The development models of affluent nations, despite their high HDI rankings, are ecologically unsustainable.

Dangerous Impact of Development Models

• California Wildfires: Recent wildfires caused economic damage of ~$250 billion, comparable to Greece’s GDP in 2023. Climate disasters highlight the hidden costs of current development trajectories.
• Unsustainable Consumption Patterns: If every country consumed at the rate of the United States or European Union, the world would need multiple Earths.
  • Resource depletion and environmental degradation are direct consequences of such high-consumption models.
• Environmental Cost: Top-ranking countries (e.g., Ireland, Norway, Switzerland) are among the highest per capita resource consumers and carbon polluters. 
  • If their development models were replicated globally, the planet would face ecological collapse.

Flaws in Traditional Development Matrics

• Disconnect: The UN’s HDI projects high-income nations as development models, despite unsustainable ecological footprints. This disconnect between economic benchmarks and ecological sustainability is dangerous.
• Incomplete Framework: HDI measures life expectancy, education, and income as core factors. HDI ignores environmental sustainability, creating a misleading picture of progress.
• Ecological Overshoot: Developed nations have exceeded planetary limits in greenhouse gas emissions, ecological destruction, and pollution. The HDI framework rewards affluence while ignoring global environmental costs.
• Failure of PHDI: Introduced in 2020, the Planetary Pressures-adjusted HDI (PHDI) penalizes countries with high environmental impacts. However, it only ranks countries relative to each other, not against absolute ecological limits.
• Illusion: Nordic countries, which consume over five Earths’ worth of resources per capita, still score highly. This relative ranking fails to address true sustainability, creating a false sense of progress.

Analysis of Middle Income countries

• Costa Rica:  High life expectancy, universal health care, and near-universal literacy achieved with minimal resource consumption.
  • 99% of electricity comes from hydropower, wind, and solar, while reforestation efforts have increased forest cover by 60% since the 1980s. 
  • Aligns human development with environmental stewardship, setting a model for sustainable growth.
• Sri Lanka: HDI of 0.78, surpassing many South Asian nations, driven by early investments in health care and education. 
  • 2022 economic crisis revealed financial vulnerabilities, causing inflation, mass protests, and instability. 
  • Ethnic tensions and majoritarian policies have hindered equitable progress.

Way Forward

• Avoiding the Nordic Model: The affluent consumption patterns of Nordic countries are unsustainable on a global scale. India, with 1.4 billion people, cannot afford to replicate these resource-intensive models.
• Sustainable Development: Costa Rica and Sri Lanka, despite their challenges, offer valuable lessons in sustainable development. The key takeaway is Economic growth must align with ecological and social justice.
• Rethinking of Development metrics: HDI and PHDI prioritize economic growth without acknowledging planetary limits. True progress should focus on human well-being within ecological boundaries.
• Beyond GDP: India must redefine progress beyond GDP and rankings. A dignified life for all, within environmental limits, is not just desirable—it is essential for survival.

Conclusion

The future demands a new development paradigm that prioritizes sustainability, equity, and resilience. India has the opportunity to pioneer a model that ensures both prosperity and planetary health—a blueprint for the world to follow.

DOWNLOAD PDF