From Sustainable Development to Sustainable Retreat, Brundtland to Lovelock: what has Africa in it?

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper was to show that James Lovelock proposed “Sustainable Retreat” opposed to the UN Predatory Sustainable Development doesn’t fit the African ecology and development, African ecology as well as others of less developed and developing countries are preys to coalition UN-Sustainable Development. It tries to answer the question: What has African ecology in sustainable development/retreat?

Methodology: Using the archaeologico-critical method, this paper traces, evaluates the history of sustainable development/retreat and show cases the possibility of an African “special development/technology status” in a new sustainable development which is ecology-centered.

 Findings: Findings show that first, concerning Lovelock’s Sustainable Retreat, Africa is still at embryonic phase of its development/technology so it cannot be put into the industrialized nations’ policy of sustainable development/retreat. Secondly, the UNO-born Sustainable Development/Technology which emerged with the UN Brundtland’s commanded Report of 1987 is a bluff at the service of hyper neoliberal forces (market forces). Furthermore, to show that “Business as usual” follows its normal trend under the auspices of an accomplice UN-Sustainable Development accords and goals while the ecological macro equilibrium of the planet deteriorates. This masked coalition Sustainable Development-neoliberal forces has pushed industrialization technology too far to the point where if it is not halted and retreated the planet’s ecological equilibrium will crash.

Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The unique contribution of this paper to theory is transcending sustainable development/retreat and forging a new development set up that fits the African ecology. The recommendations are such that the UN-Sustainable Development pyramid domination of economy over social and environment is inversed and that the social, environment dominate the economy and finally that the special status is void of the idea of Africa as “depot of raw material”, nations’ dependency on ecological resources as principal source of income and the formation of local, national and regional African “tug of war” with predatory international neoliberal forces.