Sustainable development means achieving economic growth that is widely shared and that protects the Earth’s vital resources, but our current global economy is not sustainable, with more than a billion people left behind by economic progress and the Earth’s environment suffering terrible damage from human activity. Sustainable development requires mobilizing new technologies that are guided by shared social values.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has rightly declared sustainable development to be at the top of the global agenda. We have entered a dangerous period in which a huge and growing population, combined with rapid economic growth, now threatens to have a catastrophic impact on the Earth’s climate, biodiversity and fresh-water supplies. Scientists call this new period the Anthropocene — in which human beings have become the main causes of the Earth’s physical and biological changes.
Ban’s Global Sustainability Panel has issued a new report that outlines a framework for sustainable development. The panel rightly notes that sustainable development has three pillars — ending extreme poverty; ensuring that prosperity is shared by all, including women, youth and minorities; and protecting the natural environment. These can be termed the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainable development, or more simply the “triple bottom line” of sustainable development.
The panel has called for world leaders to adopt a new set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that will help to shape global policies and actions after the 2015 target date for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Whereas the Millennium Development Goals focus on reducing extreme poverty, the SDGs will focus on all three pillars of sustainable development — ending extreme poverty, sharing the benefits of economic development for all of society and protecting the Earth.
It is, of course, one thing to set SDGs and quite another to achieve them. The problem can be seen by looking at one key challenge — climate change.
Today, there are 7 billion people on the planet and each one, on average, is responsible for the release each year of a bit more than four tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This carbon dioxide is emitted when we burn coal, oil and gas to produce electricity, drive our cars or heat our homes. All told, humans emit roughly 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide a year into the atmosphere, enough to change the climate sharply within a few decades.
By 2050, there will most likely be more than 9 billion people. If these people are richer than people today (and therefore using more energy per person), total emissions worldwide could double or even triple. This is the great dilemma — we need to emit less carbon dioxide, but we are on a global path to emit much more.
We should care about that scenario, because remaining on a path of rising global emissions is almost certain to cause havoc and suffering for billions of people as they are hit by a torrent of droughts, heat waves, hurricanes and more. We have already experienced the onset of this misery in recent years, with a spate of devastating famines, floods and other climate-related disasters.
So, how can the world’s people — especially its poor people — benefit from more electricity and more access to modern transportation, but in a way that saves the planet rather than destroys it?
The truth is that we cannot — unless we improve dramatically the technologies that we use.
We need to use energy far more wisely, while shifting from fossil fuels to low-carbon energy sources. Such decisive improvements are certainly possible and economically realistic.
Consider the energy inefficiency of an automobile, for example. We currently move about 1,000kg to 2,000kg of machinery to transport only one or just a few people, each weighing perhaps 75kg, and we do so using an internal combustion engine that utilizes only a small part of the energy released by burning the gasoline. Most of the energy is lost as waste heat.
We could therefore achieve huge reductions in carbon dioxide emissions by converting to small, lightweight, battery-powered vehicles running on highly efficient electric motors and charged by a low-carbon energy source, such as solar power. Even better, by shifting to electric vehicles we would be able to use cutting-edge information technology to make them smart — even smart enough to drive themselves using advanced data processing and positioning systems.
The benefits of information and communications technologies can be found in every area of human activity — better farming using global positioning systems and micro-dosing of fertilizers; precision manufacturing; buildings that know how to economize on energy use; and, of course, the transformative, distance-erasing power of the Internet.
Mobile broadband is already connecting even the most distant villages in rural Africa and India, thereby cutting down significantly on the need for travel. Banking is now done by telephone and so, too, is a growing range of medical diagnostics. Electronic books are beamed directly to handheld devices, without the need for bookshops, travel, and the pulp and paper of physical books.
Education is increasingly online as well and it will soon enable students everywhere to receive first-rate instruction at almost a zero “marginal” cost for enrolling another student.
Yet getting from here to sustainable development will not just be a matter of technology. It will also be a matter of market incentives, government regulations, and public support for research and development, but even more fundamental than policies and governance will be the challenge of values. We must understand our shared fate and embrace sustainable development as a common commitment to decency for all human beings, today and in the future.
Jeffrey Sachs is a professor of economics and director of Columbia University’s Earth Institute. He is also special adviser to the UN secretary-general on the Millennium Development Goals.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
For Taipei, last year was a particularly dangerous period, with China stepping up coercive pressures on Taiwan amid signs of US President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, which eventually led his Democratic Party to force him to abandon his re-election campaign. The political drift in the US bred uncertainty in Taiwan and elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region about American strategic commitment and resolve. With America deeply involved in the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, the last thing Washington wanted was a Taiwan Strait contingency, which is why Biden invested in personal diplomacy with China’s dictator Xi Jinping (習近平). The return of
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has long been a cornerstone of US foreign policy, advancing not only humanitarian aid but also the US’ strategic interests worldwide. The abrupt dismantling of USAID under US President Donald Trump ‘s administration represents a profound miscalculation with dire consequences for global influence, particularly in the Indo-Pacific. By withdrawing USAID’s presence, Washington is creating a vacuum that China is eager to fill, a shift that will directly weaken Taiwan’s international position while emboldening Beijing’s efforts to isolate Taipei. USAID has been a crucial player in countering China’s global expansion, particularly in regions where
Looking at the state of China’s economy this year, many experts have said that weak domestic demand and insufficient internal consumption might be its Achilles’ heel, with the latter being related to culture and demographics. Since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took office in 2013, he has been combating extravagance and corruption as well as rectifying a bad atmosphere. China expert Stephen Roach said the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) regulatory crackdown has been targeting Chinese tycoons, such as Alibaba Group Holding Ltd founder Jack Ma (馬雲), and opposing what the CCP defines as “excessively extravagant lifestyles,” such as playing too
With the manipulations of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), it is no surprise that this year’s budget plan would make government operations difficult. The KMT and the TPP passing malicious legislation in the past year has caused public ire to accumulate, with the pressure about to erupt like a volcano. Civic groups have successively backed recall petition drives and public consensus has reached a fever-pitch, with no let up during the long Lunar New Year holiday. The ire has even breached the mindsets of former staunch KMT and TPP supporters. Most Taiwanese have vowed to use