Summary of JIIA−UNU-IAS Joint Lecture

June 29, 2010
Venue: Japan Institute of International Affairs

Prof. Saleem H. Ali
Professor of Environmental Planning and Asian Studies,
Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont“Need, Greed and a Sustainable Future – Charting a New Development Agenda”

My topic – “need, greed and a sustainable future” – derives from a remark made by Mahatma Gandhi
that “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need but not every man’s greed.”

In speaking on therelationship between need and greed today, I will examine in particular whether need and greed should
be considered in separate terms. Environmental conservationists assert, as implied by Gandhi’s words,
that need and greed are irreconcilable and that satisfying people’s needs is sufficient; going beyond thatwould deplete the Earth’s resources.

However, I hold that need and greed should not be regarded

separately because, in light of the circumstances of the international community at present, such adichotomization cannot open the way to a sustainable future.

Need and greed are not necessarily incompatible. Perhaps a good example of this is Botswana, whose
diamonds have saved many Batswana.

Diamonds are not daily essentials, but the desire for diamonds

in developed countries has led to development and progress for Botswana. The money obtained fromdiamonds has enabled the people of Botswana to receive free medical care and education. In otherwords, the greed of the developed countries has satisfied the need of a developing country.

Thisorganic relationship between need and greed can be seen elsewhere as well.

A new environmental conservation paradigm must be established to systematically build an organic
relationship between need and greed.

This paradigm must accept people’s greed and incorporate it ina fashion that also contributes to resource conservation.

Building a new paradigm first requires theformulation of norms and systems for recompense. To go back to my earlier example, diamonds havemade Botswana a success story but they have been a source of tragedy in Congo. The question is
how best to meet the needs of people while extracting resources. The international community must
put in place norms and systems to determine how to compensate societies and countries unable tosecure sufficient profits from extracting resources.

Secondly, people’s livelihoods must be incorporated into the concept of sustainability.
“sustainable livelihood index” would be meaningful in this regard.

Calculating a

Such an index would show not only if

a given (secondary industry) product is sustainable from an environmental perspective but also where
the product and its raw materials/inputs were sourced and produced and how beneficial the product is in1eliminating poverty in the country of origin/production.

Nearly all of the indices produced by the United

Nations and other organizations are compiled on a nation-by-nation basis, but the sustainable livelihood
index would be a yardstick for specific products. An item produced in Germany and the same item
produced in Mali, for instance, would differently impact the lives of people in the respective countries.
The greater the beneficial impact of a product on a nation, the higher its index number would be.

Third, the concept of development must be reconsidered.

Development tends to be regarded as theaim of a country’s economic advancement, and development and wealth are often understoodsynonymously.

This is not, however, a sustainable viewpoint.

Raising the living standards of theentire world to, for example, the high living standards of the US is not feasible because Earth’s resources
are limited.

Development should be understood as the maximization of people’s health and options.

Debates on the advisability of developmental assistance have touched on the contention thatdevelopment assistance supports the recipient country’s advancement but that what is truly needed is
assistance for building people’s capacity and securing their livelihoods.

While it would not be prudent tosuspend all existing developmental assistance, it is important to seek a balance between developmental
assistance and assistance directed toward securing livelihoods (one opinion offered from the floor wasthat development assistance had thus far focused on bridging disparities in development levels between
developed and developing countries, and that emphasis should be given in future to improving the skillsof people in developing countries).

By moving to implement the aforementioned, greed can satisfy

people’s needs.

2