Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-th4rj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T10:48:24.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Environmental Conservation and Sustainable Development Require a New Development Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Gopi Upreti
Gopi Upreti
Affiliation:
Lecturer, Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science (IAAS), Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal; Director of Environmental Studies, International Institute for Human Rights, Environment, and Development (INHURED), PO Box 2125, Kha 2/191 Putalisadak, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Designing appropriate policies and strategies that lead to environmental conservation (of biological diversity and natural ecosystems) and ecologically sustainable development, is not an option but a necessity. Nevertheless, it requires an appropriate developmental paradigm that can provide a more relevant perceptual and interpretive framework from which such strategies may emerge. The prevailing dominant social paradigm has ignored the following problems: the present level of resource consumption in the developed industrialized countries, the acute poverty and inequitable development pattern in the Third World, the massive capital flight from ‘global’ South to ‘global’ North, and the massive population growth-rates in poor Third World countries, for political or ideological reasons. This paradigm will ultimately lead to environmental destruction and collapse of The Biosphere if ‘business’ continues ‘as usual’.

There has been unwillingness on the part of the politicians to admit this truth, but the development philosophy that does not include the strategies which can induce changes in our consumption and behavioural patterns, attitudes towards Nature, environmentally sound conservation and management practices and principles, elimination of poverty and inequity, and reduction of global population growth, will achieve nothing more than, as Morowitz (1991) calls it, a ‘Sisyphus's Myth’.

Only a development paradigm that is deeply rooted in the principle of cooperation, social synergism, equity, and the understanding of ecological and social sustainability of resource uses, allocation, and management, can offer hope and engender optimism. The sooner humanity realizes and acts on this, the greater will be the chance for environmental conservation and the lesser will be the cost of human adaptation.

Information

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , Spring 1994, pp. 18 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Baldwin, John H. (1985). Environmental Planning and Management. Westview Press, New York, NY, USA: ix + 366 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Barbier, E. W. (1987). The concept of sustainable economic development. Environmental Conservation, 14(2), pp. 101–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyden, Stephen & Dovers, Stephen (1992). Natural resource consumption and its environmental impacts in the Western World: impacts of increasing per capita consumption. Ambio, 21(1), pp. 63–9.Google Scholar
Brinck, P., Nilson, L. M. & Sevedin, U. (1988). Ecosystem redevelopment. Ambio, 17(2), pp. 84–9.Google Scholar
Cairns, J. Jr, (1988). Increasing diversity by restoring damaged ecosystem. Pp. 230–51 in Biodiversity (Ed. Wilson, E. O.). National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA: xiii + 521 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Caldwell, L. K. (1990). Moral thrusts: The attainable ideal in human and ecological terms. Pp. 97–108 in Maintenance of The Biosphere: Proceeding of the Third International Conference on Environmental Future (Ed. Polunin, N. & Burnett, J. H.). Edinburgh University Press, 22 George Square, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: xvi + 228 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Coate, A. R. & Rosati, J. A. (1988). The Power of Human Needs in World Society. Lunne Reinner Publisher, Boulder & London: xi + 283 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Cohen, P. & Polunin, N. (1990). The viable culture Environmental Conservation, 17(1), pp. 3–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotgrove, S. F. (1982). Catastrophe or Cornucopia: The Environment, Politics and the Future. Wiley, Chichester, England & New York, USA: xi + 154 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Daly, H. E. (1990). Towards some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 2, pp. 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dombois, D. M., Kartawinata, K. & Handley, L. L. (1983). Conservation of species and habitats. Pp. 260–81 in Natural Systems For Development: What Planners Need To Know (Ed. Carpenter, R. A.). Macmillan Publishing Company, New York & London: xii + 491 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Durning, Alan B. (1989). Poverty and the Environment: Reversing the Downward Spiral. WorldWatch Paper 92, 83 pp., Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Erickholm, E. P. (1975). The deterioration of mountain environments. Science, 189, pp. 764–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folke, Carl, Maler, Karl-Goran & Perrings, Charles (1992). Biodiversity loss: an introduction. Ambio, 21(3), pp. 200–2.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (cited as FAO) (1989). The State of Food and Agriculture. FAO, Rome, Italy: [not available for checking].Google Scholar
Gee, Henry (1992). The objective case for conservation. Nature (London), 357, pp. 639–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gow, D. D. (1992). Poverty and natural resources: principles for environmental management and sustainable development. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., 12, pp. 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowdy, J. M. (1992). Economic growth versus the environment. Environmental Conservation, 19(2), pp. 102–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harting, J. H. & Vallentyne, J. R. (1990). Use of an ecosystem approach to restore degraded areas of the Great Lakes. Ambio, 19(4), pp. 47–56.Google Scholar
Heinen, J. T. & Low, R. S. (1992). Human behavioural ecology and environmental conservation. Environmental Conservation, 19(2), pp. 105–16, fig. and table.Google Scholar
MacNeill, J. (1989). Strategies for sustainable economic development. Scientific American, 261(3), pp. 155–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathews, J. T. (1989). Redefining security. Foreign Affairs, 68(2), pp. 162–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Max-Neef, Manfred, Elizalde, Antonio & Hopenheyn, Martin (1989). Human scale development: an option for the future. Development Dialogue, 1, pp. 3–80.Google Scholar
Milbrath, L. W. (1989). Envisioning a Sustainable Society: Learning Our Way Out. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, USA: xiv + 403 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Morowitz, Harold J. (1991). Balancing species preservation and economic consideration. Science, 253, pp. 752–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munashinghe, Mohan (1992). Biodiversity protection policy: environmental valuation and distribution issue. Ambio, 21(3), pp. 227–36.Google Scholar
Norton, B. G. & Ulanowicz, Robert E. (1992). Scale and biodiversity policy: a hierarchical approach. Ambio, 21(3), pp. 244–9.Google Scholar
Odum, E. P., Finn, J. T. & Franz, E. H. (1979). Perturbation theory and the subsidy-stress gradient. BioScience, 29, pp. 341–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panayotou, T. (1990). The Economics of Environmental Degradation: Problems, Causes and Responses. Development Discussion Paper No. 335, A CAER Project Report, Harvard Institute for International Development, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: [not available for checking].Google Scholar
Pearce, D., Barbier, E. & Markandya, A. (1990). Sustainable Development: Economics and Environment in the Third World. Billing & Sons, Worcester, England, UK: xi + 217 pp. illustr.Google Scholar
Perring, Charles, Folke, Carl, & Maler, Karl-Goran (1992). The ecology and economics of biodiversity loss: the research agenda. Ambio, 21(3), pp. 201–11.Google Scholar
Polunin, Nicholas (1972). The Biosphere today. Pp. 33–52 and following discussion in The Environmental Future: Proceedings of the first International Conference on Environmental Future held in Finland from 27 06 to 3 07 1981 (Ed. Polunin, N.). Macmillan, London & Basingstoke, England, UK: xiv + 660 pp., illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polunin, Nicholas & Worthington, E. Barton (1990). On the use and misuse of the term ‘ecosystem’. Environmental Conservation, 17(3), p. 274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponting, Clive (1990). Historical perspectives on sustainable development. Environment, 32(9), pp. 4–9.Google Scholar
Rapport, D. J., Regier, H. A. & Hutchinson, T. C. (1985). Ecosystem behaviour under stress. Nature (London), 125, pp. 617–40.Google Scholar
Rees, William E. (1990). The ecology of sustainable development. The Ecologist, 20(1), pp. 18–23.Google Scholar
Repetto, Robert (1992). Accounting for environmental assets. Scientific American, 266(6), pp. 94–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Upreti, Gopi (1987). Ecological problems and conservation needs. The Rising Nepal, 02 18, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar
World Commission on Environment and Development (cited as WCED) (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 OOP, England, UK: xv + 400 pp.Google Scholar