 In 1987, the World

Commission on
Environment and
Development defined
as a process in which
the exploitation of
resources, the
direction of investment
and the orientation of
technological
development and
institutional change
are made consistent
with future as well as
present needs.
 It is a development of
industrial and natural
resources that meets
the energy needs of
1. The concept of
needs, in particular the
essential needs of the
world's poor, to which
overriding priority
should be given; and

2. The idea of

limitations imposed by
the state of technology
and social organization
on the environment's
ability to meet present
and future needs.
 Neo-liberal view
 The environment is natural
‘capital’. The services
derived from air, water, soil,
biological diversity and
recreation depend on
maintaining those
environmental ‘assets’
intact, or renewing them. If
this is not done, those
services will sooner or later
decline. If values can be
assigned to natural ‘capital’,
then sustainable
development can be secure
by classical economics
People-centered development view
Sustainable human
communities can be
achieved only
through a people-
centered
development.” It
emphasizes the need
for priority in
development to be
given to securing
‘sustainable
livelihoods’ for the
poorest groups within
communities. It
 The Global Environmental
Management View

The Brundtland Commission envisaged

international co-operation to achieve
environmental management at a ‘global’
level, through international environmental
treaties enforced by international agencies.
 Through the use of natural
resources as raw materials
( ‘renewable’ resources in
the case of plants and
animals, wind and water
power; ‘non-renewable’ in
the case of minerals for
production and fossil
fuels);

 Through the use of the

environment to accept
waste products. The
capacity of the
environment to transform
The goal of Sustainable Development(SD) is to maximize
three systems
Approach Role of Geographical Nature Technology
in SD Economy Focus
and Nature
of Growth

Ideal Changes in Bioregionalism Promoting Labour-intensive

model of patterns and and appropriate
SD levels of protecting technology
production biodiversity
and
consumption

Strong SD Environmenta Heightened Environment Clean Technology

lly regulated local economic al
market self-sufficiency management

Weak SD Market reliant Initial moves Replacing Mixed labour and

environmenta to local finite capital intensive
l policy economic resources technology
sufficiency with capital
Treadmill Exponential Global markets Resource Capital intensive
growth exploitation production
technologies
Some SD Principles
:
Protection of the Biosphere

Sustainable Use of Natural Resources

Reduction and Disposal of wastes

Energy Conservation

Risk Reduction

Safe Products and Services

Environmental Restoration
SD indicators:
1. Environment

2.Population and Resources

3. Economy

4. Youth and Education

5. Health and Community

 Environmental
sustainability is defined
as the ability of the
environment to
continue to function
properly indefinitely.
This involves meeting
the present needs of
humans without
endangering the
welfare of future
generations.
 Consumption
ConsumptioState Stateofof Sustainabili
Sustainabili
of renewable
n of environmen
environment ty ty
resources
renewable t
More than
resources
More than Environmen
nature's
nature's ability
Environmental NotNot
tal
degradation sustainable
ability to
to replenish sustainable
degradation
replenish
Equal to Steady-
Equal to Environmen
nature's
nature's ability
Environmental state
Steady-state
tal
equilibrium Sustainability
ability to
to replenish Sustainabili
equilibrium
replenish
Less than ty
Less than Sustainable
nature's Environmen
Environmental Sustainable
nature's ability
renewal developmen
development
ability to
to replenish tal renewal
t
replenish
 Agenda 21 is a program of
action into the 21st century
for bringing the Earth into a
sustainable future. It was
adopted by the
participating governments
of the world in the United
Nations Conference on
Environment and
Development (UNCED),
otherwise known as the
Earth Summit, in Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil in June 1992.
Philippine Agenda 21 (PA 21) is our own
national agenda for sustainable
development.

PA 21 is the Philippines’ commitment to

the UNCED. It also lays down the mix of
strategies that integrate the parameters in
the country’s overall development
strategy, identifies the intervention areas
(or Action Agenda) – from the national to
the regional level – with the corresponding
implementing platforms and plans.
 PA 21 envisions a better quality of life for all
through the development of a just, moral,
creative, spiritual, economically-vibrant, caring,
diverse yet cohesive society characterized by
appropriate productivity, participatory and
democratic process and living in harmony within
the limits of the carrying capacity of nature and
the integrity of creation.
 Sustainable development as defined in the PA 21
(1996) is “harmonious integration of a sound and
viable economy, responsible governance, social
cohesion and ecological integrity, to ensure that
development is a life-sustaining process.”
 - The rise of globalization and the creation of an
external environment of finance, markets, and
technology did not seem conducive to sustainable
development.

- The civil society needs to specify its
commitments and contributions to achieving
sustainability in the updated document.

- Government departments need to be imbued
with the sustainable development perspective
with which to handle issues properly.
1. Poverty Reduction
2. Social Equity
3. Empowerment and Good
Governance
4. Peace and Solidarity
5. Ecological Integrity
- Business, the key actor in economy,
which is mainly concerned with producing
goods and services for people.
- Government, the key actor in polity,
which is concerned with democratic
governance and security of human rights.
- Civil society, the key actor in culture,
which is concerned with the development
of the social and spiritual capacities of
human beings.
Government’s Claims
The poverty incidence fell from about 40 percent in
1991 to nearly 36 percent in 1994. However due to the
effects of the Asian financial crisis, it fell slightly to 36.8
in 1997 (ADB).
Basic literacy rose from 93.5 percent in 1990 to 95.0
percent in 1995, while functional literacy remarkably
improved from 75.6 percent in 1989 to 83.8 percent in
1995.
The year 1996 saw the completion and approval of the
National Health Plan, 1995-2000.
PHILNET-WSSD’s View
Government statistics on poverty incidence are
understated because the poverty threshold is set
very low: PhP 31.00 in 1997 (US$ 1.05) and PhP
38.10 (US$ 0.73) in 2000. Yet independent
estimates of the daily cost of living show that a
family of six in Metro Manila needs P515 to meet
food and non-food requirements. The legislated
daily wage rate, on the other hand, is pegged at
P265 in Metro Manila.
The seeming statistical improvement is misleading.
Even the National Statistics Office (NSO) admits
that only 77% of the 22.5 million school-aged
children (5 to 17 years old) were reportedly
enrolled in school year 1999-2000. This means
that about 5.0 million Filipino children failed to go
to school at that time.
The National Health Plan, however, aims to
privatize health care. This is reflected in
decreasing public spending for health—the PhP
129.40 (US$ 2.50) per Filipino in the proposed
2002 national government budget is a 25% drop
from levels in the early 1990s—and in the
privatization of government hospitals. There is also
increasing reliance on private health maintenance
organizations (HMOs) whose profits lie in charging
high premiums and restricting coverage.
In June 1995, the Philippines launched the Social
Reform Agenda (SRA) to enable people to have
access to opportunities for undertaking
sustainable livelihoods espoused under the agenda
for change.
In 1993, the Philippine Population Management
Program (PPMP) was implemented to serve as the
government’s program for maintaining a healthy
balance between and among population and
resources.
The SRA only provides so-called safety nets
like livelihood training for farmers who are
displaced by agricultural liberalization. It
doesn’t provide, for instance, much needed
subsidies on farm inputs and even ends up
tolerating land conversion. In any case budgets
for this have not even been forthcoming.
This agency is silent on the operations of TNCs
engaged in logging, mining and other industries
which are the greatest despoilers of the
environment. Indeed it deflects attention from them
by blaming individuals instead. Nor does it address
crucial equity issues.

For the period 1992-1996, a National Land Use Act
was drafted in line with a goal of strengthening the
existing process of identifying, determining, and
evaluating alternative land use patterns to guide and
enable appropriate land management and
development. The Act was certified as a priority
environmental legislation.
Again, this is silent on the plight of farmers who fell
prey to land conversion. Because of other laws
favorable to foreign investors like the Investors
Lease Act of 1993, this cannot serve the interests
of the poor majority. In any case, the bill has yet to
be enacted.

In 1993, an Integrated Pest Management Program was This does not directly ban the use of harmful
introduced. chemical pesticides. Nor does it address the
dumping of such products to the country.
 An EIS cannot succeed if the government does not
have a clear environmental agenda which seeks,
In January 1996, the President signed the revised
among others, to hold big local and foreign
Executive Order No. 291 entitled “Improving the
corporations accountable for their industrial waste.
Environmental Impact Statement System (EIS).”
Experience has also shown that EIS are easily
abused by private corporations and TNCs.
Environmental consultancies have developed into a
thriving business because of the law but but they
are unable to control the proliferation of
environmentally-hazardous businesses—mining,
oil refineries, distilleries, coal plants.

In 1997, the Environment Code, EO No.44, TNCs are still not held accountable for the pollutants
incorporating laws on quality of air and water they emit.
resources was approved.
In 1997, major policies and legislation were passed, By design, the AFMA aims to benefit mainly rural elites
among them: the Agricultural Fisheries Modernization and transnational agri-business engaged in cash crops
Act (AFMA), the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act and fisheries for export. It deflects attention from
(IPRA) and the Anti-Squatting Law. genuine agrarian reform which is more meaningful for
the vast majority of the poor peasantry. It will also
facilitate opening up the country for the distribution and
use of agro-chemical TNCs’ certified and hybrid or
genetically engineered seeds—for cash crops rather
than staple food crops.
In 1997, the Philippine National Development Plan This does not tackle structural roots of poverty nor the
(Plan 21) was formulated for the 2000-2005 period. intensification of the chronic crisis through
globalization. Indeed, it ends up facilitating neo-liberal
globalization.
The Philippines is involved in the formation of ISO This is just part of the government’s thrust of
14000. adhering to internationally accepted trade
standards which does not benefit workers,
peasants and basic sectors of society, as much as
it does TNCs.
The Philippine Strategy for Biological Diversity As with Plan 21, these do not address the structural
Conservation (PSBDC) was approved in 1994 and the roots of poverty nor the intensification of the chronic
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan crisis through globalization and end up facilitating it.
(NBSAP) was approved in 1997.
In October 1996, the Presidential Task Force on Water utilities are being privatized nationwide,
Water Resources Development and Management causing access to water to be primarily
(PTFWRDM) was created by virtue of Executive determined by capacity to pay.
Order No. 374. The PTFWRDM drafted a bill which
proposes the creation of a Water Resources
Authority of the Philippines (WRAP) that sets the
general framework for the planning and regulation
of water resources with respect to quality,
quantity and tariff.
The Philippine Clean Air Act was enacted into TNC accountability vis-à-vis emission of pollutants
law in 1999. was not clearly outlined in this law. Oil firms have also
used this as an excuse for future oil prices, claiming
that they have to pass on to consumers the cost of
complying with this law. Rather, the Clean Air Act
must be viewed in the context of deregulation and
liberalization. TNCs which provide the technologies
for companies to keep up with the standards set by
act also stand to gain. However the Act has yet to be
fully implemented because of corporate resistance.
The PCSD could not serve as a
genuine venue to advance
sustainable development and the
people’s welfare because the
government which is such a key
player in the process is itself
committed to pushing neo-liberal
globalization. And yet under the
pretext of “maximizing” so-called
opportunities in globalization, it
trapped civil society groups within
the narrow confines of
developmentalism and
Alternative
Paths:
1. Non hegemonic

2. Grassroots and participatory

3. Locally and ecologically based