What is sustainability?

11

2. What is sustainability?

2.1 Introduction
Sustainable development has been the subject of considerable research over recent decades.
In indigenous communities, the notion of sustainability is often rooted in tradition and
heritage. Because of growing global concerns over environmental sustainability, the topic of
sustainable development has been largely investigated in the context of environment and
impacts of development on environment sustainability. Economic development, such as
economic growth of communities, including social and political aspects, is also covered in
the literature, and a wide range of studies across multiple locations exists. The word
sustainable is used frequently and in many different combinations, sustainable development,
sustainable growth, sustainable community, sustainable industry, sustainable economy,
agriculture etc. However, what does it actually mean? What are the issues of sustainability
and sustainable development? How we can interpret sustainability? What are the different
models of sustainability? How we can measure the sustainable development?

This chapter aims to cast light on these questions by providing an integration of literature
relevant to the area. This is followed by a brief review of definitions and dimensions of
sustainable development reviewed then different interpretation of sustainable development,
and indicators for sustainable development are studied. Central to the research of achieving
sustainable development is the ability to evaluate the sustainable development potential of
different policies and projects, as well as to identify the trends that are, or are not, sustainable,
trends that pose severe or irreversible threats to our future quality of life. Sustainable
development indicators are the most frequently used tools in this context. The chapter draws
together the various strands and provides an overview of the main conditions and issues
concerned with indigenous sustainable development.

2.2 Dimensions of sustainability

The word sustainable is used frequently and in many different combinations, sustainable
development, sustainable growth, sustainable community, sustainable industry, sustainable
economy, agriculture etc. However, what does it actually mean?

Sustainable development was used for the first time in the 1980 IUCN report, World
Conservation Strategy: Living resources for sustainable development. The perhaps most
commonly quoted definition within today’s extensive Sustainable development literature is
the popularization and the definition of the concept made by the World Commission on
Environment and Development published in 1987 in the report Our Common Future also
called the Brundtland Report:

Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of

current generations without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their needs. It contains within it two key
concepts: the concept of needs, in particular the essential needs of the
world’s poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and the
idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social
organization on the environment’s ability to meet present and future
needs (WCED, 1987:43)
 12 What is sustainability?

In 1992 the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio,
established Sustainable development as a common goal of human development for the
roughly 160 countries that attended the meeting, which then became manifest in the action
program Agenda 21. Since 1992 Sustainable, development has become a widely used concept
and goal in international, national, regional, and local politics.

The roots of the sustainable development concept can be found in the emerging
environmental consciousness of the 1960s and in the identification of the link between
economic development and environmental degradation and pollution. This development was
closely related to the replacement of the optimism about the creation of a modern
technological utopia with a new understanding of the forces contributing to the world’s
problems.

Like other development approaches, sustainable development is about the improvement of

the human condition, yet unlike many of the others, it does not only emphasize economic
growth, but it stresses the importance of a balance between economic growth and
environmental protection. The general understandings of Sustainable development are
compromise two dimensions: the notion of development (to make better) and sustainability
(to maintain). Sustainable development is classically explained as the balancing between
environmental, economic, and social aspects of development (Goodland and Daly, 1996).
These three aspects are frequently defined as the three pillars of Sustainable development.

One important difference from other macro theories of development is the underlying
philosophy that what is done now to improve the quality of life of people should not degrade
the environment (in its widest bio-physical and socioeconomic sense) and resources such that
future generations are put at a disadvantage. The emphasis on the world’s poor also implies a
link between environmental concerns and economic- and social development over both space
and time. If earlier development theories focussed on the economy, the use of Sustainable
development has, thus far, in politics, practice and research emphasized its environmental
dimension. Today the concept of Sustainable development has broadened its perspective,
with more emphasis now being put also on the social dimension (European Commission,
2002).

Another important aspect of sustainable development is that it is seen as a participatory

process. Sustainable development has not assumed to be imposed by a small minority of
technocrats or policy-makers from above. This idea is embodied in Principle 10 of the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development where it is stated that; Environmental Issues
are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens. Part of the emphasis in
creating sustainable development has consequently been to include stakeholders in the
determination of what needs to be done and how (Guy and Kibert, 1998).

Sustainable development may thus be seen as incorporating three different aspects:

 Balanced development (trade-offs between social, environmental and economic

interests should be taken into consideration).
 Equity and shared responsibility extended over time and space
 Participation
 What is sustainability? 13

2.3 Different interpretations of sustainable development

The definition of sustainable development or the categorization of different aspects of
Sustainable development may seem to be simple and straightforward. Some scientists have
even made more or less successful attempts to derive a common understanding of Sustainable
development using natural science as a base. However, when asking scientists the question,
how much pollution can nature withstand, the answer is not straightforward, but instead
rather depends upon which scientific discipline, geographical scale and time perspective is
adopted. Although a desire for the improvement of the human condition and a concern for
future generations rests at the heart of Sustainable development, the details of what this
balancing between economic, environmental and social aspects implies in practice has been
open to much debate. The major reason is that there are disagreements between different
groups of people as to how to strike a balance between the economy, the environment, and
society. The chosen perspective is critical here, and as soon as more than one person is
included then, by definition interpretations multiply. What is one person’s definition of
Sustainable development is another’s despoliation, degradation and exploitation, as is the
case for natural resource extraction at the global level (Dahl, 1997). To understand
sustainable development it is important to understand these differing interpretations. Several
attempts have been made to categorize these differences (Dahl, 1997, Allenby et al, 1998).
These categorizations include a number of basic questions: What assumptions are made
concerning the relationship between humankind and nature – does nature, have a value in
itself (intrinsic value) or only in relation to human interest. These basic and often
unconscious and tacit assumptions have direct implications for the choice of Sustainable
development policy and action (Stenmark, 2002). How much pollution can naturally
withstand? What does equity and shared responsibility mean? What should be the time scope
and the geographical boundaries of responsibility? What is understood as sound economic
growth? What is the role of the economy in Sustainable development? To what extent should
the public be involved in decision-making? Finally, and perhaps the most basic question of
all: what is seen as the good life?

The interpretation of Sustainable development is in some instances based on, for example,
very different basic ethical assumptions, or basic assumptions on the nature of the economic
system. Some stress the ability of growth and a free market system to solve the problems,
other stress the importance of equality between people, yet other groups stress the importance
of equity between all living beings. In the Sustainable development literature, it is common to
distinguish between weak and strong sustainability (Bell and Morse, 1999). Weak
sustainability is based on the idea that welfare is not generally dependent on a specific form
of capital and can be maintained in most cases by substituting manufactured capital for
natural. Strong sustainability on the other hand, derives from a different perception where it is
not so evident to substitute manufactured capital for natural. The arguments for the position
of strong sustainability relate to environmental characteristics such as irreversibility and
uncertainty.

There are also differing interpretations as to the societal mechanisms causing unsustainable
development, thus what ought to be changed. Two main poles can be identified (Falkheden,
2000). The first looks upon environmental problems as societal problems. In this approach,
referred to as ecological modernization, it is assumed that economic growth and
 14 What is sustainability?

environmental management can be made compatible through the integration of ecological

considerations into established institutional arrangement and ways of thinking (Hajer, 1995).
The other poll assumes that environmental problems are the result of profound cultural
problems that can only be changed through changes more radical in our economic systems,
and in the conditions of production distribution. It is assumed here that changes in our
perceptions of reality and in our perceptions of our relation to nature are needed (Falkheden,
2000). This line of thought questions some of the main elements of the western paradigm of
development. (Concept from Hettne 1983 in Falkheden 2000)

One of the most profound lines of thought concerns economic growth and development also
how this relates to the Sustainable development (Friman, 2002). In recent years, economists
have tackled this issue somewhat differently. The different lines of thought – environmental
economics and ecological economics – also illustrate the two poles described above.
Environmental economics builds upon mainstream neoclassical theory and generally views
GDP-growth (Gross Domestic Product) and Sustainable development as compatible.
However, this compatibility depends upon what kind of production and consumption is
promoted or allowed. Growth is perceived as a prerequisite for prosperity, but it is also
acknowledged that growth has negative environmental impacts. In order for GDP-growth to
be sustainable, accurate pricing is needed. There also seems to be an agreement among
environmental economists that there is no reason to believe that environmental policies will
affect long-term economic growth (Goldin and Winters, 1995 in Friman, 2002). Ecological
economics criticize the assumptions above and their protagonists' claim that it is not enough
to consider the external effects and otherwise continue as usual. If cost internalization were
implemented fully the visibility of environmental problems would increase and the incentives
for diminishing them would increase (Friman, 2002). Nevertheless, these strong forces, i.e.
powerful producer- and consumer interests, aim at the maximization of profits and at keeping
prices low. Thus, the process of economic growth is in itself, creating stakes opposing the
internalization of environmental costs (Booth, 1997 in Friman, 2002).

The environmentally based Kuznets Curve has been used by environmental economists to
prove the relationship between a decrease in environmental stress and high-income levels.
The inverted U curve implies that environmental stress is initially an impact on growth. At a
certain income level, however, the curve turns downwards and thus environmental stress
gradually decreases. This is interpreted as illustrating the possibility that countries or regions
could ‘grow’ out of their environmental problems. Both environmental and ecological
economists have however together be stated that caution should be applied in drawing
conclusions from the findings behind the Kuznets Curve (Arrow et al, 1995). “While they do
indicate that economic growth may be associated with improvements in some environmental
indicators, they imply neither that economic growth is sufficient to induce environmental
improvement in general, nor that the environmental effects of growth may be ignored, nor
indeed, that the Earth’s resource base is capable of supporting indefinite economic growth. In
fact, if this base were to be irreversibly degraded, economic activity itself could be at risk.”
One of Friman’s conclusions from his discussion of the different lines of economic thought in
relation to Sustainable development is that there is agreement “that [the] environmental effect
of growth must not be ignored” independent of the economic line of thought referred to
above.
 What is sustainability? 15

When discussing different interpretations of Sustainable development in relation to varying

lines of economic thought, the concept of sustainable growth needs to be mentioned.
Recently this concept has entered the Sustainable development discussions. There are
however, a number of different views prevalent amongst economists as to whether this
concept is an oxymoron or not. Friman (2002) concludes that the interpretation of sustainable
growth as a prospect or as an oxymoron will depend upon two things: the conception of the
nature of the economic system and whether or not growth and develop are given distinct
definitions. If the economic system is viewed as a subsystem and growth is defined as a
quantitative change of the physical dimensions of the economic system, while development is
defined as a qualitative change, the concept of sustainable growth becomes inherently
contradictory. If development and growth are however seen as concepts that cover the same
phenomenon (but refer to different contexts Friman 2002, argues that in conventional
economic language ‘growth’ is used for high-income nations and development for low-
income nations. He also points out however that surprisingly few of the economists, that
discuss Sustainable development actually define the concepts of growth and development.)
and the economic system is not viewed as a subsystem (but rather as a free-floating system in
relation to the system Earth) sustainable growth becomes a necessary and prosperous
concept, if Sustainable development is taken seriously (Friman, 2002).

2.4 The operationalization of sustainable development is context

dependent
It has been argued that the attractiveness of the concept of sustainable development lies in its
elusiveness (Redclifts 1987:4; O’Riordan 1988). The elusiveness of the concept of
sustainable development has been functional when the main concern is to drive through a
broad consensus or to attain a minimum commitment to some broad understanding of change.
However, its utility has been shown to diminish when trying to operationalize the concept
with a view to undertaking more exact macro-economic, political, or social changes. This
problem was one of the most important challenges discussed at the ‘10 years after Rio’ UN
conference, in Johannesburg in 2002.

In the Sustainable development, literature of today it becomes ever clearer that to understand
and to operationalize sustainable development, it is crucial to move away from literary or
scientific definitions and towards a process, which recognises the diversity of perspectives
(Meppem and Gill, 1998). The details of what compromises Sustainable development should
be understood as something highly context specific, as it would be illogical to expect the
same conditions to apply everywhere. The interpretation and operationalization of the broad
understanding and definition of Sustainable development into sustainable regional
development therefore has to be done in the specific context of each individual region. It also
needs to be based on explicit standpoints concerning the unsustainable development patterns
in the region and a vision, goal of where the regional development is aiming at from a
Sustainable development point of view.

2.5 Models for Sustainable Development

Moving towards sustainable development presents tremendous challenges. Man has all the
tools necessary for achieving it. However, we tend to forget that in order to survive, we need
to adapt to nature and not vice-versa.
 16 What is sustainability?

We need to develop the ability to make a choice that respects the relationship between the
three “ES” – economy, ecology, and equality. If all the three “ES” were incorporated in the
national goals of countries then it would be possible to develop a sustainable society.

Models help us understanding the concepts of Sustainability better. Achieving Sustainable

development thus, requires more effective, open, and productive association among the
people themselves. Models help us gather, share, and analyse information; they help
coordinating work; and educate and train professionals, policymakers and the public in
general. The following are some of the constructive models for understanding Sustainable
development.

2.5.1 Three Pillar Basic Models

This is one of the most well-known models created using the three dimensions -Economy,
Environment and Society. The diagram shows three interlocking circles with the triangle of
environmental (conservation), economic (growth), and social (equity) dimensions.
Sustainable Development is modelled on these three pillars. This model is called ‘three
pillars’ or ‘three circles model’. It is based on considering the society, but does not explicitly
take into account ‘human quality of life’.

Figure 3 : Dimension of Sustainability

Source: Johann Dréo, 2006

2.5.2 The Egg of Sustainability

The ‘Egg of Sustainability’ model was designed in 1994 by the International Union for the
Conservation of Nature, IUCN (cf. Guijt & Moiseev 2001). It illustrates the relationship
between people and ecosystem as one circle inside another, like the yolk of an egg. This
implies that people are within the ecosystem, and that ultimately one is entirely dependent
upon the other. Just as an egg is good only if both the white and yolk are good, so a society is
well and sustainable only if both, people and the eco-system, are well. Social and economic
development can only take place if the environment offers the necessary resources: raw
materials, space for new production sites and jobs, constitutional qualities (recreation, health
etc.). Ecosystem is therefore to be regarded as a super coordinated system to the other
dimensions of the triangle or prism models: social, economic, and institutional.

These latter can only prosper if they adapt themselves to the limits of environmental carrying
capacity. Thus according to this model:
 What is sustainability? 17

Sustainable development = human well-being + ecosystem well-being

Figure 4 : The Egg of Sustainability

Source: Own representation based on Robert Prescott-Allen, in IUCN, 1995

2.5.3 Atkisson’s Pyramid Model

The Atkisson Pyramid process supports and accelerates the progress from identifying the
vision of sustainability, through analysis and brainstorming and agreements on a credible
plan of action.

The Structure of the Pyramid guides through the process of first building a firm base of
understanding, searching for and collecting relevant information and ideas, and then focusing
and narrowing down to what is important, effective, doable, and something that everyone can
agree in.
The Atkisson’s Pyramid is a blue print for the Sustainable development process. Its five steps
or levels include:

• Level 1: Indicators- Measuring the trend

• Level 2: Systems- Making the connections
• Level 3: Innovations- Ideas that Make a Difference
• Level 4: Strategies: From Idea to Reality
• Level 5: Agreements: From Workshop to Real World

This model is designed to help groups of 20-40 people move quickly up the sustainability
learning curve, from basic principles and frameworks, to systems analysis, to innovative
strategies for action. Along the way, groups practice cross-sectorial teamwork, make
linkages, generate dozens of new ideas, and work toward an “Agreement” which is a set of
actions they agree to follow through within the real world. (AtKisson, Believing Cassandra
(Earthscan, 2010).
 18 What is sustainability?

Figure 5 : Atkisson’s Pyramid Model

Source: Atkisson Inc.

The same process can be carried out for the other two components- Society and Economy and
then we can come up with the Agreement by making interlink ages between all the three
components.

2.5.4 Prism of Sustainability

This model was developed by the German Wuppertal Institute and defines Sustainable
development with the help of four components economy, environment, society, and
institution. In this, model the inter-linkages such as care, access, democracy, and eco-
efficiency need to be looked at closely as they show the relation between the dimensions
which could translate and influence policy.

Figure 6 - The Prism of Sustainability

Source: Spangenberg, Wuppertal institute, 1998
 What is sustainability? 19

In each dimension of the prism, there are imperatives (as norms for action). Indicators are
used to measure how far one has actually come in comparison to the overall vision of
Sustainable development. This is described in the following diagram.

Kain (2000, p. 25) had however criticized this prism, arguing that ‘the economic dimension
tends to include assets emanating from all four dimensions, thus, adding confusion to the
description and analysis’.

2.5.5 The Amoeba Model

The Amoeba Approach is a model used to visual assesses a system’s condition relative to an
optimal condition. The model is circular with the various indicators positioned around the
outside. Lines radiate from the centre to the indicators, on a continuum from unsustainable (in
the centre) to sustainable (the outside of the circle). A circle would indicate the optimum
conditions. This type of model allows simultaneous assessment of different indicators, and
easy comparison between components of the system.
“The Amoeba Model” is a powerful technique for accelerating the innovation process and
training to be far more effective in achieving Sustainable development.

Figure 7 : The Amoeba Model sustainability

Source: AtKisson, Believing Cassandra (Earthscan, 2010)

2.6 What is an indicator for sustainable development?

There are many tools and methodologies designed to measure and communicate progress
towards Sustainable development. One of the most popular tools is indicators and indices, an
index being an amalgam of more than one indicator. A sustainable development indicator
(Sustainable development) can generally be understood as a quantitative tool that analyses
changes, while measuring and communicating progress towards the sustainable use and
management of economic, social, institutional and environmental resources. An indicator is
something that points to an issue or condition.
 20 What is sustainability?

Its purpose is to show how well a system is working towards the defined goals. An indicator
can also be used in an evaluation, assessing if a development project takes into consideration
aspects of Sustainable development. Indicators are normally seen as something quantifiable
and in that sense an indicator is not the same thing as an indication. This does not mean that
there can be no qualitative indicators. The choice between quantitative and qualitative
indicators depends mainly on the purpose of the indicators, though quantifiable indicators are
more frequently used (Gallopin 1997).

Traditional measures such as, unemployment rates, economic growth rates, the percentage of
the population below the poverty line, rates of homelessness, crime, asthma. Alternatively,
figures on volunteer working, political involvement, air pollution, water quality and the level
of toxins in fish, illustrate only partial changes in one discrete part of society without bringing
to our attention the many linkages that exist between such diverse issues. When society, the
economy, and the environment are seen as separate and unrelated parts, there is a risk that the
problems identified within each sphere also are viewed in an isolated manner. Such a
piecemeal approach has several unwanted side effects. For example, the solution to one
problem may make another problem worse. Thus, creating affordable housing may be good,
but when the new housing is built in areas far from workplaces, the result is increased traffic
and pollution. A piecemeal approach may also create opposing groups. Moreover, it tends to
focus on short-term benefits without monitoring long-term effects. For example Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) measures the amount of money being spent, the higher the GDP the
better the overall economic well-being. However, GDP only reflects the amount of economic
activity and can rise when the overall community health is being impaired. Chambers et al
(2000) have argued that the next generation of indicator-producers most likely will focus
more specifically on the assumptions lying behind them and move from being librarians who
organise information in categories into being plumbers who focus on how the different
categories are interconnected and what the trade-offs among them may be. Instead of having
this “one-problem, one-indicator” approach, Sustainable development should thus aim to
develop a framework that tries to bring the economic, social and environmental aspects of
society together, emphasising the links between them.

Understanding the three parts and the linkages between them is thus the key to developing
and using sustainable indicators. For example, highways or other types of infrastructure result
in more commuting and better regional integration, which in turn leads to a more dynamic
work force and less unemployment, but also to more environmental pollution. An indicator
that would be able to measure the trade-offs between infrastructural construction and
environmental pollution would thus be highly interesting from the perspective of Sustainable
development. Sustainable indicators should therefore point to areas where the linkages
between the economy, the environment, and society are weakest. They should also reflect the
fact that the economy, society and the environment are tightly interconnected. Figure 8 is one
such example of how regional Sustainable development could be conceptualised as a web of
interactions between different aspects of the three pillars of Sustainable development.

The natural resources, either locally provided or imported in the form of raw materials or
energy, provide the material for production on which industry and jobs depend. The number
of jobs affects the poverty rate, while the poverty rate is related to crime. Air quality, water
quality, and materials used for production have an effect on health. Health problems, whether
 What is sustainability? 21

due to general air quality problems such as exposure to toxic materials, have an effect on
worker productivity and thus contribute to the rising costs of health insurances.

Sustainable development is thus requiring an integrated view of the world, in relation to the
different aspects of Sustainable development as well as in relation to time and scale and to
who is involved.

Figure 8 : The interaction between different aspects of the three pillars of Sustainable development.
Source: Eurostat (2001): UNCSD Sustainable development indicators