Page 94 [94]
92 VIKTOR GLIED
from the late 1980s, such as the recognition that economic growth is not a value
but only a tool which — in optimal cases — does not result in disrupting social
values or upsetting the balance between natural and built environments. The
dominance of the principle of economic growth in development policy brings
about forced courses of adaptation, which may give rise to imbalance, and this
negative spiral prevents the system from restoring its balance. The disruption of
the balance and the prevalence of imbalance lead to social and environmental
conflicts. Strategic development planning is not only a technical but also a moral
activity, which aims to explore and eliminate the value differences beneath the
divergence of interests , taking into account the endowments and the geographic,
regional, and local situations. This is made absolutely necessary by the progress of
technological knowledge ahead of the development of the other scientific disciplines.
This leads to development projects being interpreted as growth or technological
advance.” Consequently, the use of development policy’s sustainable elements is a
“compulsion” of adaptation, calling for prevention, converting constraints into
possibilities and helping the venues of action with strategic planning. Consensus
which strives for stability, carries on a social dialogue and seeks channels of progress
has an important role here (Csete-Läng 2009: 87-89). Creating a social discourse
depends on the possibilities and ability of involving people, which in turn are
strongly determined by the traditions and the level of political culture, the models
of participation and the quality of social capital. The new perception of societal
sustainability not only regards the democratic institutions as a kind of framework
within which it has to collaborate with diverse social groups, but also understands
it as a space of communication in which articulating values and constructive action
have an impact on strategic development policy. That is, it does not hinder the
political will, but rather lends it help in its search for paths to the future.
Comprehending the interests of different interest groups, solving the conflicts
between them, and working out compromise solutions are the fundamental
preconditions of socially sustainable decisions. Some decisions might significantly
affect the welfare of the individuals, but the degree of impact may vary among
individuals and social groups. The social backing of a decision depends on the
groups affected by its repercussions (externalities) and the degree to which they
are affected (Bela—Pataki—Valené Kelemen 2003).
The literature on hazards often points out that once a society has accepted a
certain level of risk at some point in the past, it will presumably continue accepting
it. Viktória Szirmai (1992) has found that the population of settlements where a
factory or plant that burdened the environment was established in the past are
likely to accept new environmental pollution or at least protest against it less
adamantly. Take, for example, the extension of the Paks Nuclear Power plant,
which clearly shows that the Hungarians are divided on the project. Half of them
support the use of nuclear energy, the other half reject it, but — as the Median poll
has found — the majority of the surveyed people were against the construction of
the new plant with Russian support. Obviously, the data are prone to manipulation
in how the questions are put and how the answers are interpreted, but it is an
? Iván Gyulai: Vitaindító a fejlesztéspolitika és fenntarthatóság témájához [Keynote speech on the
theme of strategic policy and sustainability]. MTVSZ, Budapest, 2007. https://www.mtvsz.hu/
dynamic/2007_06_21_ff_forum_gyulai.pdf