GRENADA DOVE: THE ‘HART’ OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

One of the greatest challenges in sustainable development is reaching consensus among viewpoints that can vary as widely as sustainable development solutions can be perceived. Defining a ‘sustainable development path’ is no easy accomplishment. The attempt to define sustainability virtually began in 1972 during the Stockholm Summit on People and the Environment. This Summit marked the first time world leaders gathered to discuss environmental matters, and from it, the United Nations Environment Programme was founded.

Since then, numerous publications, summits, programmes, civil society groups, covenants and more have risen in an attempt to define, promote and ultimately to achieve sustainable development. Just as this debate has been raging on the world stage for decades, so it is happening in Grenada now. Civil society groups are raising a critical eye of observance on a recent amendment to the parks act, and plans to develop an area that has been reserved to protect the country’s national and critically endangered National bird, the Grenada Dove.

The Government does not believe they are abandoning their environmental responsibilities by allowing development to take place on Mount Hartman Estate; the land area that had been reserved as parkland, and is now at the centre of this controversy. The Government is attempting to balance economic needs with long term land management options. The environmental screen of the proposed development plan suggests that the steps being taken to protect the Dove may actually enhance its preservation rather than threaten it. For the Government, this is better than relying on project based funds, which bear a heavy accompanying administrative burden and no long term guarantees for financial support.

Civil society on the other hand, is attempting to point out that economic benefits and conservation can be achieved using different models of development. Ecotourism has been presented as one of those alternatives. In this model, tourism development and long term ‘value for land’ can be achieved by preserving natural assets and fostering the development of markets that generate profits through conservation, rather than through the more traditional brick and mortar approaches to development. Ecotourism has also proven to be a successful model for poverty alleviation, disaster risk mitigation (through environmental protection) as well as enjoying growth rates that have been reported as high as 30% in places like Costa Rica.

Is one side right and the other wrong? Regardless of where these stakeholders stand, any position that is focused on being in opposition of, or counter to another, is wrong: If the desired result is a sustainable solution. The only factor that we do know that must always be present is that people, from all walks of life, have to buy into an idea, concept or plan for it to be sustainable.

And thus, if a sustainable solution is to be realized from this currently polarized debate, both sides will have to take the time to listen to the other, and agree to work together so that if a win-win solution exists – it can be found.