he Brundtland Commission: Sustainable development as health issue
Michael 2013, 10: 198–208.
The social determinants of health include economic and environmental factors. A mutually detrimental relation of these factors is harmful to health, so that safeguarding public health requires a harmonious economic-environmental development. Such a concept was launched as «sustainable development» by the Brundtland Commission in the 1980s. Negotiating this concept was complicated by different, sometimes contradictory perspectives of Commission members regarding the relative importance of economic and environmental aspects and the underlying political causes of environmental degradation. It required reconciling views of Northern, industrialized and Southern, low-income countries and also finding a balance between scientific accuracy and political acceptability. The results of the following years suggest a mixed record.
Introduction
A frequently under-appreciated aspect of public health is its long-term dependence on sustainable development. The social determinants of health include, on the one hand, economic factors, such as employment, income and, generally, living standards, and, on the other hand, environmental factors like access to clear water and air, protection from natural disasters etc. Unfortunately, those economic and environmental factors are not necessarily in harmony: both a high-level economy which destroys the environmental basis of life-support systems and an environment, which is either protected or degraded to the point of being economically useless, are tangibly harmful to health. In a fateful triangular relation, long-term stability of public health requires a mutually supportive relation of the economy and the environment. Such a relation was termed «sustainable development» by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), more commonly known as the Brundtland Commission after its chairperson, Gro Harlem Brundtland, politician, medical doctor and public health expert.
The Commission is best known for having coined the definition of sustainable development as development which «seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability to meet those of the future.»1 Health was not explicitly mentioned either in this definition, in the Commission mandate or even in its recommendations at the end of its work. Nevertheless, the Commission left no doubt in its report that its work was also about public health. Malaria, schistosomiasis, respiratory illnesses, cancers, and injuries were only a few of countless health problems affected by environmental-economic factors like irrigation, air pollution, carcinogenic substances in industrial products, and natural disasters exacerbated by climate change, while biodiversity loss diminished potential material for medicines and food production. The WCED pointed out those connections and declared: «Integrated approaches are needed that reflect key health objectives in areas such as food production; water supply and sanitation; industrial policy, particularly with regard to safety and pollution; and the planning of human settlements.»2
But what exactly was sustainable development? The often cited definition focuses on inter-generational justice but gives no hint of the vehement discussions the WCED had on numerous other issues, notably social justice or the role of physical limits for economic growth. Nor does it betray the underlying double challenge of balancing contradictory demands: those of economic needs versus those of environmental well-being, and to balance the need to be scientifically accurate with the need to be politically acceptable.Implicitly, this search for a reconciliation of these conflicts is also a story of an effort to balance contradictory demands on health.
Background
In December 1983, the United Nations General Assembly decided to establish a Special Commission, in charge of proposing «long-term environmental strategies for achieving sustainable development to the year 2000 and beyond.» As chairperson, UN Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar appointed Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Minister of the Environment and Prime Minister and then head of the opposition Labour Party and member of the Norwegian parliament.3 Between October 1984 and February 1987, the Commission met eight times in different cities and discussed the selected topics on the basis of texts provided by the Secretariat, which was located in Geneva and headed by Jim MacNeill. Information came from a wide range of sources, including scientific institutions, NGOs, academics, consultants, industry and individual experts. Some papers were commissioned by the Secretariat, some were volunteered. Through a process of drafting, discussions and redrafting of texts, the WCED produced a report, later known as the Brundtland report or by its title, Our Common Future.
The Commission consisted of twenty-two Commissioners from twentyone countries in
he Brundtland Commission: Sustainable development as health issueMichael 2013, 10: 198–208.The social determinants of health include economic and environmental factors. A mutually detrimental relation of these factors is harmful to health, so that safeguarding public health requires a harmonious economic-environmental development. Such a concept was launched as «sustainable development» by the Brundtland Commission in the 1980s. Negotiating this concept was complicated by different, sometimes contradictory perspectives of Commission members regarding the relative importance of economic and environmental aspects and the underlying political causes of environmental degradation. It required reconciling views of Northern, industrialized and Southern, low-income countries and also finding a balance between scientific accuracy and political acceptability. The results of the following years suggest a mixed record.IntroductionA frequently under-appreciated aspect of public health is its long-term dependence on sustainable development. The social determinants of health include, on the one hand, economic factors, such as employment, income and, generally, living standards, and, on the other hand, environmental factors like access to clear water and air, protection from natural disasters etc. Unfortunately, those economic and environmental factors are not necessarily in harmony: both a high-level economy which destroys the environmental basis of life-support systems and an environment, which is either protected or degraded to the point of being economically useless, are tangibly harmful to health. In a fateful triangular relation, long-term stability of public health requires a mutually supportive relation of the economy and the environment. Such a relation was termed «sustainable development» by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), more commonly known as the Brundtland Commission after its chairperson, Gro Harlem Brundtland, politician, medical doctor and public health expert.The Commission is best known for having coined the definition of sustainable development as development which «seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability to meet those of the future.»1 Health was not explicitly mentioned either in this definition, in the Commission mandate or even in its recommendations at the end of its work. Nevertheless, the Commission left no doubt in its report that its work was also about public health. Malaria, schistosomiasis, respiratory illnesses, cancers, and injuries were only a few of countless health problems affected by environmental-economic factors like irrigation, air pollution, carcinogenic substances in industrial products, and natural disasters exacerbated by climate change, while biodiversity loss diminished potential material for medicines and food production. The WCED pointed out those connections and declared: «Integrated approaches are needed that reflect key health objectives in areas such as food production; water supply and sanitation; industrial policy, particularly with regard to safety and pollution; and the planning of human settlements.»2But what exactly was sustainable development? The often cited definition focuses on inter-generational justice but gives no hint of the vehement discussions the WCED had on numerous other issues, notably social justice or the role of physical limits for economic growth. Nor does it betray the underlying double challenge of balancing contradictory demands: those of economic needs versus those of environmental well-being, and to balance the need to be scientifically accurate with the need to be politically acceptable.Implicitly, this search for a reconciliation of these conflicts is also a story of an effort to balance contradictory demands on health.BackgroundIn December 1983, the United Nations General Assembly decided to establish a Special Commission, in charge of proposing «long-term environmental strategies for achieving sustainable development to the year 2000 and beyond.» As chairperson, UN Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar appointed Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Minister of the Environment and Prime Minister and then head of the opposition Labour Party and member of the Norwegian parliament.3 Between October 1984 and February 1987, the Commission met eight times in different cities and discussed the selected topics on the basis of texts provided by the Secretariat, which was located in Geneva and headed by Jim MacNeill. Information came from a wide range of sources, including scientific institutions, NGOs, academics, consultants, industry and individual experts. Some papers were commissioned by the Secretariat, some were volunteered. Through a process of drafting, discussions and redrafting of texts, the WCED produced a report, later known as the Brundtland report or by its title, Our Common Future.The Commission consisted of twenty-two Commissioners from twentyone countries in
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
