Sustainable

 In 1987, the World

Commission on Environment and Development defined as a process in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investment and the orientation of technological development and institutional change are made consistent with future as well as present needs.  It is a development of industrial and natural resources that meets the energy needs of

1. The concept of

needs, in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and 2. The idea of

limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.

Neo-liberal view  The environment is natural

‘capital’. The services derived from air, water, soil, biological diversity and recreation depend on maintaining those environmental ‘assets’ intact, or renewing them. If this is not done, those services will sooner or later decline. If values can be assigned to natural ‘capital’, then sustainable development can be secure by classical economics

People-centered development view Sustainable human

communities can be achieved only through a peoplecentered development.” It emphasizes the need for priority in development to be given to securing ‘sustainable livelihoods’ for the poorest groups within communities. It

The Global Environmental Management View The Brundtland Commission envisaged

international co-operation to achieve environmental management at a ‘global’ level, through international environmental treaties enforced by international agencies.

 Through the use of natural

resources as raw materials ( ‘renewable’ resources in the case of plants and animals, wind and water power; ‘non-renewable’ in the case of minerals for production and fossil fuels);  Through the use of the

environment to accept waste products. The capacity of the environment to transform

The goal of Sustainable Development(SD) is to maximize three systems

Approach in SD

Role of Economy and Nature of Growth

Geographical Focus

Nature

Technology

Ideal model of SD

Changes in patterns and levels of production and consumption

Bioregionalism

Promoting and protecting biodiversity

Labour-intensive appropriate technology

Strong SD

Environmenta lly regulated market

Heightened local economic self-sufficiency

Environment Clean Technology al management

Weak SD

Market reliant environmenta l policy

Treadmill

Exponential growth

Initial moves to local economic sufficiency Global markets

Replacing finite resources with capital Resource exploitation

Mixed labour and capital intensive technology Capital intensive production technologies

Some SD Principles : Protection of the Biosphere Sustainable Use of Natural Resources Reduction and Disposal of wastes Energy Conservation Risk Reduction Safe Products and Services Environmental Restoration

SD indicators: 1. Environment 2.Population and Resources 3. Economy 4. Youth and Education 5. Health and Community

 Environmental

sustainability is defined as the ability of the environment to continue to function properly indefinitely. This involves meeting the present needs of humans without endangering the welfare of future generations.

Consumption ConsumptioState Stateofof Sustainabili Sustainabili of renewable n of environmen environment ty ty resources renewable t More than resources More than Environmen Environmental Not nature's Not nature's ability tal degradation sustainable ability to sustainable to replenish degradation replenish Equal to SteadyEnvironmen Equal to Environmental state Steady-state nature's nature's ability tal equilibrium Sustainability ability to Sustainabili to replenish equilibrium replenish ty Less than Sustainable Less than nature's Environmental Environmen Sustainable nature's ability developmen renewal development ability to tal renewal to replenish t replenish

 Agenda 21 is a program of

action into the 21st century for bringing the Earth into a sustainable future. It was adopted by the participating governments of the world in the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), otherwise known as the Earth Summit, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in June 1992.

Philippine Agenda 21 (PA 21) is our own

national agenda for sustainable development. PA 21 is the Philippines’ commitment to

the UNCED. It also lays down the mix of strategies that integrate the parameters in the country’s overall development strategy, identifies the intervention areas (or Action Agenda) – from the national to the regional level – with the corresponding implementing platforms and plans.

 PA 21 envisions a better quality of life for all

through the development of a just, moral, creative, spiritual, economically-vibrant, caring, diverse yet cohesive society characterized by appropriate productivity, participatory and democratic process and living in harmony within the limits of the carrying capacity of nature and the integrity of creation.  Sustainable development as defined in the PA 21 (1996) is “harmonious integration of a sound and viable economy, responsible governance, social cohesion and ecological integrity, to ensure that development is a life-sustaining process.”

 - The rise of globalization and the creation of an

external environment of finance, markets, and technology did not seem conducive to sustainable development.



- The civil society needs to specify its commitments and contributions to achieving sustainability in the updated document. 

- Government departments need to be imbued with the sustainable development perspective with which to handle issues properly.

1. Poverty Reduction 2. Social Equity 3. Empowerment and Good

Governance 4. Peace and Solidarity 5. Ecological Integrity

- Business, the key actor in economy,

which is mainly concerned with producing goods and services for people.

- Government, the key actor in polity,

which is concerned with democratic governance and security of human rights.

- Civil society, the key actor in culture,

which is concerned with the development of the social and spiritual capacities of human beings.

Government’s Claims The poverty incidence fell from about 40 percent in 1991 to nearly 36 percent in 1994. However due to the effects of the Asian financial crisis, it fell slightly to 36.8 in 1997 (ADB).

Basic literacy rose from 93.5 percent in 1990 to 95.0 percent in 1995, while functional literacy remarkably improved from 75.6 percent in 1989 to 83.8 percent in 1995.

The year 1996 saw the completion and approval of the National Health Plan, 1995-2000.

PHILNET-WSSD’s View Government statistics on poverty incidence are understated because the poverty threshold is set very low: PhP 31.00 in 1997 (US$ 1.05) and PhP 38.10 (US$ 0.73) in 2000. Yet independent estimates of the daily cost of living show that a family of six in Metro Manila needs P515 to meet food and non-food requirements. The legislated daily wage rate, on the other hand, is pegged at P265 in Metro Manila. The seeming statistical improvement is misleading. Even the National Statistics Office (NSO) admits that only 77% of the 22.5 million school-aged children (5 to 17 years old) were reportedly enrolled in school year 1999-2000. This means that about 5.0 million Filipino children failed to go to school at that time. The National Health Plan, however, aims to privatize health care. This is reflected in decreasing public spending for health—the PhP 129.40 (US$ 2.50) per Filipino in the proposed 2002 national government budget is a 25% drop from levels in the early 1990s—and in the privatization of government hospitals. There is also increasing reliance on private health maintenance organizations (HMOs) whose profits lie in charging high premiums and restricting coverage.

In June 1995, the Philippines launched the Social Reform Agenda (SRA) to enable people to have access to opportunities for undertaking sustainable livelihoods espoused under the agenda for change.

In 1993, the Philippine Population Management Program (PPMP) was implemented to serve as the government’s program for maintaining a healthy balance between and among population and resources.

For the period 1992-1996, a National Land Use Act was drafted in line with a goal of strengthening the existing process of identifying, determining, and evaluating alternative land use patterns to guide and enable appropriate land management and development. The Act was certified as a priority environmental legislation.

The SRA only provides so-called safety nets like livelihood training for farmers who are displaced by agricultural liberalization. It doesn’t provide, for instance, much needed subsidies on farm inputs and even ends up tolerating land conversion. In any case budgets for this have not even been forthcoming. This agency is silent on the operations of TNCs engaged in logging, mining and other industries which are the greatest despoilers of the environment. Indeed it deflects attention from them by blaming individuals instead. Nor does it address crucial equity issues. Again, this is silent on the plight of farmers who fell prey to land conversion. Because of other laws favorable to foreign investors like the Investors Lease Act of 1993, this cannot serve the interests of the poor majority. In any case, the bill has yet to be enacted.

In 1993, an Integrated Pest Management Program was This does not directly ban the use of harmful introduced. chemical pesticides. Nor does it address the dumping of such products to the country.

An EIS cannot succeed if the government does not have a clear environmental agenda which seeks, In January 1996, the President signed the revised among others, to hold big local and foreign Executive Order No. 291 entitled “Improving the corporations accountable for their industrial waste. Environmental Impact Statement System (EIS).” Experience has also shown that EIS are easily abused by private corporations and TNCs. Environmental consultancies have developed into a thriving business because of the law but but they are unable to control the proliferation of environmentally-hazardous businesses—mining, oil refineries, distilleries, coal plants. In 1997, the Environment Code, EO No.44, TNCs are still not held accountable for the pollutants incorporating laws on quality of air and water they emit. resources was approved. In 1997, major policies and legislation were passed, among them: the Agricultural Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA), the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) and the Anti-Squatting Law.

By design, the AFMA aims to benefit mainly rural elites and transnational agri-business engaged in cash crops and fisheries for export. It deflects attention from genuine agrarian reform which is more meaningful for the vast majority of the poor peasantry. It will also facilitate opening up the country for the distribution and use of agro-chemical TNCs’ certified and hybrid or genetically engineered seeds—for cash crops rather than staple food crops.

In 1997, the Philippine National Development Plan This does not tackle structural roots of poverty nor the (Plan 21) was formulated for the 2000-2005 period. intensification of the chronic crisis through globalization. Indeed, it ends up facilitating neo-liberal globalization.

The Philippines is involved in the formation of ISO This is just part of the government’s thrust of 14000. adhering to internationally accepted trade standards which does not benefit workers, peasants and basic sectors of society, as much as it does TNCs. The Philippine Strategy for Biological Diversity As with Plan 21, these do not address the structural Conservation (PSBDC) was approved in 1994 and the roots of poverty nor the intensification of the chronic National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan crisis through globalization and end up facilitating it. (NBSAP) was approved in 1997. In October 1996, the Presidential Task Force on Water utilities are being privatized nationwide, Water Resources Development and Management causing access to water to be primarily (PTFWRDM) was created by virtue of Executive determined by capacity to pay. Order No. 374. The PTFWRDM drafted a bill which proposes the creation of a Water Resources Authority of the Philippines (WRAP) that sets the general framework for the planning and regulation of water resources with respect to quality, quantity and tariff. The Philippine Clean Air Act was enacted into TNC accountability vis-à-vis emission of pollutants was not clearly outlined in this law. Oil firms have also law in 1999. used this as an excuse for future oil prices, claiming that they have to pass on to consumers the cost of complying with this law. Rather, the Clean Air Act must be viewed in the context of deregulation and liberalization. TNCs which provide the technologies for companies to keep up with the standards set by act also stand to gain. However the Act has yet to be fully implemented because of corporate resistance.

The PCSD could not serve as a

genuine venue to advance sustainable development and the people’s welfare because the government which is such a key player in the process is itself committed to pushing neo-liberal globalization. And yet under the pretext of “maximizing” so-called opportunities in globalization, it trapped civil society groups within the narrow confines of developmentalism and

Alternative Paths: 1. Non hegemonic 2. Grassroots and participatory 3. Locally and ecologically based