[Last Updated: July 28, 2008]
|
|
||
|
|
What is sustainability?
That there is no single, simple agreeable definition of sustainability is a sign of the strength of the concept, not its weakness. The root concern is with thoughtful proper action, attentively derived. Taoist ideas of Ògoing with the flowÓ and of Òbecoming one with natureÓ are likely as good a way of getting at the meme of sustainability as any other.
However, there are a few ways of defining sustainability that are more useful than most. First, there is the definition proposed by the Brundtland Commission, in 1987, which suggests that a sustainable development is that development which "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." This concern with intergenerational equity is central to the idea of sustainability, and shows itself as a concern with long-term thinking that has become a hallmark of the concept. In conventional economics, we are accustomed to discounting the future. Money, for instance, is taken to be worth more today than it is in some distant future. This is considered emblematic of unsustainable thinking, and sustainability values the future differently.
Second, there is the meme of the three overlapping circlesÑone representing economic concerns, one representing ecological concerns, and one representing social equity concerns. Where the three circles overlap fully, there we are in a sustainable place. Here, the argument is that when we are able to give appropriate weight to all three concerns in our decision processes, then we are close to a decision space that can be called sustainable.
Third, using the planet as an example, there are the intertwined ideas of carrying capacity and ecological footprint. Carrying capacity, generally, is the ability of the ecosphere to sustain lifeÑits capacity to carry life, so to speak. Ecological footprint may be taken as the load we place upon the ecosphere in the process of living within it. (The ideas can be applied to any system of concern which ÒcarriesÓ the load for any sort of operation or activity.) Here, to be sustainable is to ensure that oneÕs ecological footprint (impact) does not exceed the carrying capacity of the containing system, both in terms of the systemÕs ability to provide the raw materials necessary for life and in terms of the systemÕs ability to absorb waste products generated by the business of life (sources and sinks).
Fourth, and more generally, there is the concept of a systems approach, in which we seek to transcend the conventional strategy of knowledge-building by compartmentalized specializationÑwhich has proven highly successful, in its own placeÑand embrace instead a broader strategy of integrating across domains of knowledge, encouraging synergistic effects in which the whole becomes greater than the mere sum of its parts.
These ideas, taken together, bring us closer to a place from which we can legitimately claim to be practicing sustainable thinking.
There are some other ideas that matter as well, and that help nuance our understanding of sustainability. One is the realization that what we see is rarely all that we get. The morphological world that is directly accessible to us through our somewhat limited sensory and cognitive apparatus, is merely the tip of the proverbial iceberg. ThereÕs usually somewhat more going on than just what we can see and touch and taste and feel and hear. Processes and functions, usually intangible to us directly, often matter more than objects and entitiesÑour normal proxies for Òreality.Ó
For instance, take the case of air pollution. An engine that is belching thick black smoke is conventionally taken to be more polluting than an engine that is not visibly emitting smoke. Remember the old jet liners? Well, it turns out that this is not necessarily so. That our breathing apparatus is rather well adapted to dealing with the relatively larger particles of thick black smoke than it is to dealing with the more toxic fine particles that make up modern internal combustion engine exhaust. Ultrafine particles can reach deep into our bodies, getting at our blood stream, whereas the coarse particles are trapped in our nostrils and lungs and then expectorated.
Or take, for example, the case of my hand resting upon a table. In my own mindÕs eye, I can tell quite precisely where my hand ends and where the table begins. I can even characterize the boundaries of these two quite distinct entities. However, out of sight of my mindÕs eye, my hand and the table are quite busy exchanging molecules!
To think sustainably, then, is to be able to get beyond the apparent to the actual.
* * *
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_development
The United Nations Division for Sustainable Development lists the following areas as coming within the scope of sustainable development:
á Agriculture
á Atmosphere
á Biodiversity
á Biotechnology
á Business
á Capacity-building
á Climate Change
á Consumption and Production Patterns
á Corporate Social Responsibility
á Demographics
á Desertification and Drought
á Disaster Reduction and Management
á Education and Awareness
á Energy
á Finance
á Forests
á Fresh Water
á Health
á Human Settlements
á Indicators
á Industry
á Information for Decision Making and Participation
á Integrated Decision Making
á International Law
á International Cooperation for Enabling Environment
á Institutional Arrangements
á Land management
á Major Groups
á Mountains
á National Sustainable Development Strategies
á Oceans and Seas
á Poverty
á Product Design
á Sanitation
á Science
á SIDS
á Socially Responsible Investment
á Sustainable tourism
á Technology
á Toxic Chemicals
á Trade and Environment
á Transportation
á Urban Planning
á Waste (Hazardous)
á Waste (Radioactive)
á Waste (Solid)
á Water