Influential theories of economics in shaping sustainable development concepts

Sunny, Faruque As; Jeronen, Eila; Lan, Juping Article Influential theories of economics in shaping sustainable development concepts Administrative Sciences Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Sunny, Faruque As; Jeronen, Eila; Lan, Juping (2025) : Influential theories of economics in shaping sustainable development concepts, Administrative Sciences, ISSN 2076-3387, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 15, Iss. 1, pp. 1-33, https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15010006 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/321152 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Received: 10 October 2024 Revised: 20 December 2024 Accepted: 23 December 2024 Published: 25 December 2024 Citation: Sunny, F. A., Jeronen, E., & Lan, J. (2025). Influential Theories of Economics in Shaping Sustainable Development Concepts. Administrative Sciences,15(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/ admsci15010006 Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/). administrative sciences Article Influential Theories of Economics in Shaping Sustainable Development Concepts Faruque As Sunny 1, Eila Jeronen 2,* and Juping Lan 3 1School of Management, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China; [email protected] 2Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Oulu, 90014 Oulu, Finland 3School of Two Mountains, Lishui University, Lishui 323000, China; [email protected] *Correspondence: eila.jer[email protected] Abstract: This study explores the pivotal role of theories of economics in shaping the multifaceted concept of sustainable development and integrates economic, social, and environmental dimensions. It traces the intellectual trajectory of classical, neoclassical, and contemporary economic paradigms, analysing their contributions to sustainability-oriented policies and practices. The study critically analyses key concepts, including equitable income redistribution, resource stewardship, and ecological preservation. It contrasts liberal and dependency theories while also comparing insights from environmental and ecological economics. Employing a rigorous literature review and comparative analytical methodology, the study bridges the theoretical foundations with real-world applications, illustrating the dynamic interplay between theories of economics and sustainability imperatives. The findings elucidate the dichotomy between weak and strong sustainability frameworks, advocating for ethical and interdisciplinary approaches to policymaking. By offering a comprehensive synthesis of the most influential theories of economics and sustainable development practices, this study provides profound insights for policymakers, academics, and practitioners seeking to address pressing global challenges through informed and integrative strategies. Keywords: economics; theories; sustainable development; resource management; environmental economics; weak and strong sustainability; ethics; policy 1. Introduction In the wake of the industrial era, humanity’s trajectory has inadvertently triggered a series of climate upheavals, environmental disasters, social discord, and economic instability. This disconcerting trend jeopardises future generations, necessitating an urgent and occasionally contentious shift towards more judicious and effective management of natural resources (Klarin,2018). Central to this urgency are the Earth’s ecological limits, encapsulated by the planetary boundaries. These boundaries delineate the intricate relationship between the economic, social, and ecological aspects of development, highlighting nature’s finite capacity. Indeed, the sustainability of our planet is fundamental to all life forms, underpinning both economic prosperity and societal resilience (Rockström et al.,2009). Throughout history, the seeds of progress and development can be traced back to the classical Greco-Roman era. However, the concept of sustainable development emerged more tentatively in the 18th century, primarily within forestry management. Planetary boundaries—unalterable limits dictated by natural systems—underscore the critical need to preserve and foster the environment as the bedrock of sustainable living. In the context of development, a transformative shift towards sustainability emerges as an essential priority Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15010006 Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 2 of 33 (UN,2019). This transition demands a holistic approach that encompasses ecological, social, and economic dimensions aimed at mitigating and adapting to the myriad challenges we face (Davidson,2014). This evolving understanding has brought to light the importance of judiciously managing renewable natural resources, thereby setting the stage for future discourse (Klarin,2018). Early economic analyses influenced by the seminal works of thinkers such as Malthus and Ricardo grappled with the spectre of resource scarcity. They suggest that the finite nature of agricultural land could hamper economic growth and societal advancement, overshadowing aspirations for improved living standards. While these initial inquiries touched upon sustainability principles, the term ‘sustainable development’ only crystallised in the late 20th century, when the ‘Brundtland Report’ was published in 1987 (Klarin,2018;Meadows et al.,1972;Smith,2009). This report marked a pivotal moment in global environmental discourse, igniting considerable interest. By the 1990s, the notion of ‘sustainable development’ emerged as a predominant topic of conversation, first in Europe and subsequently on a global scale (Purvis et al.,2019). It emphasised the necessity of collective action towards shared objectives and articulated a foundational definition of sustainable development as the fulfilment of present needs without jeopardising those of future generations (Klarin,2018). The Brundtland Report identifies sustainable development as comprising three integral components. First, development must prioritise socio-economic advancement within ecological boundaries. Second, equitable resource redistribution is essential to ensure a high quality of life for all members of society. Third, the responsible management of resources is crucial to maintaining the living standards required by future generations. This concept aligns with the ‘triple bottom line’ framework, which highlights the “three P’s”, namely profit, people, and planet, as the foundation of sustainable development (Klarin,2018). These categories provide a framework for understanding environmental responsibility and assessing the societal impacts of human activities. Consequently, sustainable development encompasses the natural, social, and human capitals that are essential for income generation and the maintenance of living standards. A critical component of this concept involves a delicate equilibrium between environmental, social, and economic advancements. This notion also integrates ethical considerations and a profound dedication to the welfare of both current and future generations (Kibert et al.,2012). Though the definition of sustainable development remains a topic of ongoing discourse, it can be characterised as a dynamic process aimed at balancing environmental, social, and economic aspects to ensure a better quality of life for current and future generations. It emphasises intergenerational equality, gender equality, social tolerance, poverty alleviation, environmental protection and restoration, conservation of natural resources, and the building of just and peaceful societies (Jeronen,2024). At its heart, the principle of strong sustainability advocates for the preservation and enhancement of natural capital—a prerequisite for enduring prosperity (Martins,2016). The concept of ‘responsible behaviour’ extends beyond a mere ideal, as it forms the bedrock of sustainable development. It embodies a powerful imperative, steering society towards a future in which the prosperity of both humanity and the planet is safeguarded for generations yet to come ( Bengtsson et al.,2018 ; Klarin,2018). Since then, the world has increasingly prioritised sustainable development, culminating in the launch of the 2030 Agenda, which features 17 global goals for sustainable development in 2015 (Pezzey,1992;United Nations,2015). Economics undeniably plays a pivotal role in shaping the sustainable development concept. At the heart of this concept lies the fundamental question of how to allocate finite Earth resources to sustainably meet present and future needs (Klarin,2018). Economics revolves around the concepts of scarcity, choice, and opportunity cost, investigating the Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 3 of 33 essential drivers of development, including the production, consumption, and distribution of goods and services that are vital for enhancing living standards. Economics also examines the interactions between human activities and the underlying factors influencing changes in Earth systems. By integrating economic principles with Earth science, we can achieve a comprehensive understanding of the positive and negative impacts of various alternatives and their trade-offs. Economics, in conjunction with social and behavioural sciences, offers valuable insights into potential strategies for guiding human behaviour towards the attainment of sustainable development goals. Fields such as development, ecological, environmental, and natural resource economics contribute extensive research that is relevant to sustainable development challenges. Thus, grasping economic principles and empirical findings is essential for fulfilling humanity’s aspirations for a prosperous existence while managing scarce resources effectively. In light of these considerations, the intricate interplay between various disciplines within economics, the progression of theories, and their alignment with sustainable development have emerged as significant subjects of scholarly inquiry in contemporary discourse. Sustainable development has emerged as a critical imperative for addressing the intertwined challenges of environmental degradation, social inequities, and economic instability. However, the complex dynamics between economic paradigms and sustainability remain insufficiently explored in academic discourse. This is particularly evident in the limited examination of how historical and contemporary theories of economics shape sustainable development practices and policies. The lack of clarity surrounding the integration of social, environmental, and economic dimensions within these theoretical frameworks impedes the formulation of comprehensive strategies to achieve long-term sustainability. This work aims to fill this gap by investigating the influence of classical, neoclassical, and modern theories on sustainable development, highlighting their practical applications and theoretical contributions. By examining critical concepts such as resource management, equity, and environmental stewardship, this study seeks to unravel the extent to which theories of economics inform and align with the principles of sustainability. Additionally, it critically assesses the divergence between weak and strong sustainability perspectives, exploring their implications for policymaking and the ethical dimensions of economic practices. Through a systematic literature review and comparative analysis, this study contributes to bridging the theoretical and practical disconnect in sustainability discourse. It strives to provide policymakers, scholars, and practitioners with profound insights into the nexus of theory and sustainability, facilitating informed decision-making and the effective implementation of sustainable development strategies. This article holds considerable importance, as it explores the complex interconnections between economics and sustainable development—fields of increasing pertinence in a world contending with urgent global challenges. By examining the evolution of economic theories and their real-world implications, this work elucidates critical insights into how these frameworks influence policymaking and impact sustainability practices across diverse sectors. Unlike many discussions on sustainability, this study integrates social, economic, environmental, ecological, and ethical dimensions. It offers a comprehensive perspective on sustainability and its many challenges. The study also explores how these economic theories connect to real-world applications, highlighting their relevance in addressing contemporary issues. In an era marked by urgent challenges like climate change, resource depletion, and social inequality, this analysis sheds light on the role of economic paradigms in shaping Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 4 of 33 sustainable development strategies. It also aims to engage a diverse audience, including students, policymakers, and practitioners, in meaningful discourse. By enhancing our understanding of the complex relationships between economic growth, environmental stewardship, and social equity, this work provides an essential resource. It fosters informed decision-making and encourages collaborative efforts to achieve sustainable solutions. This study is structured to provide a comprehensive exploration of the intricate interplay between economic theories and sustainable development, encompassing historical evolution, theoretical advancements, and practical implications. The work begins by contextualising the urgency for sustainability, tracing its origins from classical economics to the pivotal Brundtland Report, which formalised sustainable development as a guiding global principle. Following this foundation, the article delves into the evolution of economic thought, examining classical, neoclassical, and modern paradigms, alongside their integration—or lack thereof—of ecological and social considerations. Ultimately, the study seeks to address a pivotal question: how have concepts of environmental, ecological and social sustainability been incorporated into classical, neoclassical, and modern economic paradigms to shape the concept of sustainable development? The methodology section articulates a systematic approach that employs PRISMA guidelines to synthesise multidisciplinary perspectives, ensuring robust analytical depth. The subsequent analysis is divided into three segments: the historical development of economic theories, their incorporation of sustainability principles, and their real-world applications in diverse sectors. By juxtaposing economic paradigms with sustainability imperatives, the study illuminates the divergence between weak and strong sustainability frameworks, providing critical insights into policymaking and ethical governance. The study concludes with actionable recommendations, advocating for holistic strategies that harmonise economic growth, social equity, and environmental stewardship to achieve sustainable development. 2. Material and Methods This article does not purport to offer a bibliometric review. Instead, it seeks to identify and conduct a qualitative analysis of the seminal works that significantly contribute to the discussion surrounding the topic. The decision to analyse essential works on the interplay between economic theories and sustainable development, rather than undertaking a bibliometric review, better suits the focus of this research. This approach is more appropriate given the nuanced and interdisciplinary nature of the topic. A bibliometric review, while valuable for mapping the scope and trends within a field, often prioritises quantitative metrics over the qualitative depth required to dissect complex theoretical intersections. In contrast, analysing seminal works allows the research to explore foundational concepts in depth. It examines the intellectual trajectories and philosophical underpinnings that have shaped sustainability discourse. This approach also enables critical engagement with key economic paradigms—classical, neoclassical, and modern. It integrates their implications for resource management, equity, and environmental stewardship. Furthermore, the study emphasises qualitative synthesis, which allows for addressing interdisciplinary themes beyond traditional economic boundaries. It incorporates ecological, social, and ethical dimensions. By focusing on key contributions, the research ensures a thorough examination of how economic theories influence sustainability practices. This approach provides insights that are both profound and directly applicable to policymaking and real-world challenges. The method aligns with the research’s goal of fostering a holistic understanding of sustainable development, prioritising analytical depth over bibliometric breadth. An overview of the study framework is presented in Figure 1. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 5 of 33 Adm. Sci. 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 34 a holistic understanding of sustainable development, prioritising analytical depth over bibliometric breadth. An overview of the study framework is presented in Figure 1. This research used a systematic search of academic databases, such as Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct. The search aimed to locate peer-reviewed articles, books, conference proceedings, documents, and reports relevant to the study’s focus, as shown in Table 1. The study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to mitigate potential bias and evaluate the relevance of the study contents (Page et al., 2021). The PRISMA methodology offers a versatile framework for synthesising diverse types of evidence that address various queries and has been utilised in numerous studies. This approach benefits general readers by distilling key insights on the topic, enabling researchers to identify future investigation priorities and assisting policymakers in assessing the applicability of findings to their contexts (Page et al., 2021). For each scientific database, a hierarchical search strategy was implemented, commencing with basic Boolean combinations and advancing to more intricate formulations. Furthermore, online resources were accessed to obtain the most recent information. Figure 1. An overview of the study framework. All searches were conducted in English between August and October 2024 without a temporal restriction, aiming to encompass all pertinent resources. An initial search across the designated databases yielded a substantial corpus of 41,481,596 results. Table 1. Topics searched across different Databases. Search Topic Google Scholar Web of Science Scopus Science Direct Economics theory and sustainable development concept 4 , 040 , 000 2486 550 71 , 282 Most influential definition of economics 3,810,000 141 52 31,753 Figure 1. An overview of the study framework. This research used a systematic search of academic databases, such as Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct. The search aimed to locate peer-reviewed articles, books, conference proceedings, documents, and reports relevant to the study’s focus, as shown in Table 1. The study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to mitigate potential bias and evaluate the relevance of the study contents (Page et al.,2021). The PRISMA methodology offers a versatile framework for synthesising diverse types of evidence that address various queries and has been utilised in numerous studies. This approach benefits general readers by distilling key insights on the topic, enabling researchers to identify future investigation priorities and assisting policymakers in assessing the applicability of findings to their contexts (Page et al.,2021). For each scientific database, a hierarchical search strategy was implemented, commencing with basic Boolean combinations and advancing to more intricate formulations. Furthermore, online resources were accessed to obtain the most recent information. Table 1. Topics searched across different Databases. Search Topic Google Scholar Web of Science Scopus Science Direct Economics theory and sustainable development concept 4,040,000 2486 550 71,282 Most influential definition of economics 3,810,000 141 52 31,753 Brundtland report and sustainable development 102,000 440 440 5678 Economic sustainability 4,580,000 156,269 107,299 742,212 Social sustainability 4,900,000 181,109 99,555 639,717 Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 6 of 33 Table 1. Cont. Search Topic Google Scholar Web of Science Scopus Science Direct Environmental sustainability 4,440,000 283,865 169,240 1,000,000 Ethics and sustainability 3,110,000 9224 6067 188,259 Classical economics and sustainability 555,000 597 173 27,675 Neo-classical economics and sustainability 47,400 60 38 3726 Ecological economics and sustainability 2,440,000 22,914 4091 64,949 Environmental economics and sustainability 3,900,000 82,083 16,226 162,412 Keynesian Economics and sustainable development 75,000 59 39 3198 Theories of economics integrating social and environmental aspects 1,230,000 772 16 41,819 Modern economic theory and sustainable development 4,050,000 1421 532 73,758 Total 37,279,400 741,440 404,318 3,056,438 All searches were conducted in English between August and October 2024 without a temporal restriction, aiming to encompass all pertinent resources. An initial search across the designated databases yielded a substantial corpus of 41,481,596 results. From this extensive database, a total of 3246 studies were meticulously selected for an initial relevance assessment (refer to Figure 2) following the exclusion of 41,478,350 studies. The selection process followed precise criteria. It focused on the intersection of theoretical frameworks and sustainable development. It also emphasised the integration of multidisciplinary perspectives, including economics, ecology, and social sciences. Additionally, it prioritised the rigorous application of qualitative research methodologies. These criteria formed the foundation for the subsequent screening phase, ensuring alignment with the overarching research objectives. During the screening process, 2113 studies were excluded. This included 530 duplicates, identified as identical items appearing across all search protocols, and 1583 studies were deemed irrelevant due to limited pertinence, unclear theoretical frameworks, or a lack of interdisciplinary coherence. In addition, from the remaining 1133 studies, we excluded an additional 965 studies that failed to align with the study’s objectives. The exclusion criteria focused on studies with insufficient theoretical depth, lacking reflexivity, offering minimal potential for advancing knowledge, and demonstrating limited theoretical novelty. As a result, 168 contributions were selected, comprising 103 journal articles, 47 book references, and 18 web-based resources (see reference number 15–182). These works were chosen for their significant insights grounded in complexity theory, addressing the interconnected realms of social, economic, ethical, environmental, and ecological dimensions that are relevant to the study’s focus. This meticulous exclusion process reflects the study’s commitment to rigorous scholarly standards, emphasising theoretical depth, interconnectivity, and innovation over the mere quantitative inclusion of research material. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 7 of 33 Adm. Sci. 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 34 Figure 2. An overview of the literature collection process using the PRISMA protocol. 3. Results and Discussion Section 3 presents a comprehensive analysis of the key findings derived from economic theories, highlighting their practical applications through a range of examples. The discussion is structured into three distinct segments: Section 3.1 examines the historical and theoretical evolution of economic thought, excluding direct references to sustainability, while Section 3.2 integrates sustainability into the economic narrative. Finally, Section 3.3 offers a critical evaluation of the global assimilation of these theoretical frameworks, underscoring their role in shaping policies designed to promote sustainable development. Figure 2. An overview of the literature collection process using the PRISMA protocol. 3. Results and Discussion Section 3presents a comprehensive analysis of the key findings derived from economic theories, highlighting their practical applications through a range of examples. The discussion is structured into three distinct segments: Section 3.1 examines the historical and theoretical evolution of economic thought, excluding direct references to sustainability, while Section 3.2 integrates sustainability into the economic narrative. Finally, Section 3.3 offers a critical evaluation of the global assimilation of these theoretical frameworks, underscoring their role in shaping policies designed to promote sustainable development. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 8 of 33 The first Section 3.1 provides a foundational analysis of economic theories that have shaped modern paradigms. It explores the seminal contributions of economists such as Adam Smith, Alfred Marshall, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, and John Stuart Mill, focusing on concepts like resource allocation, market efficiency, ethics in economics, and the balance between individual and collective welfare. This section situates these ideas within their historical context, enabling readers to understand the intellectual foundations of contemporary economic practices, even as early theories largely overlooked the ecological and social dimensions of sustainability. This examination is pivotal, as it highlights the limitations of early economic models, emphasising the need for a transformative shift in response to the current global challenges, such as environmental degradation and social inequality. This realisation underscores the importance of incorporating ethical principles and a commitment to sustainability in economic thinking, thereby setting the stage for the subsequent sections. In contrast, Section 3.2 explicitly integrates sustainability into the economic discourse, reflecting the growing recognition that traditional economic models are insufficient to achieve sustainable development. This segment introduces contemporary economic theories that encompass social and environmental considerations, advocating for a fundamental shift towards frameworks that prioritise ecological resilience, social equity, and ethical governance. The section explores innovative approaches to sustainability in economic policy, with practical examples demonstrating the dynamic relationship between economic systems and environmental stewardship. Finally, Section 3.3 examines how economic theories are applied to real-world sustainable development challenges, highlighting their relevance and impact. By exploring practical examples, this section demonstrates how these frameworks inform policy-making and shape sustainability practices across various sectors. It investigates the connections between economic growth, environmental stewardship, and social equity, illustrating how these theories address critical issues such as climate change, resource management, and social inequality. This analysis underscores the essential role economic theories play in guiding effective strategies for sustainable development. In its entirety, Section 3will provide an in-depth exploration of the historical development of economic thought, alongside emerging paradigms that integrate economics with sustainability. It will illustrate how these theoretical advancements translate into real-world strategies that aim to create a more just and sustainable future. By focusing on both the evolution of economic theories and the integration of sustainability, this section offers readers a nuanced understanding of the importance of embedding sustainability within economic discourse. This perspective lays the foundation for a further examination of how these interconnected themes influence local and global responses to the pressing environmental and societal challenges of the present day. 3.1. Historical and Theoretical Advancements in Economic Thought Without Directly Addressing Sustainability The historical and theoretical evolution of economic thought encapsulates the progressive refinement of economic principles and their implications for society. From seminal definitions that have moulded the discipline to the contrasting perspectives of Classical, Keynesian, and Neoclassical frameworks, each intellectual epoch has offered unique contributions. Moreover, the intersection of ethical considerations with economic advancement underscores the multifaceted influences shaping development and prosperity. 3.1.1. Influential Definition of Economics The definition of economics is inherently multifaceted, with various interpretations reflecting the complex relationship between the economy, society, and individuals. Prominent Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 15 of 33 lights challenges in the rural sector, such as overpopulation and excessive unproductive labour, which constrain agricultural productivity. In contrast, the urban sector offers higher productivity, stable wages, and ample employment opportunities, facilitating industrialisation through labour migration. This migration not only propels industrial expansion but also fosters sustainable economic development (Lewis,1954). However, while this model effectively addresses labour transition dynamics in developing economies, it must also grapple with sustainability challenges stemming from rural-to-urban migration. To conclude, classical economists adhere to a largely laissez-faire approach, emphasising the importance of free markets and self-regulation. They advocate for a competitive environment driven by minimal government interference. In contrast, Keynesian economists endorse active government intervention, such as the provision of public goods, the implementation of regulations, and adjustments to the tax system, in order to manage economic fluctuations and stabilise demand. Meanwhile, neoclassical economists focus on rational behaviour, utility maximisation, and the role of prices in coordinating supply and demand within markets. While Keynesian and Neoclassical economists have made significant contributions, their models have been critiqued for their oversimplification of complex economic realities. Classical economics, for example, is often criticised for assuming perfect competition and neglecting market failures, such as monopolies and externalities. Keynesian economics, while advocating for active government intervention, has faced criticism for its potential to create inflation and increase public debt if fiscal policies are mismanaged. Neoclassical economics has been criticised for relying heavily on mathematical models and assumptions of rationality, which overlook the complexities of human behaviour and market imperfections. Despite these critiques, the contributions of Keynesian, Neoclassical, and Classical economists have been instrumental in shaping contemporary economic thought. The integration of these theories has provided valuable insights into market dynamics, resource allocation, and government intervention, helping to refine the economic models and policies that address a range of issues, from macroeconomic stabilisation to micro-level decision-making. These schools of thought continue to offer important frameworks for analysing economic challenges, particularly in the context of globalisation, inequality, and environmental sustainability. 3.1.4. The Role of Ethics in Economic Development and Growth The late 1950s to 1970s marked a pivotal period in economic thought, particularly regarding the challenges of global economic disparity. Economists began to express concerns over the growing dissonance between the economic advancement of industrialised nations and the persistent underdevelopment of poorer countries. These concerns led to the rise of the dependency model, first articulated by Argentine economist Raúl Prebisch, which scrutinised the inequalities inherent in the global economic system (Prebisch,1981). Departing from traditional economic paradigms, the dependency model more deeply examined economic inequalities through a Marxist lens, introducing the notion of semi-colonial relationships from the late 19th century and attributing the underdevelopment of peripheral nations to the advancement of central ones (Ferraro,2008). The neo-colonial dependency model posits that stimulating economic development requires interdependent international trade relations (Todaro & Smith,2012). It delineates two categories of nations: developed (or capitalist) countries at the centre and developing (or peripheral) nations. In this framework, developed nations, which control production and capital, export goods to developing countries, thereby perpetuating unequal consumption patterns. This trade relationship keeps peripheral nations dependent upon the production structures of developed nations, resulting in constrained growth prospects. The exploita- Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 16 of 33 tion of cheaper labour in developing nations further entrenches this disparity, leading to low wages and suppressed capital accumulation, which ultimately inhibits the growth and development of these economies (Marx,1887a,1893,1894;Todaro & Smith,2012). In contrast, liberal economic theories, initially championed by thinkers like Voltaire, John Locke, Adam Smith, and Immanuel Kant, offer a divergent perspective on economic growth and development. These theories advocate for minimal governmental intervention, arguing that free markets, economic freedom, privatisation, and foreign investment are the key drivers of economic performance. According to these theories, the free market’s self-regulating nature allows for the most efficient allocation of resources, thus encouraging growth and development. However, they also recognise the challenges posed by selfinterest and the potential problems associated with state intervention. Proponents argue that the government should refrain from imposing excessive restrictions on the market, leaving economic forces to operate unhindered to maximise prosperity (Hayek,1948; Thorsen & Lie,2006) A central ethical concern within both Keynesian and Neoclassical economics is the distribution of income. Economic growth reshapes societal structures, influencing labour dynamics, factor compensation, and the relative size of the public sector (Bourguihnon,2005) . The works of John Stuart Mill and John Maynard Keynes highlight the necessity of addressing income distribution through various social institutions, underscoring the ethical dimensions of economic policies. This interplay between redistribution, ethics, and welfare considerations significantly shapes a nation’s economic trajectory. Amartya Sen’s work further integrates ethics with economics, positioning the relationship between ethical principles and economic concerns as central to understanding development. Sen’s capability approach emphasises that true economic development cannot be measured solely by material wealth but must also account for individuals’ capabilities and freedoms to live fulfilling lives. Sen advocates for policies that enhance individuals’ ability to make meaningful choices, underscoring that economic growth must be inclusive, expanding access to opportunities, public goods, and social security (Sen,1979,1987,1990,1992,1999). Aristotle, in ‘The Nicomachean Ethics,’ provides a philosophical foundation for understanding the ethical dimensions of economics (Aristotle,1908). Aristotle argued that economics is a subset of ethics and politics, rooted in the pursuit of human welfare. Aristotle critiques the notion that wealth alone defines well-being, proposing instead that it serves as a means to enhance overall flourishing. Central to virtue ethics is the belief that ethical conduct, anchored in virtues such as justice, courage, and temperance, is essential for a fulfilling life, characterised by a balance of rational, emotional, and social faculties (Richard,2001). Aristotle outlines a hierarchy of goods that contribute to a good life, encompassing bodily goods, external possessions, and soul goods, such as knowledge, love, friendship, and self-esteem. Aristotle underscores the importance of ethical virtues in cultivating mutual trust, a fundamental pillar for trade and the efficient functioning of markets, as articulated by Adam Smith (Aristotle,1908;Messerly,2013). Smith elaborates on how ethical considerations foster trust and facilitate the division of labour, enhancing productivity and contributing to sustainable economic growth (Bruni & Sugden,2000). Jean-Baptiste Say further accentuates the symbiotic relationship between morality and economic prosperity, asserting that successful entrepreneurship depends on moral attributes such as judgement, perseverance, and worldly knowledge. Say claims that a nation’s economic vitality is intrinsically linked to its moral fabric, reinforcing the connection between ethical behaviour and economic advancement (Say & Swanson,2001). Similarly, John Stuart Mill articulates a nuanced perspective on the common good, resonating with Aristotle’s emphasis on individual welfare and distributive justice. Mill Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 17 of 33 cautions against unchecked economic growth, advocating for a stable-state economy to mitigate resource depletion and promote equitable income distribution through innovative social institutions (Mill,1848a). Mill’s utilitarian philosophy, grounded in the maximisation of overall happiness and well-being, stresses the ethical duty of actions that benefit the majority, regardless of intentions (Driver,2014;Mill,1863). In contrast, Immanuel Kant vehemently opposed the utilitarian perspective of evaluating actions solely based on outcomes, arguing that morally valuable actions arise from a sense of duty, free from personal desires or ulterior motives tied to happiness. Adherence to the ‘Categorical Imperative’ was urged, dictating that one should act only on principles that can be willed universally as laws (Kant,2002). Kant’s ethical framework underscores the significance of duty-driven actions in preserving the moral integrity of economic systems, ensuring that individual actions contribute to broader societal well-being (Robert & Adam,2004). John Rawls’ theory of justice provides another important ethical lens, focusing on fairness and equality in societal arrangements. Rawls’ concept of “justice as fairness” challenges conventional economic theories by prioritising the rights of the least advantaged in society. Rawls’ theory argues for policies that ensure equal access to basic liberties and resources, promoting equity and cooperation within a democratic system. Rawls’ principles of liberty and the difference principle advocate for an economic framework that allows for wealth generation while ensuring that inequalities benefit the least well-off in society (Rawls,1995,1999). Furthermore, the work of economists like Simon Kuznets, Wolfgang Stolper, and Paul Samuelson explores the complex relationship between economic growth and inequality. Simon Kuznets identified a pattern where economic growth initially correlates with income inequality. However, a threshold exists beyond which further increases in income inequality can hinder growth. Although per capita income rises, income inequality tends to widen. Yet, as economic development progresses, inequality begins to decline. Kuznets’ findings suggest that industrialisation and the establishment of a welfare state are pivotal in the reduction of inequality and promoting economic growth (Kuznets,1955). Wolfgang Stolper and Paul Samuelson’s theorem on international trade elucidates its impact on inequality between countries, particularly concerning factors of production such as capital and labour. They assert that trade liberalisation can diminish inequality in developing nations but exacerbate inequality within developed nations. This theorem highlights the complexities of globalisation and marketisation, underscoring the necessity for policies that address both domestic and international disparities (Oyevaar et al.,2016). In summary, the ethical dimensions of economic theory are integral to understanding how growth can be achieved in a manner that is just, sustainable, and inclusive. The integration of ethical considerations into economic policies ensures that growth benefits all members of society, fostering a more equitable and prosperous future. 3.2. Economics Theories Integrating Social and Environmental Aspects Within Sustainability Frameworks The concept of sustainable development, as defined by Brundtland’s report, highlights humanity’s ethical obligations to both the living and future generations. It accentuates the moral aspects of wealth accumulation, resource redistribution, and the reduction of inequality as essential for sustainability (Keitsch,2018). Indeed, sustainability without an ethical framework resembles an empty vessel (Van,2013). In economics, particularly, the integration of normative principles, such as social justice, human solidarity, compassion for the impoverished, and respect for ecological limits, is vital for understanding and achieving sustainable development. By analysing and incorporating societal values into economic Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 18 of 33 models, the potential for attaining sustainability is significantly enhanced (Langhelle,1999; O’Hara,1998;Van,2013). Prominent post-Victorian economists, such as Smith, Malthus, Ricardo, Say, Mill, and Marshall, displayed scant concern for resource depletion or environmental issues, primarily focusing on conservation and mineral resource management, thus marginalising resource economics within economic thought. However, following World War II, the fields of resource and environmental economics gained momentum within the neoclassical paradigm, driven by apprehensions surrounding resource demand and depletion. Influential publications, such as the Paley Report published in 1952 and Man’s Role in Changing the Face of the Earth published in 1955, underscored the increasing demand for resources and the intensifying environmental degradation. These landmark works signified the initial integration of environmental economics into the wider narrative of mainstream economic thought (Baggethun et al.,2009;Beder,2011;Pearce,2002;Ropke,2004;Spash,1999). By the late 20th century, environmental economics had firmly aligned with neoclassical principles, with concepts such as market failure and externalities becoming prominent. Negative externalities, including pollution, prompted state interventions like taxes and subsidies to mitigate environmental detriment. However, challenges in quantifying environmental benefits and defining property rights complicate the allocation of resources. Contemporary environmental economists now concentrate on rectifying market failures through public goods provision, market regulation, and information dissemination, advocating for the pricing of environmental goods and services to reflect their scarcity, thereby mitigating overuse and environmental harm (Beder,2011;Ojanen et al.,2017;Pigou,1920; Spash,1999). Despite its advancement, environmental economics has been critiqued for its reliance on neoclassical tenets, often overlooking the intrinsic value of nature and the ‘rights of nature’. Critics argue that the field oversimplifies environmental issues, attributing them predominantly to economic interactions while neglecting the broader ecological context (Daly,1993;van den Bergh,2001). Furthermore, the emphasis on market-driven efficiency within environmental economics necessitates a broader approach, addressing the equity issues and biophysical limitations that are essential for systematic societal advancement. Critics propose incorporating environmental and social costs into economic assessments through monetary and biophysical accounts alongside other non-monetary valuation methods (Baggethun et al.,2009;Daly,1992,1993;Venkatachalam,2006). In mid-20th century discourse, welfare economics, grounded in cost–benefit analysis, emerged as a structured approach to policy regulation and resource allocation (Pearce, 1998). Research by economists such as Hicks, Kaldor, and Robbins facilitated the practical application of welfare economics, particularly in infrastructure projects and policy regulations. While the cost–benefit analysis provided a pragmatic framework, its application often faced challenges related to equity, ethical considerations, and the valuation of intangible benefits (Gowdy,2004;Hicks,1939,1943;Kaldor,1939;Pearce,1998). By the late 1980s, ecological economics emerged as a distinct discipline, catalysed by theoretical rifts within environmental and resource economics (Baggethun et al.,2009; Beder,2011; Spash,1999). The formation of the International Society for Ecological Economics (ISEE) in 1987 epitomised this paradigm shift towards integrating economics, ecology, and sustainability. Ecological economics offers fresh perspectives on environmental policy and resource management, promoting a pluralistic methodology for studying macroeconomic dynamics, ecological footprints, long-term sustainability, and the intricate relationship between environmental factors and economic systems (Costanza,1989; Daly,2007;Ropke,2005;Venkatachalam,2006). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 19 of 33 Ecological economics contrasts with environmental economics, although both fields investigate the intricate relationships between human activity, the economy, and the environment to foster sustainable development. Ecological economics questions several neoclassical assumptions, such as those regarding consumer behaviour, perfect information, the theory of marginal productivity in distribution, and the application of cost–benefit analysis (Baggethun et al.,2009;Daly,1992). Proponents contend that traditional neoclassical perspectives portray the economy as an isolated entity, neglecting crucial elements such as energy flows that sustain vital biogeochemical cycles. They argue that, while environmental economics primarily seeks to optimise resource allocation and efficiency, it often overlooks considerations regarding the optimal physical scale of the economy and equitable distribution (Costanza & Neill,1984;Daly,2007;Hammond & Winnett,2009). Ecological economists also emphasise the need for philosophical and ethical dimensions in economic discourse, advocating for intraand intergenerational equity, moral responsibilities toward non-human entities, communal values, and the socio-cultural context (Beder,2011;Daly,1992;Spash,1999). They contest the idea that technology alone can alleviate environmental degradation, asserting that material expansion has reached critical limits and that affluent nations disproportionately exploit natural resources, exacerbating environmental burdens and inequalities (Beder,2011). Ultimately, ecological economists champion an economic framework that prioritises efficient allocation, equitable distribution, and sustainable scale, recognising the interconnectedness of these principles with social, political, and ethical concerns. They advocate for a communal approach to sharing values and responsibilities, shifting the focus from mere resource preservation to fostering a just and sustainable society, thereby enriching economic analysis with social, political, and ethical considerations that were previously relegated to policymakers or market mechanisms (Costanza,1989;Daly,2007;Spash,1993). Moreover, the disparity between weak and strong sustainability highlights a significant contention between these paradigms. Environmental economics generally supports weak sustainability, while ecological economics advocates strong sustainability. Weak sustainability posits that maintaining or substituting one form of capital for another over time can facilitate intergenerational equity and sustainable development. This perspective, rooted in neoclassical growth theory, relies heavily on the works of economists such as Robert Solow and John Hartwick (Hartwick,1977,1978;Solow,1974,1993). It categorises capital into financial, human, and natural forms, encompassing the resources, environments, and biodiversity that are essential for ecosystem services. Within this framework, the total stock of human-made and natural capital is anticipated to remain stable over time. Sustainability, in this context, is characterised by a non-decreasing total capital stock, which assumes that human-made capital can adequately substitute for natural capital. This perspective, however, overlooks the inherent limitations of capital substitution and fails to assign any unique significance to the preservation of natural capital (Figge,2005; Gutes,1996) . However, critics highlight that reliance on capital substitution in weak sustainability can yield both positive and negative outcomes. While it may enhance quality of life, such as through coal use for electricity production, it can also precipitate ecological devastation, as exemplified by Nauru’s phosphate mining. Despite initial economic benefits, the ensuing environmental degradation and economic instability underscore the limitations of weak sustainability (Pollock,2014). In contrast, strong sustainability prioritises the preservation of existing natural capital and its irreplaceable ecological services. Rejecting the notion of substitutability between natural and human-made capital, it identifies certain ‘critical natural capitals’—functions that are vital and cannot be replaced. For instance, the ozone layer’s role in sustaining ecosystems is indispensable. Strong sustainability places ecological integrity above economic Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 20 of 33 gains, advocating for nature’s inherent right to exist and underscoring the need to preserve resources in their original state for future generations (Daly,1990; Harris & Codur,2004 ). Additionally, it incorporates biophysical constraints into its valuation framework, recognising the intrinsic link between biophysical and socioeconomic reproduction, a stark contrast to weak sustainability’s subjective utility-based perspective, which disregards biophysical limitations (Boos,2015;Ropke,2005;Venkatachalam,2006). The distinction between weak and strong sustainability illustrates differing strategies for addressing environmental challenges. While weak sustainability emphasises capital substitution and subjective utility, strong sustainability foregrounds ecological integrity and acknowledges the irreplaceable nature of certain natural resources. The preference for either paradigm significantly shapes economic theory, environmental policy, and resource management strategies, ultimately influencing society’s collective capacity to achieve sustainable development (Martins,2016). In summary, the theories outlined above in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 exhibits a complex interplay of similarities and distinctions regarding economic perspectives and sustainability, particularly drawn from the works of seminal economists. Most fundamentally, classical economists like Adam Smith, Alfred Marshall, and David Ricardo frame their arguments around the production and allocation of resources, emphasising the individual choices, market dynamics, and moral dimensions within economic transactions. They propose that values such as trust, empathy, and fairness significantly influence market operations, indicating a shared recognition of ethical considerations in economic behaviour. In contrast, Paul Samuelson expands on earlier definitions by prioritising broader societal dynamics in managing scarce resources, aligning closely with sustainable practices. The focus reflects an evolution in economic thought that transcends individualism, advocating for a balance between current prosperity and future sustainability. This broader perspective represents a significant extension of earlier arguments by integrating the ethical frameworks and concepts of social justice into economic discourse, pointing towards a more collective approach to resource management. Further extending this dialogue, Keynesian economics adds another layer by emphasising aggregate demand and the distribution of income, which shapes economic outcomes and welfare. In contrast to more traditional perspectives that prioritise supply factors, Keynesian thought underlines the role of government intervention in stabilising economies, particularly during downturns—marks of a more progressive economic philosophy. Critics of neoclassical and environmental economics present opposing viewpoints regarding sustainable instruments. These critics argue that such frameworks often overlook fundamental ecological principles and systemic inequalities, prioritising market-driven efficiency over intrinsic natural values. Proponents of ecological economics challenge the assumptions of neoclassical models, which they claim isolate the economy from ecological realities and fail to recognise the limits of resource substitution. They argue for strong sustainability, which emphasises the preservation of natural capital and rejects the idea that economic growth can fully replace ecological systems. Dependency theorists add another layer of critique by highlighting the structural inequalities in global economic systems, contrasting sharply with liberal economic theories that promote free markets and minimal state intervention. They argue that wealth generation in developed nations often perpetuates underdevelopment in peripheral countries, thus highlighting structural inequalities in global trade. This illustrates a fundamental contention surrounding the economic and ethical implications of policy decisions, placing social justice at the forefront of economic discourse. Economic theories have progressively evolved to incorporate social and environmental considerations into sustainability frameworks. While early economic models primarily Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 21 of 33 focused on production and efficiency, contemporary approaches increasingly recognise the interconnectedness of ecological systems, social equity, and economic growth. The integration of ethical principles into economic analysis enriches the discourse, fostering strategies that prioritise long-term sustainability and societal well-being. As sustainability challenges grow more pressing, these interdisciplinary approaches offer valuable insights for addressing the complexities of a rapidly changing world. 3.3. Connecting Theories to Real-World Applications Classical economics, with its focus on market efficiency and limited government intervention, has profoundly influenced global trade policies. For instance, the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) principles of free trade reflect Adam Smith and David Ricardo’s advocacy for minimising trade restrictions (Howse,2002). Smith’s concept of the ‘invisible hand’ finds expression in Denmark’s policies promoting green technologies and renewable energy. Businesses innovate in response to consumer demand for sustainable solutions, driving advancements in wind power, organic farming, and energy efficiency ( K. Ali et al.,2023 ;James,2005). Similarly, in Kenya, mobile money services like M-Pesa empower small-scale entrepreneurs by enhancing financial access, resonating with Smith’s principles of economic empowerment and societal welfare (Desrochers,2009;James,2005; Kikulwe et al.,2014). Ricardo’s theory, prevalent in global trade policies, advocates for economic efficiency and comparative advantage. Canada, a developed country, leverages its extensive natural resources and technological capabilities to produce, utilise, and export sustainable products through advanced methods, thereby enhancing efficiency while maintaining an ecological balance (Miller,2019). Likewise, Ethiopia’s focus is on high-quality organic coffee production and from that, apart from domestic consumption, they also export. This exemplifies Ricardo’s ideas of the nation that specialises in sustainably grown coffee facilitating economic benefits alongside environmentally friendly farming practices (World Bank,2021). Say’s law, which posits that supply creates its own demand, finds a modern expression in the realm of sustainable development, particularly in the renewable energy sector. As technological innovation drives the increased availability of sustainable energy sources, such as solar panels and wind turbines, there is a corresponding consumer shift toward adopting these cleaner alternatives. This principle underscores the synergy between supplyside advancements and evolving market demands. Germany exemplifies this dynamic by integrating policies that bolster sustainable development. Its focus on vocational training and entrepreneurial skill-building enables individuals to innovate green technologies, such as renewable energy and waste management. These initiatives not only stimulate job creation but also advance practices like recycling and energy-efficient solutions. The policy reflects how government investments in renewable energy infrastructure and clean technologies catalyse both market demand and environmental benefits ( Lehr et al.,2012; OECD & European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training,2014 ;Lambini et al., 2021). In addition, in India, a growing number of start-ups embody Say’s law by addressing sustainability challenges through innovative market solutions. Companies focusing on waste-to-energy technologies and low-cost solar panels illustrate how entrepreneurial efforts can create demand for sustainable products. For instance, the development of affordable solar energy systems increases access to clean power, particularly in rural areas, fostering a self-sustaining market for renewable energy (Kolte et al.,2023;Harichandan et al.,2023;Gorowara et al.,2024). These examples show that, when governments and entrepreneurs prioritise investments in sustainable technologies, they can generate a virtuous cycle of supply-driven demand. Policies such as incentives for electric vehicles or tax Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 22 of 33 breaks for green start-ups further amplify these effects by reducing barriers to market entry, thus aligning economic activities with sustainable development objectives (Lakhanpal et al.,2023;Altenburg,2024). This interplay between supply-side innovation and market adaptation illustrates how Say’s law can serve as a framework for advancing global sustainability goals. Karl Marx’s critique of capitalism highlights issues of resource and labour exploitation. This perspective resonates with sustainable development movements advocating for fair trade and labour rights to tackle inequities within the global supply chain. Fair trade certification initiatives aspire to ensure that producers in developing nations are compensated equitably, thereby bolstering social equity while promoting environmental sustainability (Huybrechts et al.,2023)—a reflection of Marxist analysis. Sweden’s approach to public welfare and environmental sustainability embodies Marx’s critiques of capitalist inequality, as it fosters social welfare policies alongside strong environmental regulations to equitably distribute resources, ensuring that economic growth benefits all societal layers (Khan et al.,2023). Furthermore, Bolivia’s advocacy for water rights and land reforms reflects Marxist principles regarding resource control, with indigenous communities resisting capitalist exploitation and championing sustainable management of their natural resources (Shenkin,2024). Thomas Malthus emphasises the tension between population growth and resource availability. This notion is pertinent to contemporary discussions surrounding overpopulation and resource depletion. For instance, initiatives aimed at sustainable urban planning and agriculture strive to balance population growth with ecological constraints, ensuring the sustainable utilisation of resources like water and arable land without compromising future generations’ needs. Japan, despite facing challenges from an ageing population and declining birth rates, integrates Malthusian principles into its policies. The nation emphasises sustainable agriculture, resource-efficient urban development, and advanced resource management strategies, demonstrating a proactive approach to addressing both demographic and ecological challenges (Hui et al.,2023;Li et al.,2023). Meanwhile, in Nigeria, Malthusian anxieties surrounding population growth and resource depletion spur grassroots movements advocating for family planning and sustainable agricultural practices, with educational initiatives designed to mitigate potential crises (Evans,2023). John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism philosophy posits that actions should strive to maximise happiness for the greatest number. This principle informs policymaking in sustainable development, steering policies that harmonise economic growth with environmental protection and social equity. For instance, urban green spaces are often championed through this lens, as they yield environmental benefits, bolster residents’ mental well-being, and enhance community cohesion—an embodiment of the utilitarian pursuit of collective happiness. New Zealand’s commitment to sustainability exemplifies Mill’s utilitarian ethics, as it engenders policies intended to benefit the greatest number, as illustrated by its progressive environmental legislation and focus on social equity (Whiteside,2022). John Maynard Keynes’ advocacy for government intervention during economic downturns finds application in sustainable development initiatives. Government investments in green infrastructure projects, such as renewable energy and public transportation, can stimulate economic activity. For example, the United States initiated numerous projects during the Great Depression that provided employment and also enhanced long-term sustainability via investments in green energy projects and infrastructure improvements (Galvin & Healy,2020). Brazil’s post-2008 strategies combined poverty reduction with sustainable agricultural practices, reflecting Keynesian principles of leveraging public spending to promote equitable growth and social welfare (Nassif et al.,2020). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 23 of 33 Alfred Marshall’s insights into economies of scale are evident in the renewable energy sector, where large-scale solar and wind farms achieve cost efficiencies. For instance, companies like Tesla have scaled up battery production to capitalise on economies of scale, rendering electric vehicles more affordable and thus facilitating wider adoption—promoting sustainable transportation (Riley,2022). In addition, the emergence of urban farms in cities like Detroit showcases Marshall’s principles by producing positive externalities (such as mitigating food deserts and improving air quality) and augmenting local economic resilience (Vaseau-Sleiman,2018). Lionel Robbins’ emphasis on scarcity necessitates efficient resource allocation. This aligns with sustainable development’s circular economy model, which advocates minimising waste through resource reuse. California’s water supply strategy 2022 to enhance water scarcity issue exemplifies systematic efforts to diminish resource consumption through sustainable practices (Newsom,2022). Robert Solow’s growth model stresses the role of technological innovation in achieving economic advancement while considering capital and labour. A salient illustration of this can be found in the transition to renewable energy technologies, whereby investment in research and development catalyses efficiency and cost reduction. The declining cost of solar panels serves as a pivotal factor in promoting sustainable energy usage on both national and global scales. In China, significant investments in renewable energy have precipitated substantial advancements in solar panel production, effectively balancing economic growth with environmental sustainability (Jiang & Raza,2024). Walter Rostow’s model delineates linear stages of economic growth, with many developing nations now implementing sustainable development initiatives that align with this framework, necessitating transitions from agricultural to more industrialised, service-based economies in sustainable manners. Vietnam’s transition from agrarian economic frameworks to a more industrialised economy—through investments in sustainable agriculture and eco-tourism—illustrates efforts to leapfrog to higher stages of development while considering environmental factors (Raihan et al.,2024). Arthur Lewis’ model explicates the transition from a traditional agricultural economy to a modern industrialised one. This dual-sector model is observable in both developed and developing countries. For example, Copenhagen invests in public transportation and green infrastructure to create jobs and improve quality of life (Ismir & Jan,2022), illustrating Lewis’s transition principles. Meanwhile, Ethiopia’s Growth and Transformation Plan underscores a shift from subsistence farming to industrialisation by investing in sustainable agricultural practices and rural industry (Ababa,2016). The plan aligns closely with Lewis’s theoretical framework while pursuing sustainable development goals. In the context of community-oriented environmental initiatives, Aristotle’s emphasis on virtue ethics and the common good is particularly relevant. Aristotle contended that human flourishing is achieved through virtuous living and communal efforts. Initiatives such as community gardens exemplify this ethos by promoting environmental sustainability and fostering social cohesion (Kanosvamhira,2024). These gardens not only provide fresh produce but also engage local residents in healthy collective activities—an embodiment of Aristotle’s vision of the common good. Additionally, Copenhagen’s integrated urban planning encourages virtuous living through walking, cycling, and public transport implementation, motivating citizens towards environmentally sustainable lifestyles that prioritise communal well-being (Srivastava,2022). Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach underscores the imperative of affording individuals opportunities to realise their potential. A pertinent example lies in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which highlight education (SDG 4) and gender equality (SDG 5) as critical dimensions. Initiatives that improve access to education Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 24 of 33 for women and marginalised communities in countries such as India and Bangladesh augment their capabilities, fostering full participation in economic life and underpinning sustainable development through inclusive growth (S. Ali & Shafeeq,2021;Sunny et al., 2021). The Human Development Index (HDI), which accounts for health, education, and income metrics, exemplifies Sen’s philosophy and informs policies targeted at enhancing social equity. Programmes guided by the capability approach prioritise human well-being, furthering inclusive and sustainable development (Anand,2021;Desai,1991). Simon Kuznets proposed the Kuznets Curve, positing that, while economic growth may initially engender environmental degradation, it subsequently declines as societies become wealthier and can invest in cleaner technologies and better regulations. In Russia, an increase in carbon dioxide emissions was observed with economic growth. However, after income reaches a certain threshold, CO2 declines (Ketenci,2018). Furthermore, the United Kingdom exhibits an inverted U-shaped environmental Kuznets Curve, with a projected turning point occurring approximately in the mid-twentieth century. This inflexion corresponds with regulatory measures designed to mitigate pollution and the country’s dedication to advancing the energy transition necessary for sustainable development (Ben Amar,2021). Paul Samuelson’s economic theories are profoundly connected to the deployment of government stimulus measures. In times of economic downturn, governments frequently adopt strategies, such as extensive infrastructure investments or tax relief initiatives, to rejuvenate aggregate demand and reduce unemployment. These interventions embody the Keynesian dimension of Samuelson’s neoclassical synthesis, which emphasises the crucial role of fiscal policy in safeguarding economic stability during periods of contraction (Skousen,1997). Moreover, Samuelson highlighted the pivotal role of interest rates as a monetary policy lever to counteract economic fluctuations. Within the framework of his neoclassical synthesis, this aligns seamlessly with Keynesian principles, wherein central banks manipulate interest rates to influence borrowing, expenditure, and investment, thereby alleviating the impacts of cyclical economic changes. A prominent illustration of this approach is the Federal Reserve’s response to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. The Fed reduced the federal funds rate to near-zero levels, aiming to enhance credit accessibility, stimulate consumer expenditure, and bolster the distressed housing sector. Conversely, during the post-pandemic economic recovery, central banks, including the Federal Reserve, significantly increased interest rates to combat surging inflation. This highlights Samuelson’s theories in action, showcasing how monetary policy can function as a counter-cyclical tool to effectively moderate economic volatility (Ihrig & Waller,2024). Environmental economics prioritises market-oriented strategies to tackle environmental challenges, with carbon pricing emerging as a pivotal approach. Mechanisms such as carbon taxes and cap-and-trade systems aim to internalise the external costs of carbon emissions, effectively monetising pollution. Sweden’s successful implementation of a carbon tax has significantly reduced emissions (Martinsson et al.,2024). Additionally, the field advocates for adopting eco-friendly practices to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and promote sustainability. In Kenya, the Green Belt Movement, established by Wangari Maathai, exemplifies a grassroots initiative intertwining environmental restoration with women’s empowerment. By mobilising communities to plant trees and restore ecosystems, it combats deforestation, fosters social equity, and highlights the importance of local governance and community participation in achieving sustainable development ( Chivandire & Chirisa,2023 ;Njagi,2022). On the other hand, ecological economics emphasises the interdependence of economies and ecosystems, prioritising long-term resource sustainability and natural system health. Advocates for the sustainable management of common resources employ participatory governance and ecosystem-based management Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 31 of 33 Martinsson, G., Sajtos, L., Strömberg, P., & Thomann, C. (2024). The effect of carbon pricing on firm emissions: Evidence from the Swedish CO2tax. The Review of Financial Studies,37(6), 1848–1886. [CrossRef] Marx, K. (1887a). Capital (1st ed., Vol. 1). Progress Publishers. Marx, K. (1887b). Chapter eight: Constant capital and variable capital. In Capital (Vol. 1). Progress Publishers. Marx, K. (1893). Capital (2nd ed., Vol. 2). Progress Publishers. Marx, K. (1894). Capital (Vol. 3). International Publisher. Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1970). Feuerbach, opposition of the materialist and idealist outlook. In C. J. Arthur (Ed.), The german ideology (p. 56). International Publishers Co. Mason, T. W. (1988). Economics and impact assessment: Ceteris paribus or mutatis mutandis. Impact Assessment,6(3–4), 165–171. [CrossRef] Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W., III. (1972). The limits to growth. Universe Books. Messerly, J. (2013). Aristotle on the good life. Reason and meaning. Available online: https://reasonandmeaning.com/2013/12/19/ aristotle-on-the-good-and-meaningful-life/ (accessed on 5 August 2019). Miller, E. (2019). Branching Out: How Canada’s Forestry Products Sector is Reshaping its Future. SSRN Electronic Journal,36. [CrossRef] Mill, J. S. (1848a). CHAPTER VI: Of the stationary state. In S. W. J. Ashley (Ed.), Principles of political economy with some of their applications to social philosophy (pp. 750–752). D. Appleton and Company. Mill, J. S. (1848b). Chapter X: Of interferences of government grounded on erroneous theories. In S. W. J. Ashley (Ed.), Principles of political economy with some of their applications to social philosophy (p. 922). Book V: On the Influence of Government. D. Appleton and Company. Mill, J. S. (1848c). Principles of political economy with some of their applications to social philosophy (S. W. J. Ashley, Ed.; 1st ed., Vol. 1–5). D. Appleton and Company. Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism (1st ed.). Parker, Son & Bourn, West Strand. Nassif, A., Feijó, C., & Araújo, E. (2020). Macroeconomic policies in Brazil before and after the 2008 global financial crisis: Brazilian policy-makers still trapped in the New Macroeconomic Consensus guidelines. Cambridge Journal of Economics,44(4), 749–779. [CrossRef] Newman, P. (1960). The erosion of Marshall’s theory of value. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,74(4), 587–599. [CrossRef] Newsom, G. (2022). California’s water supply strategy: Adapting to a hotter, drier future. Available online: https://cawaterlibrary.net/ document/californias-water-supply-strategy-adapting-to-a-hotter-drier-future/ (accessed on 17 August 2024). Njagi, C. (2022). The green belt movement’s usage of african indigenous knowledge systems in the preservation of mount kenya forest. African Thought: A Journal of Afro-Centric Knowledge,1(2), 38–86. North, C. C. (1915). The sociological implications of Ricardo’s economics. American Journal of Sociology,20(6), 764–828. [CrossRef] OECD & European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training. (2014). Greener skills and jobs. OECD. [CrossRef] O’Hara, S. U. (1998). Economics, ethics and sustainability: Redefining connections. International Journal of Social Economics,25(1), 43–62. [CrossRef] Ojanen, M., Zhou, W., Miller, D. C., Nieto, S. H., Mshale, B., & Petrokofsky, G. (2017). What are the environmental impacts of property rights regimes in forests, fisheries and rangelands? Environmental Evidence,6(12), 1–23. [CrossRef] Oxford Reference. (2024). Overview classical economics. Available online: https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/ authority.20110803095615788 (accessed on 5 April 2024). Oyevaar, M., Vazquez-Brust, D., & van Bommel, H. (2016). Globalization and sustainable development: A business perspective. Macmillan International Higher Education. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(89), 11. [CrossRef] Pearce, D. (1998). Cost—Benefit analysis and environmental policy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,14(4), 84–100. [CrossRef] Pearce, D. (2002). An intellectual history of environmental economics. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment,27, 57–81. [CrossRef] Pezzey, J. (1992). Sustainable development concepts: An economic analysis. World Bank Environment Paper. World Bank. Pigou, A. C. (1920). The economics of welfare (4th ed.). MACMILLAN AND CO., Ltd. Pollock, N. J. (2014). Nauru phosphate history and the resource curse narrative. Journal de La SociétéDes Océanistes,2014(138–139), 107–120. [CrossRef] Prebisch, R. (1981). Raul prebisch on Latin American development. Population and Development Review,7(3), 563–568. [CrossRef] Purvis, B., Mao, Y., & Robinson, D. (2019). Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Science,14, 681–695. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 32 of 33 Raihan, A., Hasan, M. A., Voumik, L. C., Pattak, D. C., Akter, S., & Ridwan, M. (2024). Sustainability in Vietnam: Examining economic growth, energy, innovation, agriculture, and forests’ impact on CO 2 emissions. World Development Sustainability,4, 100164. [CrossRef] Rawls, J. (1995). Political liberalism. Columbia University Press. Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (rev. ed.). The belknap press of harvard university press. Ricardo, D. (1821). On the principles of political economy and taxation (3rd ed.). John Murray. Richard, K. (2001). Aristotle’s ethics. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Riley, G. (2022). Business costs and profits—economies of scale at tesla. Available online: https://www.tutor2u.net/economics/blog/ business-costs-and-profits-economies-of-scale-at-tesla (accessed on 12 September 2024). Robbins, L. (1932). An essay on the nature and significance of economic science (1st ed.). MACMILLAN AND CO. Robert, J., & Adam, C. (2004). Kant’s moral philosophy. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, A., Chapin, F. S., III, Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C. A., Hughes, T., van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., . . . Foley, J. A. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature,461, 472–475. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Ropke, I. (2004). The early history of modern ecological economics. Ecological Economics,50(3–4), 293–314. [CrossRef] Ropke, I. (2005). Trends in the development of ecological economics from the late 1980s to the early 2000s. Ecological Economics,55, 262–290. [CrossRef] Samuelson, P. A., & Nordhaus, W. D. (1998). Economics (16th ed.). McGraw-Hill. Say, J. B. (1843). A treatise on political economy; or the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth (6th ed.). Grigg & Elliot. Say, J. B. (2001). CHAPTER VIII. Of the Advantages and Disadvantages Resulting from Division of Labour, and of the Extent to Which it May Be Carried (Book I. Of the Production of Wealth). In A Treatise on Political Economy; or the Production, Distribution, and Consumption of Wealth, ed. Clement C. and Biddle, Biddle, LL. D. trans. C. R. Prinsep from the 4th ed. Of the French, (Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo & Co., 1855. 4th-5th ed.) (New American Edition, p. 38). Batoche Books. Available online: https://historyofeconomicthought.mcmaster.ca/say/treatise.pdf (accessed on 11 September 2024). Say, J. B., & Swanson, R. A. (2001). Translation: OLBIE. Or Essay on the Means of Improving the Morals of a Nation. Utopian Studies, 12(1), 79–107. Sen, A. (1979). Equality of what? Stanford University. Available online: https://ophi.org.uk/sites/default/files/Sen-1979 _ Equality-of -What.pdf (accessed on 2 October 2024). Sen, A. (1987). On ethics and economics. Blackwell Publishing. Sen, A. (1990). Development as capability expansion. In K. Griffin, & J. Knight (Eds.), Human development and the international development strategy for the 1990s (pp. 41–58). Palgrave Macmillan. Sen, A. (1992). Inequality reexamined. Oxford University Press Inc. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Shenkin, E. N. (2024). Bifurcated Bolivia: Indigenous Governance and Land Struggles in the Eastern Lowlands. Latin American Perspectives,51(5), 5–23. [CrossRef] Skousen, M. (1997). The perseverance of Paul Samuelson’s economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives,11(2), 137–152. [CrossRef] Smith, A. (1776a). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations (S. M. Soares, Ed.; 1st ed., Vol. I–V). Random House, Inc. Smith, A. (1776b). Chapter II: On restraints upon the importation from foreign countries of such goods as can be produced at home. In An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, book IV: On systems of political economy. Random House, Inc. Smith, A. (1776c). Chapter III: On the accumulation of capital, or of productive and unproductive labour. In An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, book II: On the nature, accumulation, and employment of stock. Random House, Inc. Smith, A. (1776d). Chapter III: On the extraordinary restraints upon the importation of goods of almost all kinds from those countries with which the balance is supposed to be disadvantageous. In An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, book IV: On systems of political economy. Random House, Inc. Smith, A. (1776e). That the division of labour is limited by the extent of the market. In An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, book I: On the causes of improvement in the productive powers. On labour, and on the order according to which its’ produce is naturally distributed among the different ranks of the people (Vol. I). Random House, Inc. Smith, A. (1790). The theory of moral sentiments (6th ed.). MεταLibri. Smith, A. C., Hurni, K., Fox, J., & Van Den Hoek, J. (2023). Community forest management led to rapid local forest gain in Nepal: A 29 year mixed methods retrospective case study. Land Use Policy,126, 106526. [CrossRef] Smith, J. L. (2009). World oil: Market or mayhem? The Journal of Economic Perspectives,23(3), 145–164. [CrossRef] Smith, V. R. (1985). John stuart mill’s famous distinction between production and distribution. Economics and Philosoph,1(2), 267–284. [CrossRef] Snippe, J. (1985). Finance, saving and investment in Keynes’s economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics,9(3), 257–269. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 6 33 of 33 Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,70(1), 65–94. [CrossRef] Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics,39(3), 312–320. [CrossRef] Solow, R. M. (1974). Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources. The Review of Economic Studies,41, 29–45. [CrossRef] Solow, R. M. (1993). An almost practical step towards sustainability. Resources Policy,17, 147–156. [CrossRef] Spash, C. L. (1993). Economics, ethics, and long-term environmental damages. Environmental Ethics,15(2), 117–132. [CrossRef] Spash, C. L. (1999). The Development of Environmental Thinking in Economics. Environmental Values,8(4), 413–435. [CrossRef] Spengler, J. J. (1959). Adam Smith’s theory of economic growth: Part I. Southern Economic Journal,25(4), 397–415. [CrossRef] Srivastava, S. (2022). The sustainable city: Learning from Copenhagen’s plan for zero carbon. Available online: https://www.spur.org/news/ 2022-08-31/sustainable-city-learning-copenhagens-plan-zero-carbon (accessed on 2 December 2024). Sunny, F. A., Zuhui, H., Fu, L., & Karimanzira, T. T. P. (2021). Sustainable rural development: Initiatives in ameliorating key drivers of rural economy and associated challenges in achieving SDGs in Bangladesh. International Journal of Business Studies and Innovation, 1(2), 140–163. [CrossRef] Tarascio, V. J. (1971). Keynes on the sources of economic growth. The Journal of Economic History,31(2), 429–444. [CrossRef] Thirlwall, A. P. (2006). Growth and development: With special reference to developing economies (8th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. Thorsen, D. E., & Lie, A. (2006). What is Neoliberalism? Available online: https://glasgow.rl.talis.com/items/9CDBDAC2-BBEF-A00A -8C24-25B20F95703D.html (accessed on 10 January 2019). Todaro, M. P., & Smith, S. C. (2012). Economic development (11th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc. UN. (2019). Global sustainable development report 2019: The future is now—Science for achieving sustainable development (p. 216). United Nations (UN). Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/2020-07/24797GSDR _ report _ 2019.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2024). United Nations. (2015). Sustainable development goals. Available online: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable -development-goals/ (accessed on 7 November 2018). Valliere, K. (2010). Production, Distribution, and J. S. Mill. Utilitas,22(2), 103–125. [CrossRef] van den Bergh, J. C. (2001). Ecological economics: Themes, approaches, and differences with environmental economics. Regional Environmental Change,2(1), 13–23. [CrossRef] Van, H. G. (2013). Ethics and sustainability: A primer with suggested readings. Available online: https://iseethics.files.wordpress.com/ 2013/09/ethics_and_sustainability_primer.pdf (accessed on 2 September 2018). Vaseau-Sleiman, K. (2018). Urban farming in detroit. Available online: https://glass.hfcc.edu/2018/05-23/urban-farming-detroit (accessed on 10 September 2024). Venkatachalam, L. (2006). Environmental economics and ecological economics: Where they can converge? Ecological Economics,61, 550–558. [CrossRef] Vives, G. T., Tashi, S., & Singay, J. (2023). Of dragons, data and clouds: Bhutan’s journey into carbon markets, technology, and a resilient future. World Bank Blogs. Available online: https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/climatechange/dragons-data-and-clouds-bhutans-journey -carbon-markets-technology-and-resilient (accessed on 3 December 2024). Whiteside, J. (2022). Sustainability in New Zealand environmental legislation: Shortcomings of the resource management act and opportunities presented by the proposed legislation. New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law,26, 21–51. World Bank. (2021). Ethiopian farmers triple coffee yields with sustainable tree stumping. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/ news/feature/2021/04/20/ethiopian-farmers-triple-coffee-yields-with-sustainable-tree-stumping#:~:text=The%20quality%20 of%20Ethiopian%20coffee,grown%20considerably%20since%20the%201990s (accessed on 21 September 2024). Zhang, D., & Tu, Y. (2021). Green building, pro-environmental behavior and well-being: Evidence from Singapore. Cities,108, 102980. [CrossRef] Zhao, R. (2018). Technology and economic growth: From Robert Solow to Paul Romer. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies,1, 62–65. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.