Rethinking Sustainable Development Models: Lessons from Costa Rica and Norway

By Chirag Dhara and Soumyajit Bhar

Published on April 7, 2025

The conversation about sustainable development continues to evolve, prompting experts to rethink which countries can genuinely serve as role models. Historically, Nordic countries like Norway, Finland, and Sweden have been celebrated for their efforts in sustainable practices, from cycling infrastructure to renewable energy initiatives. However, this admiration may overlook critical paradoxes inherent in their lifestyles.

The Paradox of Nordic Sustainability

Nordic nations are indeed leaders in human well-being indicators; however, they also rank among the highest in material consumption and carbon emissions globally. If all of humanity adhered to the consumption patterns exhibited by Norwegians or Danes, the planet's environmental limits would be severely compromised. This troubling reality suggests that the Nordic model may only appear sustainable because most of the world has not followed in their footsteps.

Questioning the Sustainability Metrics

Recent assessments, such as the UNDP's Planetary Pressures-adjusted Human Development Index (PHDI), position Nordic countries as exemplars of sustainability. These metrics often compare nations against one another, evaluating factors like health and education. However, environmental health must be viewed through the lens of planetary boundaries—the limits that, when crossed, could result in irreversible ecological damage.

Signs of environmental distress are becoming increasingly evident—California wildfires, disruptions in the Gulf Stream, and transformations in the Amazon rainforest all demonstrate the urgent need for genuine sustainable practices. Many sustainability indices currently employ a misleading relative scoring system, where countries appear more sustainable when compared to even less sustainable nations. For example, a country consuming resources at three times the Earth’s capacity may still rank higher than another utilizing resources at five times that capacity, despite both being unsustainable.

High Human Development at Lower Ecological Cost

As researchers illustrate in their analysis of sustainability, middle-income countries such as Costa Rica, Panama, and Sri Lanka stand out for their ability to achieve high living standards while consuming fewer resources compared to their Nordic counterparts.

Costa Rica exemplifies this balance, boasting near-universal healthcare, a literacy rate of 98%, and life expectancy on par with developed nations—all achieved with significantly lower resource consumption. The country's decision to abolish its military in 1948 allowed for a redirection of resources towards social programs, showcasing that strategic policy choices can effectively decouple development from high consumption.

Similarly, Sri Lanka has made notable investments in education and healthcare, resulting in a human development index (HDI) that exceeds that of many neighboring countries, despite limited resources.

However, the challenges faced by these middle-income nations, such as Sri Lanka’s recent economic crisis, underscore their vulnerability, demonstrating that high human development can indeed occur with lower ecological impact than in wealthier nations.

Shifts Needed for Genuine Sustainability

To align development with planetary boundaries, three critical shifts are identified:

Moving Beyond the Nordic Mirage: This shift entails recognizing that valuable lessons in sustainable development can come from both the Global South and North, learning from successes and failures on both sides, rather than solely glorifying one model.
Redefining Developed Nations: The criteria for identifying a truly developed nation should include the capacity to offer dignified living standards to all human beings without exceeding Earth's ecological capacity.
Creating New Metrics: Developing new metrics that accurately evaluate human and planetary well-being is essential. This requires an overhaul of existing indices, incorporating interdisciplinary insights from ecology, physics, social sciences, and economics.

Conclusion

The path forward for sustainable development does not lie in aspiring to impractical models but in forging alternatives that honor planetary limits while ensuring dignity for everyone. By adjusting our understanding of development in light of 21st-century realities concerning planetary health, we can discard outdated theories and embrace more sustainable practices.

Chirag Dhara is a climate and sustainability scientist at Krea University. Soumyajit Bhar is a scholar of consumption and sustainability at the School of Liberal Studies, BML Munjal University, Haryana.

Originally published under Creative Commons by 360info™.