1.

Sustainable Development in a Post-Brundtland World

(Based on Sneddon, Howarth & Norgaard, as seen in citeturn0file0)

• Context and Rationale:

The paper revisits the seminal ideas from the Brundtland Report (“Our Common Future”) and
examines how the concept of sustainable development (SD) has evolved in a rapidly changing
global context. It argues that despite profound changes—ranging from neoliberal globalization
to rising inequalities—the call for SD remains essential for addressing intertwined
environmental and social challenges.

• Key Themes:

 Pluralism in Sustainability: The authors advocate for a pluralistic approach that

integrates diverse epistemological and normative perspectives. They argue that
embracing multiple viewpoints (from ecological economics, political ecology, and
“development as freedom”) is necessary to overcome the narrow, sometimes
ideologically constrained interpretations of SD.

 Institutional and Political Challenges: A central concern is the fragmented global

environmental governance structure. The paper critiques the slow and uneven
implementation of policies that were once hoped to steer development toward
sustainability. In particular, it highlights the failure of institutions to bridge the gap
between economic growth and ecological conservation.

 Cultural and Ideological Shifts: Beyond technical and policy measures, the authors
emphasize the role of cultural and political change—including the rise of fundamentalist
movements and identity politics—in shaping how sustainability is understood and
pursued.

• Implications:
The paper concludes by suggesting that renewed debates and more inclusive public
deliberation (through local-to-global forums) are required. This reorientation could foster a
more e ective and democratically grounded sustainability politics.

2. The Meaning of Sustainable Development

(Based on Michael Redclift’s paper as seen in citeturn0file1)

• Definitional Ambiguity:
Redclift explores how “sustainable development” has become a contested term. He notes that
di erent groups interpret the term based on their priorities—some emphasizing the long-term
maintenance of the natural resource base, while others focus on the continuity of human
production and consumption.

• Dual Perspectives:

 Ecological Focus: Here, sustainability is seen as preserving the Earth’s renewable

resources and ecosystems. This view stresses the idea of stewardship, where humans
act as trustees of nature.

 Economic and Social Focus: Alternatively, sustainable development is defined in

terms of maintaining or enhancing human well-being—by ensuring that economic
 systems can continually provide for human needs, even if that involves trade-o s with
strict environmental conservation.

• Debate Over Needs and Trade-o s:

The paper delves into the di iculties in measuring “needs” and balancing them against resource
limits. It also discusses how cultural, social, and economic contexts influence what is
considered “sustainable,” suggesting that a one-size-fits-all approach is inadequate.

• Key Takeaway:
Redclift’s analysis underlines the importance of understanding both ecological and human
dimensions in SD debates and calls for policy frameworks that negotiate these tensions.

3. Sustainability and Sustainable Development (Lecture Slides by Prof Vibha Arora, IIT
Delhi)
(Based on citeturn0file2)

• Interrogating the Self and Society:

The slides begin by urging individuals to reflect on personal identity and social belonging in a
“small shrinking world.” They pose critical questions about individualism, market-driven
resource allocation, and personal responsibility toward both people and non-humans.

• Definitional Foundations:
Central to the discussion is the Brundtland definition: “development which meets the needs of
the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
The presentation outlines how this definition has spurred debates on the nature of needs and
limits.

• Analytical Dimensions:

 Ecological Parameters: Emphasis is placed on sustaining the natural resource base

(e.g., soil fertility, water quality, biodiversity) and understanding the carrying capacity of
the biosphere.

 Political-Economic Dimensions: The slides contrast approaches that prioritize

economic growth and poverty reduction (using market mechanisms) with those that
stress the conservation of natural capital and the equitable distribution of resources.

 Cultural and Social Considerations: There is also discussion about how sustainable
development should be defined by the people it a ects—highlighting empowerment,
self-realization, and the need for policies that are sensitive to cultural diversity.

• Principles of Sustainability:
The presentation concludes with a set of guiding principles (such as limiting human impact,
ensuring equitable resource use, and fostering technology that enhances resource benefits),
reinforcing that sustainability is a multidimensional challenge requiring coordinated social,
economic, and ecological strategies.

4. Science, Sustainability, and the Human Prospect

(Based on Peter H. Raven’s address as seen in citeturn0file3)
• Role of Science in Sustainability:
In his address, Raven emphasizes the critical role that science and technology play in
addressing global sustainability challenges. He underscores that modern society’s growth—in
population, consumption, and technological change—has pushed Earth’s systems to
unprecedented limits.

• Historical and Contemporary Context:

Raven outlines how historical developments (from Malthusian warnings to the industrial
revolution) have led to the current state where human activity significantly alters ecological
processes. He discusses the dramatic loss of biodiversity, soil degradation, and other
environmental impacts that have accelerated over the past few decades.

• Challenges and Warnings:

He warns against complacency and criticizes those who o er overly optimistic or misleading
assessments of environmental progress. Raven stresses that the problems we face are rooted in
long-neglected relationships between humans and the natural world, and that the scale of
current challenges demands innovative, integrative solutions.

• Call for Integrated Thinking:

Ultimately, Raven’s address is a call to action for the scientific community and policymakers
alike: sustainable development requires not only technological innovation but also a
fundamental rethinking of human values and priorities in relation to nature.

5. Emissions Gap Report 2022: The Closing Window

(Based on the UNEP report as seen in citeturn0file4)

• Overview of the Climate Challenge:

The report provides a stark assessment of the global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
landscape. It highlights that current policies and nationally determined contributions (NDCs)
are insu icient to meet the temperature targets set by the Paris Agreement.

• Key Findings:

 Insu icient Emission Reductions: Despite updated NDCs from many countries, the
projected reductions fall short by several gigatons of CO₂ equivalent (GtCO₂e) compared
to what is required for either a 2°C or 1.5°C pathway.

 Warming Projections: Under current policies, global warming is projected to reach

about 2.8°C, which underscores the need for transformative change.

 Inequalities in Emissions: The report also reveals stark disparities both between
countries and within populations. High-income countries and high-emission
households contribute disproportionately to global emissions.

 Sectoral and Systemic Transformations: To bridge the emissions gap, broad-based

transformations are needed across key sectors (electricity, industry, transport, and
buildings) as well as in cross-cutting areas such as food systems and finance.

• Urgency and Policy Implications:

The report’s message is clear: incremental changes will not su ice. There is an urgent need for
economy-wide transformations to reduce emissions rapidly and to close the gap before the
“window” for limiting global warming closes.

1. How Much Should a Person Consume? (2025_hul275_10.pdf)

(Prof Vibha Arora, IIT Delhi – Lecture 10) citeturn1file0)

• Core Inquiry:
– The lecture asks “How much should a person consume?” by drawing on insights from thinkers
like Ram Guha, C. Sauer, and Galbraith.
– It questions whose consumption patterns must change to address ecological crises.

• Key Themes:
– Ecological Crisis & Inequality:
• India is portrayed as an ecological disaster zone with rampant deforestation, species loss, and
pollution.
• It contrasts low per capita emissions (2.4 tCO₂e for Indians) with much higher ones in
countries like the US (14 tCO₂e).
– Role of Political and Collective Action:
• Reducing consumption is not just about individual restraint but requires political will,
technical innovation, and redistribution of wealth/resources among nations.
– Critique of Unchecked Growth:
• References to Galbraith’s critique of the “A luent Society” highlight how modern economies
chase excessive consumption at the expense of the environment.
• Gandhi’s call for simplicity and restraint is invoked as an ethical counterpoint to modern
materialism.

• Implications:
– The lecture argues that achieving sustainability will require a shift from consumption-driven
growth toward a model where both individual and collective actions reduce ecological
footprints.

2. Post-Growth & Degrowth (2025_esd_11_degrowth.pdf)

(Prof Vibha Arora, IIT Delhi – HUL275, Feb 2025) citeturn1file1)

• Growth Under Scrutiny:

– The document critiques capitalism’s perpetual drive for growth—highlighting that profit,
accumulation, and market expansion have led to irreversible ecological degradation.
– It cites thinkers like Boulding, who famously warned that “exponential growth in a finite world”
is unsustainable.

• Degrowth as a Concept:
– Definition and Distinction:
• Degrowth is presented as a voluntary, planned reduction in production and consumption—not
merely a sign of underdevelopment but a deliberate strategy for sustainability.
– Political and Social Project:
• It is seen as a multi-faceted project that calls for rethinking values, redistributing wealth, and
redefining well-being beyond material accumulation.
– Practical Guidelines:
• The discussion includes a set of “8 R’s” (Re-evaluate, Reconceptualize, Restructure, Relocate,
Redistribute, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) as pathways for transition.

• Vision for the Future:

– The degrowth approach envisions a shift toward simpler, more convivial societies that
emphasize sharing, care, and sustainability over endless economic expansion.

3. Science, Technology, and Sustainability (2023_hul275_6-7 [Link])

(Prof Vibha Arora, IIT Delhi – Lectures 6-7, 2023) citeturn1file2)

• Integration of S&T with Sustainability:

– The lectures underscore that science and technology (S&T) are essential for improving human
well-being and must be harnessed to address ecological limits.
– They stress that S&T alone is not enough—the political will and social capacity to turn
knowledge into action are equally crucial.

• Major Topics Covered:

– Public Understanding of Science:
• Emphasizes the need for society to grasp scientific principles to support sustainable
development.
– Environmental Realities:
• Cites examples such as the loss of topsoil, deforestation, and declining biodiversity (drawing
on Peter Raven’s insights) to illustrate the gravity of ecological degradation.
– Equity and Global Disparities:
• Highlights significant inequalities in resource consumption (e.g., the stark di erence between
the US and India) and argues for bridging these gaps through technology transfer and grassroots
action.

• Forward-Looking Solutions:
– The presentation calls for a “Thought-Action-Solution loop” where reformed values, improved
communication, and collective initiatives pave the way for a sustainable future.

4. Plastic Politics: Industry Stakeholders and the Navigation of Plastic Control Policy in
India (2025_hul275_Plastic politics_for [Link])

(Dr. Vibha Arora, IIT Delhi – 2025) citeturn1file3)

• Focus on Plastic Waste and Policy:

– The lecture examines India’s recent regulatory e orts to ban single-use plastics (e ective from
July 2022) as a response to plastic pollution.
– It connects these policies to broader Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 12, 13, and 14),
highlighting responsible production, climate action, and marine conservation.

• Key Insights:
– Plastic Consumption and Circular Economy:
• The presentation details the rise in plastic production—from millions of tons in 1950 to
projected figures that quadruple by 2050—and discusses the challenge of recycling and
mitigating environmental harm.
– Behavioral and Policy Shifts:
• It emphasizes initiatives like the “Bring Your Own Bag” (BYOB) campaign and other strategies
aimed at reducing reliance on single-use plastics.
– Stakeholder Dynamics:
• The lecture outlines how consumer actions, business practices, and government policies
interact to shape the transition toward more sustainable plastic use.

• Broader Implications:
– By stressing the need for both individual responsibility and systemic change, the lecture
illustrates the complexities of transitioning from a plastic-dependent economy to one guided by
circular principles.

5. Plastic Politics: Industry Stakeholders and the Navigation of Plastic Control Policy in
India (Research Article by Gauri Pathak)

(Environmental Politics, 2023) citeturn1file4)

• Research Focus:
– This article presents an in-depth case study of how anti-plastic discourses and plastic control
policies are negotiated in India.
– It critically examines the role of neoliberal environmentalism—which places the onus on
consumer behavior—in shaping policy responses.

• Stakeholder Analysis:
– Internal Dynamics of the Plastic Sector:
• The study maps out various industry players, from large petrochemical companies (like
Reliance Industries Limited) to smaller family-run converters, and details their distinct
responses to regulatory pressures.
– Role of Industry Associations and Informal Sectors:
• It discusses the influence of bodies such as the All India Plastic Manufacturers’ Association
(AIPMA) and the informal recycling economy in shaping policy debates.
– Government and Political Interventions:
• The article reveals tensions within government agencies and between political actors, noting
that pressure from anti-plastic discourses has sometimes forced the state to act—albeit in
ways that reflect compromises with industry interests.

• Conclusions and Implications:

– The research illustrates that while anti-plastic discourses are gaining traction and influencing
policy, the outcomes are mediated by complex intra-industry dynamics and political-economic
factors.
– It calls for a nuanced understanding of how regulatory measures can be designed to balance
environmental imperatives with industrial and socio-economic realities.