"Also, it is interesting that developing countries, with China and India perhaps in the lead, where the future of the global environment will be decided are now on board with the case for sustainable development"
About this Quote
Maurice Strong underscores a turning point in global environmental politics: the center of gravity has shifted toward the developing world, with China and India shaping the trajectory of the planet. The emphasis is not only demographic or economic. It is about sheer scale of energy demand, urbanization, infrastructure build-out, and the resulting emissions and resource pressures. Where growth is fastest, the environmental future is effectively decided.
He also marks a change in mindset. For decades many developing countries argued that environmental constraints were a luxury of the rich, while their priority had to be poverty alleviation. Strong spent his career trying to bridge that divide, from Stockholm in 1972 to Rio in 1992, advancing sustainable development as a way to reconcile growth with ecological limits. By noting that China and India are now on board, he points to a convergence: leading emerging economies increasingly see clean air, water security, climate resilience, and resource efficiency as prerequisites for prosperity, not obstacles to it.
That convergence rests on pragmatic drivers. Smog, water crises, and extreme heat impose real costs. Renewables, storage, and efficiency promise energy security and industrial competitiveness. Cities being built today can lock in either high-carbon or low-carbon patterns for generations. As China and India scale solar manufacturing, electric mobility, and green finance, they become rule-setters, not just rule-takers, in the global transition.
Strong’s observation also carries a reminder about equity and responsibility. Sustainable development still implies differentiated pathways and support: technology transfer, finance, and space for development, alongside transparent governance and accountability at home. It is both hopeful and demanding. If the leaders of the Global South embed sustainability into their growth models, the numbers make global goals attainable. If they do not, no amount of action elsewhere will suffice. The future hinges on choices being made in Shenzhen and Surat as much as in Silicon Valley and Brussels.
He also marks a change in mindset. For decades many developing countries argued that environmental constraints were a luxury of the rich, while their priority had to be poverty alleviation. Strong spent his career trying to bridge that divide, from Stockholm in 1972 to Rio in 1992, advancing sustainable development as a way to reconcile growth with ecological limits. By noting that China and India are now on board, he points to a convergence: leading emerging economies increasingly see clean air, water security, climate resilience, and resource efficiency as prerequisites for prosperity, not obstacles to it.
That convergence rests on pragmatic drivers. Smog, water crises, and extreme heat impose real costs. Renewables, storage, and efficiency promise energy security and industrial competitiveness. Cities being built today can lock in either high-carbon or low-carbon patterns for generations. As China and India scale solar manufacturing, electric mobility, and green finance, they become rule-setters, not just rule-takers, in the global transition.
Strong’s observation also carries a reminder about equity and responsibility. Sustainable development still implies differentiated pathways and support: technology transfer, finance, and space for development, alongside transparent governance and accountability at home. It is both hopeful and demanding. If the leaders of the Global South embed sustainability into their growth models, the numbers make global goals attainable. If they do not, no amount of action elsewhere will suffice. The future hinges on choices being made in Shenzhen and Surat as much as in Silicon Valley and Brussels.
Quote Details
| Topic | Nature |
|---|
More Quotes by Maurice
Add to List
