THEORETICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL DISCOURSE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS AN ECONOMIC CATEGORY
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The paper examines the multifaceted concept of sustainable development in the context of economic theory and philosophy. In addition to the introduction and findings, the paper is divided into three main parts: historical background, the scientific view of sustainable development, and sustainable development and economic growth. It examines the historical development of sustainable development as an economic category, its theoretical underpinnings and the philosophical discourse that shapes its interpretation and implementation. The paper highlights the tensions and synergies between economic growth and environmental protection by analysing different economic models and sustainability paradigms. This paper presents a critical analysis of the historical background, scientific view of sustainable development and its relationship with economic growth. It offers a nuanced understanding of sustainable development, providing insights into its role in shaping future economic policies and practices. The paper is based on a comprehensive review of literature and theoretical perspectives, and the process of creating it included the study of scientific and professional literature, the extraction of key topics, their mutual comparison, and the use of scientific methods such as induction, deduction, analysis and synthesis. The research yielded five principal findings. (1) The majority of models of sustainable development place the environmental aspect at the forefront. The authors believe that the economic and social dimensions of sustainable development are equally important in the context of new global threats. It is therefore evident that a transitional concept is required. (2) Among leading economists, there is a considerable range of views on the relationship between economic balance, growth and cyclicality, and sustainable development. A historical analysis corroborates the veracity of the dialectical approach to balance and development, thereby refuting the orthodoxy. (3) The free market model is unable to self-regulate as a result of rapid population growth and the worsening of environmental problems. Despite the high transformation rate of the market as an institution, social justice and environmental protection institutions are formed at an exceptionally slow rate in the free market. This model results in social stratification and the destruction of ecosystems. (4) For the sustainable development of society in the context of globalisation, it is necessary to implement systematic and proportional economic development mechanisms. (5) The concept of sustainable development requires clarification in modern conditions.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
sustainable development, economy, history, environment, economic growth
Aristotle (2021). Metaphysics. Prague: Rezek.
Bacon, F. (2017). The New Organon or: True Directions Concerning the Interpretation of Nature. New York: Jonathan Bennett.
Cannistra, M., Agasisti, T., Amagir, A., Poder, K., Holz, O., Vartiak, L. & De Witte, K. (2022). A comparative analysis of financial literacy levels and initiatives among students in five European countries. Research in Comparative and International Education, Vol. 17(2), p. 246–280.
Cohen, J., & Arato, A. (1994). Civil Sosiety and Political Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Daly, H. E. (1995). On Wilfred Beckerman's Critique of Sustainable Development. Environmental Values, Vol. 4(1), p. 49–55.
Forrester, J. W. (1971). World Dynamics. Waltham: Pegasus Communications.
Galbraith, J. K. (1984). Ekonomické teórie a ciele spoločnosti. Bratislava: Pravda.
Garbarova, M., Bachanova, P. H. & Vartiak, L. (2017). Purchasing Behaviour of E-commerce Customers. Management and Economics in Manufacturing. Proceedings of the Global Scientific Conference on Management and Economics in Manufacturing. Zvolen: Technical University. P. 160–165.
Giddens, A. (2000). The Third Way and its Critics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hartwich, J. M. (1977). Intergenerational equity and investing of rents from exhaustible resources. The American Economic Review, Vol. 67(5), p. 972–974.
Hegel, G. W. F. (2020). Fenomenológia ducha. Bratislava: Patricia Elexová.
Hueting, R. (1989). Correctiong National Income for Environmental Losses: Toward a Practical Solution. Economy & Environment, Vol. 5, p. 23–47.
Jaseckova, G., Konvit, M. & Vartiak, L. (2022). Vernadsky's concept of the noosphere and its reflection in ethical and moral values of society. History of Science and Technology, Vol. 12(2), p. 231–248.
Keane, J. (1998). Civil Society: Old Images, New Visions. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Konvit, M., Jaseckova, G. & Vartiak, L. (2023). A Contemporary View of the Planetary Oikos through the Prism of Technology and Management. META-Research in Hermeneutics Phenomenology and Practical Philosophy, Vol. 15(2), p. 367–386.
Krykun, V. (2016). Sustainable development and ecological responsibility of business. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 2(1), p. 65–71.
Lafferty, W. M. (2007). The politics of sustainable development: Global norms for national implementation. Environmental Politics, Vol. 5(2), p. 185–208.
Lewis, W. A. (1959). The Theory of Economic Growth. London: Unwin Hyman.
Marshall, A. (1993). Principles of Economics. Žilina: Vydavateľstvo Pokrok.
Marx, K. (1966). Ekonomicko-filozofické rukopisy. In: Malé ekonomické spisy. Bratislava: Vydavateľstvo politickej literatúry.
Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., Behrens, S. (1992). Limits to growth. New York: Universe Books.
Mill J. S., Nutzinger H. G. & Radre V. (1995). Das Konzept der nachhaltigen Wirtschaftsweise. Croydon: Metropolis.
Myrdal, G. (1968). Asian Drama: An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations. The Australian Quarterly, Vol. 40(4), p. 118–121.
Ophuls, W. (1977). Ecology and the politics of scarcity: Prologue to a political theory of the steady state. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Parkhomenko, O. & Iarmosh, O. (2023). Provision of global sustainable development as a factor in the formation of local welfare. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 9(5), p. 206–214.
Ricardo, D. (1817). On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation. London: J. Murray.
Russell, B. (1967). A History of Western Philosophy. London: Simon & Schuster.
Say, J. B. (1803). Traité d'économie politique ou simple exposition de la manière dont se forment, se distribuent ou se consomment les richesses. Paris: Crapelet an XI.
Seligman, B. B. (1968). Hlavné prúdy moderného ekonomického myslenia. Moscow: Progress.
Schumpeter, J. (1982). Teória ekonomického rozvoja. Moscow: Progress.
Smith, A. (2012). Wealth of Nations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Solow, R. M. (1956). A Contribution to the Theory of Economics Growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 70(1), p. 65–94.
Ursul, A. D., & Romanovič, A. L. (2009). Civilizacijsko-etički aspekti biosfernog gazdovanja. Ekonomika poljoprivrede, Vol. 56(1), p. 1–11.
Vartiak, L. (2015). Achieving excellence in projects. Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 26, p. 292–299.
Vernadsky, V. I. (1991). Vedecké myslenie ako planetárny fenomén. Martin: Veda.
Walras, L. (2019). Elements of Theoretical Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.