We Called It Development. But What Did We Leave Behind?
Look at this picture for a moment.
The same landscape, captured across different periods. What was once mostly open land, surrounded by trees and distant mountains, has gradually transformed into a city filled with roads, buildings and infrastructure.
It’s quite a contrast.
At first, we might simply see it as a sign of progress. A place that was once rural has become a developed urban area. More buildings, more businesses, more opportunities and probably a much larger economy.
But there’s another side to this transformation that I think deserves more attention.
What exactly did we sacrifice along the way?
For decades, we’ve measured development through economic growth, industrial production, infrastructure, consumption and GDP. These indicators tell us how much an economy produces and how quickly it grows.
But they don’t always tell us what happens to the natural resources that make that growth possible.
Land gets developed. Trees disappear. Water resources come under pressure. Energy consumption increases, and industrial activities generate emissions.
None of these things necessarily means development is wrong. Cities need infrastructure, businesses need to grow, and people need better living standards.
I don’t think the answer is to stop development.
The real question is whether we can continue developing without ignoring the environmental cost.
And interestingly, the business world is starting to face that question in a much more practical way.
Carbon is becoming a business concern, not just an environmental one.
One example is the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).
Get H. K. Nimnaka Yasith Ravishan Kumaradasa’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
From 1 January 2026, CBAM entered its definitive phase. It covers selected carbon-intensive imported goods, including iron and steel, aluminium, cement, fertilisers, electricity and hydrogen.
This means embedded carbon emissions are no longer something businesses can simply overlook when dealing with certain international supply chains.
For exporters and manufacturers involved in these sectors, having reliable emissions data is becoming increasingly important. It can influence how they work with international buyers, prepare documentation and remain competitive in global markets.
And I think this is only part of the bigger picture.
Water could become another major business challenge.
We often discuss carbon emissions, but water deserves the same level of attention.
Industries depend on water for manufacturing, cooling, cleaning and processing. Agriculture depends on it for raw materials. Entire supply chains can be affected when water becomes scarce, polluted or unreliable.
According to the World Resources Institute, water-related risks include droughts, floods and water stress, all of which can disrupt business operations and supply chains.
It’s also worth remembering that a company’s water footprint doesn’t end at its factory gates. Sometimes, its biggest water-related impacts happen much further up or down its supply chain.
This makes water management more than an environmental responsibility. It’s also about business continuity, operational efficiency and long-term resilience.
I believe businesses should start looking at these issues before regulations become stricter or resource shortages directly affect their operations.
Understanding your carbon footprint, knowing how much water your operations depend on, identifying environmental risks and making informed decisions should become part of how businesses plan for the future.
This is also the direction we’re working towards with Terrablu.
Our focus is on helping businesses better understand their environmental impact through carbon accounting and water-related solutions, so they can make more informed decisions rather than waiting until environmental challenges become business problems.
For me, this is not simply about building another profitable company.
It’s about contributing to a future where business growth and environmental responsibility don’t have to work against each other.
Because when we look back at these landscapes years from now, I hope we won’t only be measuring how much we have built.
I hope we’ll also be able to say how much we’ve managed to protect.
