Delivering sustainability therapy in Sustainable Development projects

This paper explores the apparent contradiction between the 'linearity' of most Sustainable Development projects, with time-bound and defined outputs achieved at a fixed cost, and an implied 'circularity' of the theory whereby there is no 'end'. Projects usually have clear parameters within which they are implemented, and the inclusion of elements such as the need for accountability, measurable impact and,value for money' have grown in importance. It could be argued that we live in a 'projectified' and therefore linear world. The paper explores the potential contradiction between 'linearity' and 'circularity', and suggests that one way around this is to frame the project within a form of the Kolb Learning Cycle heuristic. This will facilitate a rationalisation from those implementing the sustainable development project as to why decisions are being made and for whom. If these questions are opened up to the project stakeholders, including beneficiaries, then the Kolb cycle could encourage learning and understanding by all involved. It could also provide Sustainability Therapy to those trapped in processes, which they find orthogonal to their own perceptions. It is suggested that such learning, therapy and reflective practice should be a valid output of the sustainable development project, although typically the focus is only upon the final outputs and how they feed into policy. Ironically funders would be well advised to take a broader perspective in order to achieve true 'value for money' within such projects, even if learning is not an easily measurable or tangible outcome. These points are explored within the context of the wider literature and experience with a sustainable development project undertaken in Malta. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Problem structuring methods: theorizing the benefits of deconstructing sustainable development projects

Problem structuring methods or PSMs are widely applied across a range of variable but generally small-scale organizational contexts. However, it has been argued that they are seen and experienced less often in areas of wide ranging and highly complex human activity-specifically those relating to sustainability, environment, democracy and conflict (or SEDC). In an attempt to plan, track and influence human activity in SEDC contexts, the authors in this paper make the theoretical case for a PSM, derived from various existing approaches. They show how it could make a contribution in a specific practical context-within sustainable coastal development projects around the Mediterranean which have utilized systemic and prospective sustainability analysis or, as it is now known, Imagine. The latter is itself a PSM but one which is 'bounded' within the limits of the project to help deliver the required 'deliverables' set out in the project blueprint. The authors argue that sustainable development projects would benefit from a deconstruction of process by those engaged in the project and suggest one approach that could be taken-a breakout from a project-bounded PSM to an analysis that embraces the project itself. The paper begins with an introduction to the sustainable development context and literature and then goes on to illustrate the issues by grounding the debate within a set of projects facilitated by Blue Plan for Mediterranean coastal zones. The paper goes on to show how the analytical framework could be applied and what insights might be generated.

Can genetically-modified cotton contribute to sustainable development in Africa?

Genetically modified (GM) crops and sustainable development remain the foci of much media attention, especially given current concerns about a global food crisis. However, whilst the latter is embraced with enthusiasm by almost all groups, GM crops generate very mixed views. Some countries have welcomed GM, but others, notably those in Europe, adopt a cautious stance. This article aims to review the contribution that GM crops can make to agricultural sustainability in the developing world. Following brief reviews of both issues and their linkages, notably the pros and cons of GM cotton as a contributory factor in sustainability, a number of case studies from resourcepoor cotton farmers in Makhathini Flats, South Africa, is presented for a six-year period. Data on expenditure, productivity and income indicate that Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cotton is advantageous because it reduces costs, for example, of pesticides, and increases income, and the indications are that those benefits continued over at least the six years covered by the studies. There are repercussions of the additional income in the households; debts are reduced and money is invested in children's education and in the farms. However, in the general GM debate, the results show that GM crops are not miracle products which alleviate poverty at a stroke, but nor is there evidence that they will cause the scale of environmental damage associated with indiscriminate pesticide use. Indeed, for some GM antagonists, perhaps even the majority, such debates are irrelevant – the transfer of genes between species is unnatural and unethical. For them, GM crops will never be acceptable despite the evidence and pressure to increase world food production.

Sustainable development, rolled-out neoliberalism and sustainable communities

Recent contributions by geographers on the relationships between states and citizens have documented the rise of rolled-out neoliberalism. Development agendas are, it is argued, increasingly dominated by the principles of market-driven reforms, social inequality, and a drive towards enhancing the economic competitiveness of the supply side of the economy. However, at the same time, a parallel set of discourses has emerged in the development literature which argues that it is principles of sustainable development that have, in practice, become dominant. The emphasis is, instead, on democratic empowerment, environmental conservation, and social justice. This paper examines the relationships between these ostensibly very different interpretations of contemporary development with an assessment of one of the Labour government's most ambitious planning agendas-the publication in February 2003 of the document Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future. The proposals are promoted as a "step change" in the planning system with a new emphasis on tackling shortages of housing in the South East and reviving the economy of the Thames Gateway area. The paper assesses the different ways in which such programmes can be interpreted and argues that contemporary development practices in countries such as Britain are constituted by a hybridity of approaches and rationalities and cannot be reduced to simple characterisations of rolled-out neoliberalism or sustainable development.