Download Origins of “Sustainability”

eng 655 goggin
Origins of “Sustainability”
While the term 'sustainable development' was popularised by the World Commission on
Environment and Development report Our Common Future in 1987, it is generally
recognised that notions of sustainability were promoted in `limits to growth' and 'green'
discourses in the early 1970s (Meadows et al.: 1974, The Limits to Growth: A Report for the
Club of Rome, Potomac Associates and Pan Books, London and Sydney). However, there is
little acknowledgement of the way in which nineteenth century intellectuals, from a range of
disciplines, conceptualised the importance of balancing economic, social and environmental
sustainability in their quest for justice and the conservation of nature.
There was a considerable exchange of ideas on `political economy' and nature across Europe,
and later the Americas, from the middle of the eighteenth century. This discourse reached its
intellectual peak in the nineteenth century. During that era there was a proliferation of
literature that was aimed at improving the human condition and recognising humanity's
dependence upon nature.
--Lumley, Sarah, and Armstrong, Patrick. (2004). Some of the nineteenth century origins of the sustainability
concept. Environment, Development, and Sustainability, 6, 367-378.
Six separate but related strains of thought have emerged prominently since 1950 in
discussions of such phenomena as the interrelationships among rates of population growth,
resource use, and pressure on the environment. They are the ecological/carrying capacity
root, the resources/environment root, the biosphere root, the critique of technology root, the
no growth / slow growth root, and the ecodevelopment root.
Each of these strains of thought was fully developed before the word sustainable itself
was used. Many of the roots are based on fundamentally opposing assessments of the future
of mankind. Many of the roots, such as the ecology/carrying capacity root, are based on
physical concepts, and they exclude normative values. Others, such as the ecodevelopment
root, include such values as equity, broad participation in governance, and decentralized
government.
When the word sustainability was first used in 1972 in the context of man's future, in a
British book, Blueprint for Survival, normative concepts were prominent. This continued to
be the case when the word was first used in 1974 in the United States to justify a no
growth economy.
Sustainability was first used in a United Nations document in 1978. Normative concepts,
encapsulated in the term ecodevelopment, were prominent in the United Nations
publications.
After about 1978, the term sustainability began to be used not only in technological
articles and reports but also in policy documents culminating in the use of the term in the
report of the summit meeting of the Group of Seven in 1989.
The roots of the term sustainability are so deeply embedded in fundamentally different
concepts, each of which has valid claims to validity, that a search for a single definition
seems futile. The existence of multiple meaning is tolerable if each analyst describes clearly
what he means by sustainability.
--Kidd, Charles V. (1992). The evolution of sustainability. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 5,
1-26.
eng 655 goggin
4 September 2002
The Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development
From our Origins to the Future
1. We, the representatives of the peoples of the world, assembled at the World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa from 2-4 September 2002, reaffirm
our commitment to sustainable development.
2. We commit ourselves to build a humane, equitable and caring global society cognizant of
the need for human dignity for all.
3. At the beginning of this Summit, the children of the world spoke to us in a simple yet clear
voice that the future belongs to them, and accordingly challenged all of us to ensure that
through our actions they will inherit a world free of the indignity and indecency occasioned
by poverty, environmental degradation and patterns of unsustainable development.
4. As part of our response to these children, who represent our collective future, all of us,
coming from every corner of the world, informed by different life experiences, are united and
moved by a deeply-felt sense that we urgently need to create a new and brighter world of
hope.
5. Accordingly, we assume a collective responsibility to advance and strengthen the
interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars of sustainable development - economic
development, social development and environmental protection - at local, national, regional
and global levels.
6. From this Continent, the Cradle of Humanity we declare, through the Plan of
Implementation and this Declaration, our responsibility to one another, to the greater
community of life and to our children.
7. Recognizing that humankind is at a crossroad, we have united in a common resolve to
make a determined effort to respond positively to the need to produce a practical and visible
plan that should bring about poverty eradication and human development.
--United Nations. (2002). Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development: A/CONF.199/20, 1-2.
A review of the multidisciplinary literature on sustainable development (SD) reveals a lack
of a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding sustainable development and its
complexities (Jabareen, 2004). The review shows that the definitions of sustainable
development are vague (Gow, 1992; Mozaffar, 2001); that there is a lack of operative
definitions (Villanueva, 1997, p. 154); that there is disagreement over what should be
sustained (Redclift, 1993; Sachs, 1999, p. 25; Satterthwaite, 1996, p. 32); that the concept is
unclear in terms of emotional commitment (Solow, 1992); and that it ‘‘remains a confused
topic’’ (Redclift, 1994, p. 17), ‘‘fraught with contradictions’’ (Redclift, 1987). Yet, there is
no general agreement on how the concept should be translated into practice (Berke and
Conroy, 2000). Andrews (1997) further observes that ‘‘sustainable development is primarily
symbolic rhetoric, with competing interests each redefining it to suit their own political
agendas, rather than serving as an influential basis for policy development’’ (p. 19). Beatley
and Manning (1998, p. 3) argue that there is a general sense that sustainability is a good
thing, but that it still requires definition and elaboration.
--Jabareen, Yosef. (2006) A new conceptual framework for sustainable development. Environment,
Development, and Sustainability. [online]