Conventional economic progress fails to meet the needs pf many millions of people today and compromises the ability of the future generations to meet theirs.
I appreciate Abdulrahman Alkhaldi answer... indeed sustainable development is just a myth in some countries... Let's not forget that sustainable development starts with each of us, so there are bits of sustainable development, but not very significant in current societies...
Olatunji A Shobande , At the moment it is a set of goals. Conventional economic progress approaches slightly to largely modifies based on the sustainable development goals (agree with Bogdan-Vasile Cioruța and Naushad Khan
) That is what happening at the moment.
Lots of researches ( Ihab Alfadhel ) and investment on this (there is some progress, however, not achieving the targets: thats why new goals and frameworks setup).
Where are we? I think we are all trying to understand this. Brundtland specifically didn't define what they were talking about, so it's an inclusive description, rather than an exclusive definition. As a result, one can use a lot of talk to say what one is doing is Sustainable, without it having any chance of being so.
Development is the process of enhancing quality of life within a community between two points of time. Quality of life is a slippery term, that is hard to pin down to a nice definition. This is how I've done it:
Sustainable Development = an increase in quality of life within a community between two points in time, using the skills of the population and the ecological services from the landmass it manages, in a manner that can be maintained in perpetuity.
Sustainable Social Development = an increase in the quality of life of a community between two points in time by increasing how effectively people are able to use their time to meet their needs, while ensuring no subset of the community receives a greater burden than benefit from any development initiative.
Sustainable Ecological Development = an increase in the quality of life of a community between two points of time by restoring or enhancing the ecosystem services that provide resources and absorb waste from the biomes being managed, while ensuring that a non-declining portion of each biome is maintained as a ‘wilderness’ that is neither a sink for wastes nor a source for resources.
Sustainable Economic Development = an increase in the quality of life between two points in time by increasing specialization and productivity of the population, while reducing the internal barriers to trade of critical resources and the external barriers to co-management of critical resources, and retaining a sufficient financial reserve to address economic disruptions.
I would be very surprised if people are actually doing this. So, in my opinion, we aren't very close to achieving it.
Is there any existing theoretical proposition or model that have been designed to explain this term quality of life. Some researcher only make fool of the process so far.
There are several, and that's part of the problem. Max Neef says quality of life comes from having needs satisfied. Others use a subjective life satisfaction self-assessment - like Gross National Happiness. It's messy.
I think Max Neef is right, but then one still needs to fully define needs. Max Neef contributes to this understanding, but it's not complete. Gough and Doyal provide a little more discussion in that direction.
I measure quality of life objectively using time use, but it comes in 3 parts.
1. how much time one uses for activities not expected to meet needs,
2. how much time one uses for activities not expected to meet needs, once over-consumed resources and ecological services cease to be available
3. how much time one uses for activities not expected to meet needs, once over-consumed resources and ecological services cease to be available, as if all needs were being met.
..starting from what sustainable development means-
“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.
To answer “where are we” ... the pointer is to the efforts at closing the gender gap. Unfortunately, the meaning and intentions of genders equality has been misunderstood by many.
Well "there is no sustainable development without gender equality". Findings reveal that where no one is let behind in development and where there's nothing like gender-based discrimination, sustainable development is possible.
My opinion-Sustainable development is possible where women are been empowered because with this, it is guaranteed that the needs of future generations would be met!
@Olawumi Osundina, is the gender disparity a symptom or a cause of unsustainable development? I would say that it is evidence that there are obstructions in the community that prevent needs from being met, but i dont have any way of identifying or removing those obstructions. I suspect part of the problem is that the economic indicators are blind to the actions one takes for meeting the needs of others that aren’t part of paid employment (eg child care).
In practical terms, the Sustainable Development Goals Report 2018 highlights progress being made in many areas of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda (which provides a global blueprint for dignity, peace and prosperity for people and the planet). However, the report also shows that, in some areas, progress is insufficient to meet the sustainable development goals and targets by 2030.