Public Development Sustainability Values: A Case Study in Sepang Malaysia (Menilai Ciri Kelestarian Nilai Pembangunan Masyarakat di Malaysia: Satu Kajian Kes di Sepang Malaysia)

Zurina Mahadi, Rabiatul Jannah Mohamad, Hukil Sino

Abstract


The concept of sustainable development has been implemented in Malaysia for more than a decade. Nevertheless, the issues of unsustainability still persist, raising questions about whether or not the values held by local populations pertaining to development processes are compatible with sustainable development values. This study was conducted in Sepang, Selangor to explore the values of public in the development process by using qualitative approach. The data was gathered from in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with the participants recruited through purposive sampling.  Fourty participants have participated in this study. The transcript was analysed using thematic analysis to identify the theme values and the values categories. This study has identified four themes and twelve categories of public values in development. The themes were freedom, security, environment and development. The sustainability characteristics of every theme and category were explored by comparing them to existing established sustainable development values. It was evident that every theme and category of values displays sustainability characteristics despite public limited knowledge about sustainable development concepts. These findings therefore concluded that in principle, the unsustainability issues in this area did not result from the incompatibility of public development values with those of sustainable development. The implication of these findings is that the value systems of local people are already in harmony with the concept of sustainable development and could be effectively integrated into the local sustainable development framework.

Keywords: Values; sustainable development; local; engagement; empowerment 


Abstrak

Konsep pembangunan lestari telah diterima dan digunapakai dalam kerangka pembangunan di Malaysia selama lebih sedekad. Walaupun mempraktiskan konsep pembangunan lestari, Malaysia masih menunjukkan ketidaklestarian dalam pelbagai aspek. Ini menimbulkan persoalan tentang keselarian di antara nilai pembangunan masyarakat dan nilai pembangunan lestari.  Kajian ini telah dijalankan di Sepang, Selangor untuk meneroka nilai pembangunan masyarakat tempatan serta menilai ciri kelestarian setiap nilai yang ditemui. Menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif, data kajian diperolehi daripada temubual mendalam dengan peserta kajian yang dipilih menerusi persampelan bertujuan. Transkrip dianalisa secara analisa tema iaitu dengan mengenalpasti kategori-kategori nilai yang membentuk tema-tema nilai. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan terdapat empat tema dan dua belas kategori nilai pembangunan masyarakat. Tema tersebut adalah kebebasan, keselamatan, alam sekitar dan pembangunan. Ciri kelestarian setiap tema dan kategori nilai diperolehi secara perbandingan dengan nilai pembangunan lestari yang telah termaktub. Kajian ini mendapati bahawa setiap tema dan kategori nilai pembangunan masyarakat menonjolkan ciri kelestarian walaupun pengetahuan masyarakat tentang konsep pembangunan lestari amat terhad. Secara prinsipnya kajian ini merumuskan bahawa isu ketidaklestarian yang berlaku bukan berpunca dari ketidakselarian di antara nilai masyarakat dan nilai pembangunan lestari. Penemuan kajian telah memberi implikasi berikut iaitu nilai pembangunan masyarakat tempatan adalah selari dengan nilai pembangunan lestari dan boleh diintegrasikan ke dalam kerangka pembangunan lestari tempatan bagi melahirkan suatu kerangka pembangunan lestari yang bersifat sepunya.

Kata kunci: Nilai; pembangunan lestari; tempatan; keterlibatan; perkongsian tanggungjawab 




Full Text:

PDF

References


Agenda 21. 1992. Agenda 21: Earth Summit. The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio

Appleton, J. 2014. Including participants’ values in the sustainable development process. In Values in Sustainable Development, edited by Jack Appleton, 18-22. New York: Routledge.

Burford, G., Hoover, E., Velasco, I., Janoušková, S., Jimenez, A., Piggot, G., Podger, D., & Harder, M. K. 2013. Bringing the “Missing Pillar” into Sustainable Development Goals: Towards Intersubjective Values-Based Indicators. Sustainability. 5:3035-3059. doi:10.3390/su5073035 Retrieved on: 13 February 2017.

Burningham, K. 2000. Using the language of NIMBY: A topic for research, not an activity for researchers. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability. 5(1): 55-67.

Carr, D. J., Gotlieb, M. R., Lee, N., & Shah, D.V. 2012. Examining overconsumption, competitive consumption, and conscious consumption from 1994 to 2004: disentangling cohort and period effects. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 644(1): 220-233.

Chamhuri Siwar. 2000. Paradigma pembangunan: Meneliti hubungan pertumbuhan ekonomi, pengglobalan, kegawatan ekonomi dan pembasmian kemiskinan. Kertas kerja Seminar Kebangsaan Falsafah dan Peradaban Pembangunan di Alaf Baru, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 11-12 September.

Costanza, R., Kubiszewski, I., Giovanni, E., Lovins, H., McGlade, J., Pickett, K.A., Ragnarsdottir, K.V., Roberts, D., de Vogli, R. & Wilkinson, R. 2014. Time to leave GDP behind. Nature. 505: 283–285.

Earth Charter. 2000. The Earth Charter. http://www.earthcharter.org Retrieved on: 9 September 2007.

Griggs, D., Smith, M. S., Gaffney, O., Rockström, J., Öhman, M. C., Shyamsundar, P., Steffen,W., Glaser, G., Kanie, N. & Noble, I. 2013. Policy: Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature 495: 305-307. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235968344 Retrieved on: 13 February 2017.

Haq, M. 1999. Reflections on Human Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Horlings, L.G. 2015. Values in place: A value-oriented approach toward sustainable place-shaping. Regional Studies, Regional Science 2(1): 257-274. DOI:10.1080/21681376.2015.1014062. Retrieved on: 8 May 2016.

Inglehart, R., Basanez, M., Diez, M. J., Halman, L., & Luijkx, R. 2004. Human Beliefs and Values: A Cross-Cultural Sourcebook based on 1999-2002 Values Survey. Mexico: Siglo XXI

Mahathir Mohamad. 2012. Doktor Umum: Memoir Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Selangor: MPH Group Publishing Sdn Bhd.

Majlis Perbandaran Sepang. 2007. Pelan Korporat Majlis Perbandaran Sepang 2007-2010

Max-Neef, M.A., Elizalde, A. & Hopenhayn, M. 1991. Human Scale Development: Conception, Application and Reflections. New York: The Apex Press.

National Research Council. 1999. Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability. Washington DC: National Academy.

Nik Anuar Nik Mahmud, Muhammad Haji Salleh & Abd Ghapa Harun. 2011. Biografi Tun Abdul Razak: Negarawan dan Patriot. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

O’Brien, E.A. 2005. Publics and woodlands in England: Well-being, local identity, social learning, conflict and management. Forestry 78(4): 321-336.

O’Neill, J. 2001. Representing people, representing nature, representing the world. Environ. Planning C: Government Policy 19: 483-500.

Raskin, P., Banuri, T., Gallopin, G., Gutman, P. & Hammond, A. 2002. Great Transition: The promise and lure of the times ahead. SEI poleStar Ser.Rep. 10 Globe Scenario Group. Boston: Stockholm Environ Inst.

Robinson, J. 2004. Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological Economics 48: 369-384.

Schudson, M. 2007. Citizens, consumers, and the good society. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.611:236–49.

Sen, A. 1999. Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knorf.

Sivamurugan Pandian. 2006. A New Deal for Asia – Apakah Deal itu? Akademika 68(1):29-41.

Sneddon, Chris., Howarth, R. B., & Norgaard, R. B. 2006. Sustainable development in a post-Brundtland world. Ecological Economics 57(2):253-268

Soini, K., & Birkeland, I. 2014. Exploring the scientific discourse on cultural sustainability. Geoforum 51:213-223.

Sung-Joo, H. (ed.). 1999. Changing Values in Asia: Their Impact on Governance and Development. Tokyo: Japan Centre for International Exchange.

UNESCO. 2014. Unesco’s Culture For Development Indicators (CDIS). http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/cultural-diversity/cultural-expressions/programmes/culture-for-development-indicators Retrived on: 8 May 2016.

United Nations. 1986. Declaration on the Right to Development. http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/41/a41r128.htm Retrieved on: 10 October 2013

UNESCO.1972. Stockholm. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0000/000044/004437EB.pdf Retrieved on: 12 May 2013.

United Nations Conference on The Human Environment. 1972. Stockholm Declaration. Stockholm.

United Nations. 2012. Realizing the Future We Want for All; Report to the Secretary-General. http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/Post_2015_UNTTreport.pdf Retrived on: 10 May 2016.

United Nations. 2015. Sustainable Development Goals. http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/ Retrieved on: 18 April 2016.

United Nations. 1982. World Charter for Nature. http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r007.htm Retrieved on: 30 March 2015.

United Nation. 1986. UN Declaration on the Right to Development. Vienna: United Nations

United Nations. 1995. World Summit for Social Development. Copenhagen: United Nations

United Nations. 2000. United Nations Millennium Declaration. New York:UN Department of Public Information. http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm Retrieved on: 22 March 2012.

Weber, M. 1958. The City. Germany: Free Press.

Witt, H. 2011. The rising culture and worldview of contemporary spirituality: a sociological study of potentials and pitfals for sustainable development. Ecological Economics 70(6): 1019-1242.

Witt, H. 2014. Rethinking Sustainable Development: Considering How Different Worldviews Envision “Development” and “Quality of Life”. Sustainability 6(11): 8310-8328. doi:10.3390/su6118310

Yahaya Ibrahim (ed.). 2009. Komuniti Pembangunan dan Transformasi. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Zimmerer, K. & Bassett, T. 2003. Approaching political ecology: society, nature, and scale in human-environment studies. In. Political Ecology: An Integrative Approach to Geography and Environment-Development Studies, edited by Karl S. Zimmerer & Thomas J. Bassett, 1-25. New York: The Guilford Press.

Zurina Mahadi & Hukil Sino. 2013. Defining Public Needs in Sustainable Development : A Case Study of Sepang, Malaysia. PERTANIKA Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities 21(4):1341-1360.

Zurina Mahadi & Hukil Sino. 2012. Appraising Good Governance in Malaysia Based on Sustainable Development Values. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management 247-253.

Zurina Mahadi, Abdul Samad Abdul Hadi & Hukil Sino. 2011. Public Sustainable Development Values: A case study in Sepang, Malaysia. Journal of Sustainable Development 4(2): 154-166.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN: 0126-5008

eISSN: 0126-8694