Ideological contradictions of the sustainable development concept: towards a new paradigm of sustainability in a rapidly changing world?
Abstract
The article focuses on the possibilities of creative adaptation of the fundamental principles of sustainability to the realities of the modern world by resolving the ideological contradictions of the concept of sustainable development. The purpose of the article is to scientifically substantiate the possibility of building a context-oriented model of sustainable development based on a flexible approach to management, which does not deny the fundamental principles of sustainability, but calls for their creative adaptation to the realities of the modern world. The author emphasizes that with the help of a flexible management model, a conceptual transformation of approaches to ensuring sustainability is possible, taking into account modern global challenges and the needs of national economies. The author argues that it is an adaptive approach to building management processes that will contribute to resolving the ideological contradictions of the concept of sustainable development and the formation of a context-oriented model of ensuring sustainability and harmonious growth in the future. The author notes that today the concept of sustainable development, which until recently was the mainstream and the basis for the formation of policies at the national and international levels, is experiencing a certain crisis of confidence and requires critical rethinking due to excessive abstraction, detachment from local realities and insufficient consideration of the specifics of different countries and regions. The article reveals the ideological contradictions of conceptual approaches to sustainable development as the basis of the internal imbalance of the system, the catalyst of intrasystem conflicts and the root cause of the modern worldview shift. Resolving ideological contradictions based on the modernization of approaches to building management processes allows us to offer a conceptual view of updating the concept of sustainable development in today’s conditions.
Downloads
References
United Nations. (2023, April 27). Resolution of the General Assembly 78/80-E/2023/64 "Progress in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: Towards a plan to save people and the planet, report of the Secretary-General (special edition)". New York, p. 50. Retrieved January 3, 2025, URL: from https://surl.li/oslzur [in Ukrainian].
World Economic Forum. (2024). Agile Governance. Geneva: WEF. URL: http://surl.li/pgpzaa
Baker, S. (2016). Sustainable Development (2nd Ed.). London: Routledge.
Berry, F.S., & Berry, W.D. (2018). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In C.M. Weible & P.A. Sabatier (Eds.). Theories of the Policy Process (pp. 253–297). Abingdon: Routledge.
Desai, B.H. (2023). The New York Summit SDG 2023: Rescue Plan for 2030 Agenda as a Wake-up Call for the Decision Makers. Environmental Policy and Law, 53, 221–231.
Bouckaert, G., Chawdhry, U., Fraser-Moleketi, G., Meuleman, L., & Pizani, M. (2018). Effective governance for sustainable development: 11 principles to put into practice. SDG Knowledge Hub, IISD. URL: https://surl.li/svvrkt
Chatfield, A.T., & Reddick, C.G. (2018). Customer agility and responsiveness through big data analytics for public value creation: A case study of Houston 311 on-demand services. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 336–347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.11.002
De Roeck, F., Orbie, J., & Delputte, S. (2018). Mainstreaming climate change adaptation into the European Union’s development assistance. Environmental Science and Policy, 81, 36–45.
Dunlop, C.A. (2014). The possible experts: How epistemic communities negotiate barriers to knowledge use in ecosystems services policy. Environment and Planning C: Government & Policy, 32(2), 208–228.
Fangmann, J., Looks, H., Thomaschewski, J., & Schon, E.-M. (2020). Agile transformation in e-government projects. 2020 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23919/CISTI49556.2020.9141094
Glass, L.-M., & Newig, J. (2019). Governance for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: How important are participation, policy coherence, reflexivity, adaptation and democratic institutions? Earth System Governance, 2.
Hickel, J. (2020). Less is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World. London: William Heinemann.
International Energy Agency. (2020, May 2). IEA PV Snapshot 2019. URL: https://www.iea.org/reports/snapshot-of-global-pv-markets-2021
International Energy Agency. (2021). Renewables 2020 Data Explorer – Analysis.
The Economist. (2019, May 2). ITER, a reactor in France, may deliver fusion energy power as early as 2045. URL: https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2019/05/02/a-new-generation-of-reactors-will-start-producing-power-in-the-next-few-years
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022). Summary for policymakers, technical summary and frequently asked questions, Climate change: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC. URL: https://surl.li/syhytj
Jann, W., & Veit, S. (2021). Politics and Administration in Germany. In S. Kuhlmann, I. Proeller, D. Schimanke, & J. Ziekow (Eds.), Public Administration in Germany (pp. 145–161). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Janssen, M., & van der Voort, H. (2016). Adaptive governance: Towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 1–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.02.003
Jordan, A., & Russel, D. (2014). Embedding the concept of ecosystem services? The utilisation of ecological knowledge in different policy venues. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(2), 192–207.
Medina, L., et al. (2023). Community voices on climate, peace, and security: Senegal, CGIAR FOCUS Climate Security. URL: https://surl.li/lwlqvy
Locatelli, G., et al. (2023). A Manifesto for project management research. European Management Review, 20(1), 3–17.
Matinheikki, J., Naderpajouh, N., Aranda-Mena, G., Jayasuriya, S., & Teo, P. (2021). Befriending aliens: Institutional complexity and organizational responses in infrastructure public-private partnerships. Project Management Journal, 52(5), 453–470.
Mergel, I. (2023). Social affordances of agile governance. Public Administration Review. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13787
Mergel, I., Ganapati, S., & Whitford, A.B. (2021). Agile: A new way of governing. Public Administration Review, 81(1), 161–165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13202
Mickwitz, P., Neij, L., Johansson, M., Benner, M., & Sandin, S. (2021). A theory-based approach to evaluations intended to inform transitions toward sustainability. Evaluation, 27(3), 281–306.
Mitchell, D., & Mitchell, S. (2023). Don’t Go Chasing Waterfalls? How Complexity Demands More Agile Project Management Approaches to Municipal Strategy Implementation. State and Local Government Review. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X231215056
European Commission. (2016). Next steps for a sustainable European future European action for sustainability. COM/2016/0739 final report. Brussels: EC.
OBley, S.J., Hametner, M., & Gebhard, F. (2019). Sustainable Development in the European Union: Monitoring Report on Progress Towards the SDGs in an EU Context 2019. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Belknap Press.
Quagliariello, M. (2009). Macroeconomic uncertainty and banks’ lending decisions: the case of Italy. Applied Economics, 41(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840601007286
Sachs, J.D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. New York: Columbia University Press.
Stiglitz, J.E. (2015). Leaders and followers: Perspectives on the Nordic model and the economics of innovation. Journal of Public Economics, 127, 3–16.
Schmidt, N.M., & Fleig, A. (2018). Global patterns of national climate policies: Analyzing 171 country portfolios on climate policy integration. Environmental Science and Policy, 84, 177–185.
Schoenefeld, J., & Jordan, A.J. (2019). Environmental policy evaluation in the EU: Between learning, accountability, and political opportunities? Environmental Politics, 28(2), 365–384.
World Economic Forum. (2024). The global risks report (19th ed.). URL: https://surl.li/zflgxh
Simonofski, A., Ayed, H., Vanderose, B., & Snoeck, M. (2018). From Traditional to Agile E-Government Service Development: Starting from Practitioners’ Challenges. Agile
E-Government Service Development, 1-22.
Spaiser, V., Ranganathan, S., Swain, R.B., & Sumpter, D.J.T. (2017). The sustainable development oxymoron: Quantifying and modelling the incompatibility of sustainable development goals. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 24(6), 457–470.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2020). SDG Good Practices: A Compilation of Success Stories and Lessons Learned in SDG Implementation. URL: https://surl.li/ylboxy
Valencia, F. (2013). Aggregate Uncertainty and the Supply of Credit. IMF Working Papers, 13(241).
Widmer, A. (2018). Mainstreaming climate adaptation in Switzerland: How the national adaptation strategy is implemented differently across sectors. Environmental Science and Policy, 82, 71–78.
Ylinen, M. (2021). Incorporating agile practices in public sector IT management: A nudge toward adaptive governance. Information Polity, 26(3), 251–271.
