by
endearing knowledge of financial and entrepreneurial activities to name just a few. Here,
the distinguishing feature of social development is that it is executed within the institutional
mechanisms and constraints prevailing in that given entity.

Social-political sustainability too is very much concerned with physical and material standing
of peoples, but further than this it is concerned with the state of their civil society. Social-
political sustainability is differentiated from pure social development in that its sphere is

S u s t a i n a b l e D e v e l o p m e n t | 10
expanded beyond the employment of simply monetary means. Social-political development
entails not only the engagement of institutional mechanisms, but also their modification and
advancement. Social-political sustainability thus seeks pathways to durable social
enrichment and development via the vibrancy and health of a society’s political processes.
At its core, there ultimately is little more than an absolute faith in the functioning of liberal
democracy. Despite the frequent changing of the guard and the potential for policy
discontinuity this entails, it is believed that representative republican government
buttressed by mass public awareness and participation provides the best model for a
sustainable body politic.

S u s t a i n a b l e D e v e l o p m e n t | 11
SUMMARY

According to Brundtland Commission (1983),

sustainable development is thedevelopment that meets
the needs of the present without compromising
theability of future generations to meet their own
needs. Sustainable developmenthas been discussed for
many years. It is only when global climate began
tochange drastically and affect the human race with
numerous calamity did itthen gets stronger
international awareness on the importance of
appreciatingnature for future sustainability. It also
became increasingly crucial fordevelopment nations to
show the way in living and implementing sustainable
development.

S u s t a i n a b l e D e v e l o p m e n t | 12
Bibliography

1. United Nations (1987, December 11). Report of the World Commission on

Environment and Development. General Assembly Resolution 42/187.
2. Werbach, A. (2009). Strategy for sustainability. Harvard Business Press.
3. Daly, H. E. 1973. Towards a Steady State Economy. San Francisco: Freeman.
4. Barbier, E.,1987. The Concept of Sustainable Economic Development. Environmental
Conservation, 14(2):101-110.
5. Pearce, D., A. Markandya and E. Barbier,1989. Blueprint for a green economy,
Earthscan, London, Great Britain.
6. Hamilton, K., and M. Clemens,1999. Genuine savings rates in developing countries.
World Bank Econ Review, 13(2):333–56.
7. Dasgupta, P. 2007. The idea of sustainable development, Sustainability Science,
2(1):5-11.
8. Heal, G., 2009. Climate Economics: A Meta-Review and Some Suggestions for Future
Research, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 3(1):4-21.
9. Ayong Le Kama, 2001 A.D. Ayong Le Kama, Sustainable growth renewable resources,
and pollution, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 25:1911–1918.
10. Endress, L., J. Roumasset, and T. Zhou. 2005. Sustainable Growth with Environmental
Spillovers,"Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization," 58(4):527-547.
11. Stavins, R., A. Wagner, G. Wagner Interpreting Sustainability in Economic Terms:
Dynamic Efficiency Plus Intergenerational Equity, Economic Letters, 79:339-343.
12. Arrow KJ, P. Dasgupta, L. Goulder, G Daily, PR Ehrlich, GM Heal, S Levin, K-G Maler, S
Schneider, DA Starrett, B Walker. 2004. Are we consuming too much? Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 18(3):147–172.
13. Asheim, G. 1999. Economic analysis of sustainability. In: W.M. Lafferty and O.
Langhalle, Editors, Towards Sustainable Development, St. Martins Press, New York, p.
159.
14. Pezzey, J. 1989. Economic Analysis of Sustainable Growth and Sustainable
Development, Environmental department Working Paper No. 15, World Bank.

S u s t a i n a b l e D e v e l o p m e n t | 13
15. Pezzey, J. (1997). "Sustainability constraints versus 'optimality' versus intertemporal
concern, and axioms versus data". Land Economics (University of Wisconsin Press) 73
(4): 448–466. doi:10.2307/3147239. http://www.jstor.org/pss/3147239. Retrieved
2009-06-16.
16. Barbier, E. 2007 Natural Resources and Economic Development, Cambridge
University Press.
17. DeSimone, L. & Popoff, F. 1997. Eco-efficiency: The business link to sustainable
development. Cambridge: MIT Press.

S u s t a i n a b l e D e v e l o p m e n t | 14