The international order that was once the foundation of economic growth and was largely shaped by the United States is waning. That is, the geopolitical time that America imposed on the rest of the world is coming to an end.
A new star of power is emerging in its place, with Asia at the vanguard. The systems guiding” green development” stay firmly rooted in the ancient order’s worldview despite this change in economic and political weight.
The Sustainable Development Goals ( SDGs ), ESG standards, and climate finance policies continue to be based on preconceived notions made by the Global North: technocratic, metric-heavy, and frequently disassociated from the lived realities of the Global South. Asia is expanding, but the concepts remain unchanged, which is the dilemma of our time.
Governments and businesses are frantically trying to connect themselves with international conservation standards across the region. Environmental ratings are being reported, and SDG goals are being incorporated into national plans.
Asia appears to be a concept student on the outside. But if you look deeper, a disturbing pattern emerges: sustainability has become more about signaling line than actual transformation.
Some nations view the SDGs and ESG as adherence checklists rather than as situational changes. The end result is a flood of ESG-washing, carbon colonialism marketed as an “energy transition,” and a flurry of projects that claim to be sustainable but neglect to address inequality, natural degradation, or native culture erosion.
This is not an attempt at passion. It is an illogical attempt.
Conservation systems now also embodie the DNA of Bretton Woods logic: they are growth-focused, finance-driven, and run by organizations where the Global South has less actual words.
Yet well-intentioned tools like climate financing frequently come with rules that reflect the risk desires of European investors and not the priorities of line communities.
Asia’s diversity is seldom acknowledged as a source of sustainability, especially its postcolonial wisdoms, biological traditions, and shared ways of living. Otherwise, the area is used as a testbed for additional models like carbon trading, natural taxonomy, and blended finance.
These tools may include price, but they run the risk of becoming the new tools for interdependence rather than emancipation when imposed without version.
If Asia continues on this way, it might succeed in appearing lasting while failing to create systems that are resilient, only, and rooted in regional significance.
Asia needs to regain its tale and reinvent sustainability on its own terms in order to break completely. Instead of rejecting the international mission, the focus should be on reimagining it. That is, conservation may move beyond natural GDP growth and carbon measures.
The concept of balance, between people and nature, between one person and a group, between material and spiritual, has long been a part of some Asian nations. These are living philosophies that can help shape a richer, more grounded type of development, not romantic treasures.
Numbers are adored by international structures. However, not all that things can be accurately assessed. ESG scores and SDG dashboards may accurately represent the tenacity of regional economies, the dignity of indigenous management systems, or the strength of a neighborhood. Asia has define success by its own indicators, ones that reflect life, not only compliance.
Courageous institutions are also required to transform a borrowed construction into an intrinsic movement. Governments, civil society, and businesses must take challenges: to test alternative designs, to challenge imported standards, and to defend the viability of domestic improvements.
No longer is it important whether Asia can uphold international standards for conservation. The actual question is whether Asia’s earth is prepared to compete with it.
Asia does not need to turn into a superpower in a shattered world. It doesn’t need to “win” the conservation culture. What it can offer, in fact, is much more strong: a fresh compass that places dignity, relationality, and regeneration before egotism, extraction, and aesthetic green branding.
This model has already been sown. Asia is never a plain stone; it is a place with concentrated disaster governance in the Philippines, collaborative farming in Vietnam, and eco-spiritualism in Bhutan. It is a source of undiscovered living solutions.
Lack of recognition is what poses the greatest obstacle, not the lack of versions. Changes in meaning may determine the post-hegemonic world more than just shifts in energy.
Sustainability must become a question of civilization in this search for new foundations. It cannot continue to be a management tool of international finance. Who defines the value of maintaining? Whose awareness is important? Whose coming do we guard against?
Even the most greenest of future may be built on the same aged exclusions if these questions remain unanswered or worse, only those at Davos or on Wall Street get them answered. But if Asia dares to speak from its origins rather than just its increase, it might be able to provide what the rest of the world desperately lacks: a soul-based conservation.
Setyo Budiantoro is a member of Fair Finance Asia’s expert council and a MIT Sloan IDEAS Fellow 2024 and a Nexus Strategist at The Prakarsa.