Sustainable development and ecological modernisationtechnical definition to help them implement sustainable development. Yet
this perspective may undervalue one of the great strengths of sustainable
development, which is that the fluidity of the concept should be celebrated
rather than condemned. Rather like other political concepts such as democ-
racy or justice, sustainable development is widely seen as a ‘good thing’
and has a generally accepted common-sense meaning within broad bound-
aries, but within those parameters there is deeper contestation around its
constituent ideas (Dryzek 2005 :147; Baker 2006 : 27). On this view the con-
testability of sustainable development has several virtues. Its ‘all things to
all people’ quality has helped the message to resonate around the world
and attract followers to the flag. Hajer ( 1995 )suggests that the ‘coalition for
sustainable development can only be kept together by virtue of its rather
vague story-lines at the same time as it asks for radical social change’ (p. 14),
whereas insistence on a precise formulation of the term is more likely to
deter potential supporters. Thus the ‘motherhood’ idea of sustainable devel-
opment can win broader acceptance for radical ideas such as equity and
democratisation.
These debates can be a dynamic and positive feature of the incremen-
tal process of change. At the international level the sustainable develop-
ment discourse has provoked fierce political struggles – particularly between
Northand South – which have pushed many environmental and develop-
ment issues up the diplomatic agenda. International institutions such as
theCommission on Sustainable Development have tried to drive the debate
down to national and sub-national levels. The proliferation of sustainable
development round-tables and Local Agenda 21 strategies has helped dif-
fuse the idea throughout society and generated many practical initiatives.
Even when governments pay only lip-service to international commitments,
theymay indirectly initiate change simply by creating new institutions and
promulgating different ideas which can disrupt established patterns of pol-
icymaking and alter the belief systems of policy elites. By signing up to
Agenda 21, for example, governments were obliged to produce national sus-
tainable development strategies (see Chapter11), which provided a window
of opportunity for concerned actors to bring environmental issues to the
attention of other ministries.
So the ambiguity and contestability that make sustainable development
such a complex concept may also be a political strength. Its optimistic mes-
sage offers something for everyone and allows all actors to speak the same
language (even if it means different things to different people). But can
this elusive concept be turned into practical policy proposals? Although the
wide-ranging Agenda 21 document contains many practical suggestions, and
despite the laudable efforts of many institutions and individuals, there is
still no compact toolkit setting out the policies and instruments needed
forsustainable development. The next section identifies five fundamental
principles which, nevertheless, seem to underpin all versions of sustainable
development.