Can we force sustainable development on countries who don't want it?
The development dilemma addresses the compulsion for the so-called Second and Third Worlds to grow and prosper only through sustainable development. Sustainable development is defined as improving living standards without sacrificing environmental integrity, thus allowing nations to grow with minimal impact on the environment. This is in complete contrast with the development of those countries that have already gone through their growth phases. The nations of the First World became industrious with blatant disregard for the environment. History is full of environmental damage through industrial development. Roman lead smelters caused pollution readings detectable even today. Europe’s Industrial Revolution caused massive environmental damage throughout the continent. The classic London Fog was nothing more than smog. American industrial development has caused, among other things, acid rain in Canadian forests and highly toxic areas such as Love Canal in upstate New York.
As the rest of the world becomes as industrialized as the First World, there are environmental challenges. There are already more cars on Chinese roads than bicycles, causing massive gasoline consumption and emission of smog. Strong concerns are voiced regarding consumption of natural resources in pursuit of industrial development. Disposal of industrial waste was not nearly as closely regulated as it is now.
Use of inhumane labor standards was a hallmark of Western industrial development. Child labor was an integral part of factory work for generations. With modern international interest in human rights, the labor standards of the past would be abhorred today. Forced or compulsory labor was also commonplace in First World development; this has been outlawed with the institution of international human rights standards.
The biggest argument against sustainable development is from the nations who are developing. They complain that the developed world is putting unfair and unattainable standards upon them, making it more difficult to achieve the level of development enjoyed in North America and Europe. Rising nations should be able to take the cheapest route available to attain a level of improvement. However righteous, Western declarations regarding human rights prevent the use of child and forced labor in factory work, depriving families of income such workers would provide. Labor unions are encouraged, putting unprecedented burdens on employers to provide quality working conditions and high pay. Environmental concerns are paramount, something unheard of during the European or American Industrial Revolutions. Adoption of environmentally friendly emissions regimes and standards was would have been laughed to scorn in previous generations; it is now seen as the bedrock on which industrialization rests. Governmental bribery and corruption has been similarly abhorred, which in past times would have allowed unfair, inhumane, environmentally unsound, or abusive practices to continue. Such regulations are seen as onerous burdens for the up-and-coming nation trying to spread its wings and industrialize.
The most appropriate way forward is to first understand that all nations have an inherent right to prosper through industrialization. However, enforcement of environmental and human rights concerns is very important in appropriate industrial development. The adversarial position being adopted by underdeveloped countries is counterproductive; such nations are also worthy of reassurance that the US and other industrialized nations are willing to help them on their terms. Through close inspection of industrial sites and regulation of emissions, developed nations will be able to closely monitor Third World progress. By cooperating, all nations may experience the luxury of advancement, prosperity, and modernity.