Ross, A. “Modern interpretations of sustainable development,” Journal of Law and Society 36, issue 1 (2009): 32-54

Exact meaning of sustainable development remains unclear: different definitions, broad interpretations, but allthey can be divided into 2,5 groups:

Currently states shift towards using SD as a guiding ethics for creation of legal frameworks, from man vs. nature to man as a part of the nature. SD as a material consideration only suggests sustainability as a worthwhile objective, SD as a legal rule provides procedural requirements for achieving sustainability and therefore delivers it. So to achieve sustainability, the principle of SD should be incorporated into legislation as thoroughly as possible, to be not only moral obligation, but be officially required.

I see the problem of applying the concept of SD, even being incorporated into legislation, in the fact that developing countries tend to solve their urgent problems first, and when it's famine, natural disasters, or epidemics, and as far as basic needs of their citizens are not satisfied, sustainability will not be reached (the pyramid of Maslow is invincible). SD is achievable in countries without serious tensions, but if they are there, it's much harder, if not impossible. Hungry people don't care about the environment. Food, water, shelter, then goes environment.

This post is a reprint of the original assignment for ENVM7202 Course, UQ, Semester 1 2009