The term sustainable development was popularised in a report published by the World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987, Our Common Future, commonly referred to as The Brundtland Report. The report defined sustainable development as
“development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). The International Institute for Sustainable Development (ISSD) says the term gained political salience with the acceptance of the report by the United Nations General Assembly.
The Brundtland Report continues that the definition of the term sustainable development contains within it two key concepts: “The concept of needs, in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.” Drexhage & Murphy (2010) simplify the definition of sustainable development as environmental, social, and economic well-being of today and tomorrow. ISSD maintains that all the various definitions of sustainable development require that people look at the world as a system of interconnectivity—a system that connects space;
and time. It is only by understanding the world as a system that people can understand that the harm done in one part of the world, country or continent, harms people in another part (Drexhage & Murphy 2010).
The UN’s Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) identifies three dimensions of sustainable development namely, economic, social and environmental (UN, 2013). DESA continues that more than 1 billion people were still living in extreme poverty in 2013 and
income inequality continued to widen in many countries. It is not possible to achieve sustainable development in the developing world without raising the living standards of its people (Burayidi, 1994). To reiterate that sustainable development entails systems thinking not a quick single fixes, a targeted approach towards a combination of various sectors of the economy—agriculture, fisheries, mining, buildings, transport, waste, water and energy—
make up a sustainable development agenda (UN, 2013). This combination touches most aspects of human development.
Energy production has far reaching implications for the future of mankind. Costs of energy production and consumption are not only environmental but also social and economic. The correlation between economic growth and energy consumption, for example, should be studied closely when considering assessing sustainable economic development. This study of the correlation is even more important in developing countries, which are often most affected by fluctuation in energy prices. Giraud and Kahraman (2014) confirmed that there is some level of dependence between economic growth and primary energy and that primary energy is a key factor behind fluctuations in growth. This confirmation makes it possible to say the quest for economic growth by the human population has consequences, in absence of measures controlling this growth. As the figure below indicates, fluctuations in energy prices, particularly oil, have had some salient influence on GDP per capita growth.
Figure 7. Salient economic events (From lecture notes by Prof. Andrius Kazukauskas 2015, Umea University visiting Vaasa University).
The figure above suggests that most of the recent economic recessions were associated with energy price shocks. It can be argued that there is a two way causality between real energy consumption and real GDP per-capita growth. An increase in real energy consumption may cause an increase in real GDP per-capita growth and an increase in GPD per-capita may cause a similar reaction in energy consumption. However, it should be noted that fluctuations
in energy prices, although impacting per-capita GDP, are caused by various factors related to supply and demand.
Some researchers and conservatives agree that had the issue of sustainable development been taken seriously in the 20th century, much of the harm caused to the environment today would have been abated. With the developing world now accelerating their efforts in achieving economic growth, it is imperative that this growth is achieved sustainably, Namibia has a lesson to be learnt. One way of growing sustainably is to decouple GDP growth and energy consumption to limit their influence on one another. GDP and energy decoupling occurred in countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) after the oil shocks of the 1970’s (Mielnika & Goldemberg 2002). Mielnika & Goldemberg studied 20 developing countries and concluded that decoupling took place in those countries as an effect of foreign direct investment (FDI). As data shows in the figures below, there was a trend of GDP and primary energy consumption developing separately from one another.
Figure 8. Changes in energy use and GDP-PPP in 20 developing countries (Mielnika &
Goldemberg, 2002)
Figure 9. Total FDI/GDI in 20 developing countries (Mielnika & Goldemberg, 2002)
Namibia is no exception to the matter of GDP and energy decoupling. Although Mielnika and Goldemberg’s study emphasised FDI as a driving force behind the decoupling, several other ways could be explored in the Namibian context. An alternative approach to growing sustainably, as a case for Namibia, is the adoption of efficient technologies already proven successful in other parts of the world. Perhaps one of the most important step towards sustainable growth is the advancement of renewable energy systems. The importance of policy should be emphasised too because to be sustainable it will require additional critical steps by policy makers that go beyond what have already been committed to (BP, 2014).
Decoupling, energy efficiency, and climate policies will not work without proper policy implementation. However, policy aimed at ensuring energy security without a strategy for a broader energy mix is unlikely to succeed.