The Palgrave Handbook of Sustainability

Case Studies and Practical Solutions

Robert Brinkmann, Sandra J. Garren, Robert Brinkmann, Sandra J. Garren

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9783319713892
• Topic: Physical Sciences
• Subtopic: Geography
• Index: Geography

This book provides a comprehensive overview of the practice of sustainability through a diverse range of case studies spanning across varied fields and areas of expertise. It provides a clear indication as to the contemporary state of sustainability in a time faced by issues such as global climate change, challenges of environmental justice, economic globalization and environmental contamination.

The Palgrave Handbook of Sustainability explores three broad themes: Environmental Sustainability, Social Sustainability and Economic Sustainability. The authors critically explore these themes and provide insight into their linkages with one another to demonstrate the substantial efforts currently underway to address the sustainability of our planet. This handbook is an important contribution to the best practises on sustainability, drawn from many different examples across the fields of engineering, geology, anthropology, sociology, biology, chemistry and religion.

© The Author(s) 2018

Robert Brinkmann and Sandra J. Garren (eds.)The Palgrave Handbook of Sustainabilityhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71389-2_1

Begin Abstract

1. Sustainability Definitions, Historical Context, and Frameworks

Sandra J. Garren¹ and Robert Brinkmann¹

(1)

Geology, Environment, and Sustainability, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY, USA

Sandra J. Garren (Corresponding author)

Robert Brinkmann

Keywords

SustainabilitySustainable developmentSustainability frameworksSustainability assessmentsSustainability case studies

End Abstract

Different experts and organizations define sustainability in different ways. This introductory chapter discusses these definitions and reviews the development of the field of sustainability since it emerged from the United Nations in the 1980s in order to provide context for the chapters that follow. Additionally, the chapter highlights how sustainability brings together important themes of environment, economics, and social equity to try to limit the impact of human activity on the planet. We highlight how sustainability is assessed and measured by summarizing a number of local, national, and international assessment schemes used in a variety of contexts. We also consider how the three pillars of sustainability (environmental protection, economic development, and social equity) are key to each of the case studies presented in this book.

One overarching goal of this book is to define the field at the present moment. This text is a useful indicator of the state of sustainability at this pivotal time in our history in which the world is dealing with issues such as global climate change, environmental justice challenges, economic globalization, and environmental contamination. The book comprehensively looks at how distinct themes of sustainability are managed along with how they are managed together.

As we consider how the world is changing, society will look more and more to sustainability experts to try to find solutions to our emerging problems. This book is an important contribution that provides examples on the best practices on sustainability and highlights lessons learned and continued barriers and challenges related to sustainability.

Sustainability Definitions

The definition of sustainability and sustainable development remains contested in many academic quarters, and there is a lack of a consistent definition within organizations in the academic literature. To explore the definitions, let’s start with a dictionary definition. Merriam-Webster defines sustainable in three ways:

“capable of being sustained”; a “method of harvesting or using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged”; and, “a lifestyle involving the use of sustainable methods” (Merriam-Webster n.d.)

From this definition, one might conclude that to be sustainable, a practice simply needs to continue over a given length of time or that we can use a resource as long as we don’t use it all up or cause harm in the process. While the definition is a good starting place, the definition is problematic because for one it uses the term in the definition itself and because it leaves the reader without a working knowledge of what it means to be sustainable. For example, what lifestyle is considered sustainable? The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) offers up an expanded definition of sustainability:

Sustainability is based on a simple principle: Everything that we need for our survival and well-being depends, either directly or indirectly, on our natural environment. To pursue sustainability is to create and maintain the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony to support present and future generations. (US EPA n.d.)

This definition is much more useful since it brings together the many elements of the current field of sustainability which sprung into existence in the 1980s as a result of meetings conducted at the United Nations.

The term “sustainable development ” was defined globally during the United Nations (UN) World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (United Nations 1987). This classic definition was published in the outcome document called Our Common Future (or the Brundtland Report as it is sometimes referred) and reads as follows:

Sustainable development is development which meets the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It contains within it two 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.... (United Nations 1987, 41)

This definition contains a number of key items worth examining. Firstly, the definition contains the word development which is absent from the two definitions presented above. So, what does development actually refer to? Typically, one thinks of economic development but in this definition, people are highlighted as part of the development definition. Secondly, the definition highlights the concept of needs with a focus on the needs of the poor who clearly are not getting basic needs met. Beyond basic needs though, the concept of needs differs from person to person and the definition does not define what at what level of needs should be met. Should society attempt to meet only the basic need or all the needs of a human being through self-actualization as presented in Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Fig. 1.1)?

Fig. 1.1

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Source: https://​www.​simplypsychology​.​org/​maslow.​html)

The third concept in the definition is that of limitations and points specifically to limitations on the environment. Researchers have been studying planetary boundaries for decades and have identified nine environmental limits that society must prevent crossing to ensure the sustainability of our planet (Steffen et al. 2015; Rockstrom et al. 2009). As shown on Fig. 1.2, four of the nine boundaries have been crossed, namely, climate change, biodiversity loss, excessive phosphorus and nutrient loading, and land use system change.

Fig. 1.2

Planetary boundaries according to Rockstrom et al. 2009 and Steffen et al. 2015 (Source: https://​en.​wikipedia.​org/​wiki/​Planetary_​boundaries#/​media/​File:​Planetary_​Boundaries_​2015.​svg)

Three balanced pillars often conceptualize sustainable development : environmental protection, economic growth, and social equality, sometimes referred to as the three E’s (environmental, economic, and social) (Fig. 1.3). The three E’s were presented in 2002 at a UN Conference, World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) , and were intended to be interdependent and mutually reinforcing (United Nations 2002). However, many practitioners in the field still view the three E’s as separate silos and look for solutions to disparate problems in isolation of the other two pillars.

Fig. 1.3

The three pillars of sustainability (Source: http://​www.​thwink.​org/​sustain/​glossary/​ThreePillarsOfSu​stainability.​htm)

Even with the specific sustainable development definition advanced by the United Nations, the ambiguous nature of the definition has resulted in organizations and institutions projecting “their interests, hopes and aspirations onto the banner of sustainable development ” (Kates et al. 2005) which has led to a proliferation of practical definitions. For example, Johnston et al. (2007) identified 140 altered or variously modified definitions of sustainable development . It is clear that the lack of a unified definition of sustainability may hinder the ability to comprehensively assess sustainability, and there have been recent attempts to develop a unified definition. For example, Moore et al. (2017) reviewed over 200 research studies, identified 24 unique definitions of sustainability, and, from those definitions, identified five distinct yet interrelated constructs that include time, continued delivery, behavior change, evolution/adaption, and continued benefits. The proposed unifying definition is as follows:

After a defined period of time, a program, clinical intervention, and/or implementation strategies continue to be delivered and/or individual behavior change is maintained; the program and individual behavior change may evolve or adapt while continuing to produce benefits for individuals/systems. (Moore et al. 2017, 6)

Moore et al. (2017) intend to use this definition to develop a meta-framework to consolidate factors across the numerous sustainability frameworks. Whether this unifying definition is useful to practitioners is unclear. Not all sustainability researchers agree that having a unified definition would help advance sustainability given the complexity of such a definition and advocate that a simpler definition allows for flexibility when assessing unique and complex sustainability initiatives and programs (Dale and Newman 2005). Another critic...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Front Matter
• 1. Sustainability Definitions, Historical Context, and Frameworks
• Part I
• Part II
• Part III
• Part IV
• Back Matter