Sunderlin, William D. 1995. "Managerialism and the Conceptual Limits of Sustainable Development." Society and Natural Resources 8: 481-492.
Summary:
Sunderlin examines three classic sociological paradigms: the class, managerial, and pluralistic traditions. He argues that support for sustainable development can be found within the managerial paradigm, while both pluralistic and class paradigms tend to oppose it.
Beginning with the class tradition, Sunderlin describes how each sociological paradigm views sustainable development (see Table 1, p. 483 and Table 2, p. 484). Because class theorists tend to see the world in terms of "mutually antagonistic social groupings" (p. 482), they tend to view economic development as a way for the wealthy and powerful in the North to better their economic position at the expense of the poor in the South. Class theorists also tend to dislike government attempts to regulate the environment at a global level. They see government intervention as increasingly supportive of economic development which, as described above, creates further class antagonism.
Proponents of the managerial perspective tend to be supportive of sustainable development. This sector is split into two sections, "progressive managerialists" and "mainstream managerialists." Progressives believe that political and cultural transformation must take place in the industrialized countries to avoid environmental catastrophe (see Lester Brown, Donella Meadows and Herman Daly). Mainstream managerialists, on the other hand, tend to support solutions that focus on appropriate policies, sound management decisions, and the development of new technologies (see WCED and the World Bank).
Pluralists are opposed to sustainable development because they tend to view it as a form of government interference in resource management. Rather, proponents of this paradigm support "Free Market Environmentalism."
In summary, Sunderlin explains that he sees little prospect for a unified concept or theory of sustainable development. While the various ideologies "fit" into these three general paradigms, the ideologies themselves are value-laden and tend to represent different interests within society at large. An effort at a constructive dialogue, however, is appropriate and Sunderlin offers several useful starting points.
Keywords: environmental management, ideology, paradigm, sociology, sustainable development