Sustainable Development – a Focus on People or Nature?

The concept sustainable development with its focus on social justice and fore-thinking for future generations is often cited as an anthropocentric value system (Palmer, 2003). Therefore, according to an anthropocentric framework, saving nature would depend upon saving those areas of value to human needs; a philosophy which has initiated great debate about whether nature should be valued in instrumental terms which are subjective or whether this philosophy cannot be rejected since ascribing values to nature which are not humanly-based is difficult (Light and Rolston, 2003).

In the European Union’s 2003 directive on the promotion of biofuels for transport, the first declaration is that the development of biofuels will be used as a strategy for sustainable development (Official Journal of the European Union, 2003). In 2006, the European Commission (2006a) published A Vision for 2030 and Beyond which stated a target of replacing a quarter of transport fuel with biofuels

However, reports have been circulating concerning how destructive biofuel corporations have been, replacing rainforests with monoculture plantations and exploiting poor, displaced communities (Greenpeace, 2009). In order to counter such negative press, the EU’s 2006 directive stressed the importance of sustainable production which focused on the protection of biodiversity, water, soil, habitats and species (European Commission, 2006b). In 2004 the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) was launched to examine the social issues surrounding palm oil production and for a company to become RSPO certified it had to meet minimum criteria (Renewable Fuels Agency, 2010).

Greenpeace has since led campaigns against sustainable palm-oil producers and in 2009, Sinar Mas, a member of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil was exposed in a report as engaging in illegal deforestation and peatland clearance (Greenpeace, 2009). Pressure was put on a leading purchaser of Sinar Mas’s biofuel, Unilever and eventually the company withdrew its contract with its suppliers (Greenpeace, 2009).

However an NGO, World Growth (2009), has spoken out against organisations such as Greenpeace which it believes are halting a sustainable product which can help end poverty. World Growth (2009) are committed to promoting the benefits of globalization to lessen the divide between rich and poor through trade and sustainable development; they take a completely anthropocentric approach and have even questioned the EU’s stance on trade barriers against imports of fuel produced on cleared land, calling such practices unwarranted in their failure to prevent poverty and preventing developing nations the right to clear their land for development. They even claim that biofuels are not driving deforestation, that instead, two-thirds of forest clearance is driven by low income people searching for land and food.

From an anthropocentric point of view, it could be argued that biofuels have been marketed by the EU as a green, ethical solution to the socio-economic problems of developing countries; that it can provide employment opportunities, and help people out of poverty, whilst at the same time meeting the fuel demands of developed nations, helping to cut carbon emissions, thus tackling global warming. However, conflicts in values between corporate notions of sustainability and tribal values have arisen. For the tribes of Sumatra, logging and farming the land is seen as a crime against the spirits of the forest, not a great employment opportunity as NGO’s such as World Growth believe.

References

European Commission (2006a) Biofuels in the European Union: A Vision for 2030 and Beyond, [Online] Biofuels Research Advisory Council. EUR 22066. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/rtdinfo/index_en.html (Accessed 15^th March 2010)

European Commission (2006b) An EU Strategy for Biofuels [Online] Commission of the European Communities COM(2006) 34 final. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/rtdinfo/index_en.html (Accessed 15^th March 2010)

Greenpeace (2009) ‘A Defining Moment for the Palm Oil Industry as Unilever Breaks link with Forest Destruction?’ [Online] Available at: http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/forests/defining-moment-palm-oil-industry-unilever-breaks-link-forest-destruction-20091209 (Accessed 14th May 2010)

Light, A., and Rolston III, H., (2003) ‘Introduction: Ethics and Environmental Ethics,’ in Light, A. and Rolston III, H. (ed.) Environmental Ethics, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd pp.1-24

Official Journal of the European Union, (2003) Directive 2003/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 May 2003, [Online] The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/res/legislation/doc/biofuels/en_final.pdf (Accessed 14^th May 2010)

Palmer, C., (2003) ‘An Overview of Environmental Ethics,’ in Light, A. and Rolston III, H. (ed.) Environmental Ethics, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd pp.120-156

Renewable Fuels Agency (2010) Palm Oil Cultivation in Malaysia: Case Study, [Online] Renewable Fuels Agency. Available at; http://www.renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk/sites/renewablefuelsagency.gov.uk/files/_documents/RFA_Year_One_palm_case_study.pdf (Accessed 1st April 2010)

World Growth (2009) Collateral Damage: How The Bogus Campaign against Palm Oil Harms the Poor [Online] A World Growth Report. Available at: www.worldgrowth.org/assets/files/WG_Palm_Oil_ColDam_Report_12_09.pdf (Accessed 4th May 2010)