The Sustainable Development Paradox

Here is a note to Relentlessly Progressive Economics readers from Dr. Luis T. Gutierrez:

The January 2009 issue of the E-Journal of “Solidarity, Sustainability, and Nonviolence” has been posted:

The Sustainable Development Paradox

As part of a series of articles on “dimensions of sustainable development,” the January 2009 issue shows the impossibility of integrating the social, economic, and political dimensions of sustainable development unless “homo economicus” becomes “homo solidarius.” The current economic and environmental crises confirm the importance of the issues we are researching.

Any feedback is deeply appreciated.


  • I was interested to find this blog. 20 years ago I had a book published on different economic concepts to point the way to a sustainable world economy. Someone who liked the book contacted me this year to suggest that I update and re-publish it as a blog. She set up the blog, and the book is now complete on the blog in a series of postings. There are now also additional pieces on global warming and other subjects. Here is the link:

    With all good wishes,
    Charles Pierce

  • Just a quick note.

    Thinking about these ideas, which many of us have been on this blog, one has got to give a sigh of relief that we have entered into this new era where debt and deficits have magically been lubricated out of the steely cage of market orthodoxy.

    In just several months, after years and years of the balance the budget mantra, we have the News paper economists convinced that potentially deficits are okay.

    Suddenly though there is the extreme differentiation between temporary and structural.

    It will take a while for the neo-cons to fully swallow the temporary, but now even the discourse of years of “trillion dollar deficits” has entered the lexicon.

    To me it is all just a different methodology for accounting, i.e. surpluses, deficits, who owes who, who is counting what. It is they who controls the bank that matters the most. Public/private interests are a key to understanding this, but ultimately potentially the only way forward with green, is structural deficits for all. Print it and spend it and green it. That should be the new causality chain, at east until we get through the next 50 years. By then we can recreate all new accounting rules, just as we arguably have over the post war era.

    International finance should become a hot topic within the public accounts and the green movement soon. Trust me I have not thought seriously about this for a long time, but its seems to be the only way forward given the mess we are in now.

    However, how much can, say in Canada, 40-50 Billion, public spending deficit effect the overall economy. It will help green, but can it be the stimulus needed as well. At least it will be in the right direction.

    A good example is the current auto crisis. A space has opened up for government to step in, on behalf of non-market forces and mandate a green policy. Kind of an unplanned, Polanyi like market based crisis change. The double movement works in mysterious ways.

    Watch, trillion dollars deficits have become vogue. It is amazing how powerful the newspaper economist really are, compared to say the theoretically based acadmic variety ( escpecially those still regressing numbers so imputedly riddled with non-imaginery non response that it all makes it look silly in the end.) Just ask a BOC economist and they’ll tell yah, how data is made to fit models and not vice versa. Been there and had a small cup of Joe on the house.

    So if I were a green, (maybe I am) I would be pushing the spend the deficit spending on greenery.

    check out this site for a man on a mission trying, quite poetically to put it all together. He sure does go on a mission when he knows where he wants to go. Staying power is good friend to have and so is this guy.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *