Sustainability

  (Redirected from Sustainable)

Sustainability is the capacity to endure in a relatively ongoing way across various domains of life.[2] In the 21st century, it refers generally to the capacity for Earth's biosphere and human civilization to co-exist. For many, sustainability is defined through the interconnected domains of environment, economy and society.[3] Despite the increased popularity of the term "sustainability" and its usage,[4] the possibility that human societies will achieve environmental sustainability has been, and continues to be, questioned—in light of environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, climate change, overconsumption, population growth and societies' pursuit of unlimited economic growth in a closed system.[5][6]

Urban sustainability analysis of the greater urban area of the city of São Paulo using the ‘Circles of Sustainability' method of the UN and Metropolis Association.[1]

A related concept is that of "sustainable development", which is often discussed through the domains of culture, technology economics and politics.[1][7] Sustainable development may be seen as the organizing principle of sustainability. According to Our Common Future (the "Brundtland Report" in 1987), sustainable development is defined as development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[8][9]

Moving towards sustainability can involve social challenges such as individual lifestyles and ethical consumerism. The philosophical and analytic framework of sustainability draws on and connects with many different disciplines and fields; this is also called sustainability science.[10]

Definitions and common useEdit

Historic originsEdit

Originally, "sustainability" meant making only such use of natural, renewable resources that people could continue to rely on their yields in the long term.[11][12] The concept of sustainability, or Nachhaltigkeit in German, can be traced back to Hans Carl von Carlowitz (1645–1714), and was applied to forestry.[13] However, the idea itself goes back to times immemorial, as communities have always worried about the capacity of their environment to sustain them in the long term. Many ancient cultures had traditions restricting the use of natural resources, e.g. the Maoris of New Zealand,[14] the Amerindians of coastal British Columbia and peoples of Indonesia, Oceania, India and Mali.[15]

Sustainability as a policy conceptEdit

Modern use of the term "sustainability" really begins with the UN Commission on Environment and Development, also known as the Brundtland Commission, set up in 1983. According to Our Common Future (also known as the "Brundtland Report"), sustainable development is defined as development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[8][9] Sustainable development may be the organizing principle of sustainability, yet others may view the two terms as paradoxical (seeing development as inherently unsustainable).[16][17][18]

The word sustainability is also used widely by development agencies and international charities to focus their poverty alleviation efforts in ways that can be sustained by the local populace and its environment.

Contemporary useEdit

Three dimensions of sustainabilityEdit

 
A diagram indicating the relationship between the "three pillars of sustainability", in which both economy and society are constrained by environmental limits[19]
 
SDG wedding cake model: A way of viewing the economic, social and ecological aspects of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

A different view of sustainability emerged in the 1990s. Here, sustainability is not seen in terms of confronting human aspirations for increased well-being with the limitations imposed by the environment, but rather as a systems view of these aspirations, incorporating environmental concerns.[20] Under this conception, sustainability is defined through the following interconnected domains or pillars: environmental, economic and social.[3] In crude versions of this view (also termed the ‘triple bottom line’), the three dimensions are equivalent, and the aim is to achieve a balance between them.[21] More sophisticated versions recognize that the economic dimension is subsumed under the social one (i.e., the economy is part of society), and that the environmental dimension constrains both the social and the economic one.[22] In fact, the three pillars are interdependent, and in the long run, none can exist without the others.[23] The term "sustainability" and its derived definition continue to change and adapt as the world advances and opinions develop.

The 2005 World Summit on Social Development identified sustainable development goals (SDGs), such as economic development, social development, and environmental protection.[24] This view can be expressed as a “wedding-cake” model, in which each of the 17 SDGs is assigned to one of the three dimensions.[25]

The three pillars have served as a common ground for numerous sustainability standards and certification systems, in particular in the food industry.[26][27] Standards which today explicitly refer to the triple bottom line include Rainforest Alliance, Fairtrade, UTZ Certified, and GLOBALG.A.P.[28][29] Sustainability standards are used in global supply chains in various sectors and industries such as agriculture, mining, forestry, and fisheries. Based on the ITC Standards, the most frequently covered products are agricultural products, followed by processed food.[30][31]

EnvironmentEquitableSustainableBearable (Social ecology)Viable (Environmental economics)EconomicSocial 
About this image
Venn diagram of sustainable development:
at the confluence of three constituent parts[32]

The economy is a subsystem of human society, which is itself a subsystem of the biosphere, and a gain in one sector is a loss in another.[33] This perspective led to the nested circles' figure (above) of 'economics' inside 'society' inside the 'environment'.

Thus, the simple definition of sustainability as something that may constrain development has been expanded to incorporate improving the quality of human life. This conveys the idea of sustainability having quantifiable limits. On the other hand, sustainability is also a call to action, a task in progress or "journey" and therefore a political process, so some definitions set out common goals and values.[34] The Earth Charter[35] speaks of "a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace." This suggests a more complex image of sustainability, which includes the domain of politics. Essentially, sustainability can not be ensured through one route means of focus, attention, and action. It must be cultivated through a complete targeting of the object itself to ensure results and feasibility.

More than that, sustainability implies responsible and proactive decision-making and innovation that minimizes negative impact and maintains a balance between ecological resilience, economic prosperity, political justice and cultural vibrancy to ensure a desirable planet for all species now and in the future.[7] Understanding sustainable development is important but without clear targets, it remains an unfocused term like "liberty" or "justice."[36] It has also been described as a "dialogue of values that challenge the sociology of development."[37]

Sustainability can also be defined as a socio-ecological process characterized by the pursuit of a common ideal.[38][39] An ideal is by definition unattainable in a given time and space. However, by persistently and dynamically approaching it, the process results in a sustainable system.[39]

Critique and variationsEdit

Call for further dimensionsEdit

Some sustainability experts and practitioners have proposed additional pillars of sustainability. A common one is culture, resulting in a quadruple bottom line.[40] There is also an opinion that considers resource use and financial sustainability as two additional pillars of sustainability.[41] In infrastructure projects, for instance, one must ask whether sufficient financing capability for maintenance exists.[41]

An example of this four-dimensional view is the Circles of Sustainability approach, which includes cultural sustainability.[42] This goes beyond the three dimensions of the United Nations Millennium Declaration but is in accord with the United Nations, Unesco, Agenda 21, and in particular the Agenda 21 for culture which specifies culture as the fourth domain of sustainable development.[40] The model is now being used by organizations such as the United Nations Cities Program[43] and Metropolis.[44] In the case of Metropolis, this approach does not mean adding a fourth domain of culture to the dominant triple bottom line figure of the economy, environment and the social. Rather, it involves treating all four domains—economy, ecology, politics, and culture—as social (including economics) and distinguishing between ecology (as the intersection of the human and natural worlds) and the environment as that which goes far beyond what we as humans can ever know.[45]

Another model suggests humans' attempt to achieve all of their needs and aspirations via seven modalities: economy, community, occupational groups, government, environment, culture, and physiology.[46] From the global to the individual human scale, each of the seven modalities can be viewed across seven hierarchical levels. Human sustainability can be achieved by attaining sustainability in all levels of the seven modalities.

Strong and weak sustainabilityEdit

An alternative way of thinking is to distinguish between what has been called weak and strong sustainability.[47] The former refers to environmental resources that can be replaced or substituted for, such as fossil fuels, many minerals, forests and polluted air. The latter refers to resources that once lost cannot be recovered or repaired within a reasonable timescale, such as biodiversity, soils or climate. Different policies and strategies are needed for the two types.

Also, with regards to the economic dimension of sustainability, this can be understood by making a distinction between weak versus strong sustainability. In the former, loss of natural resources is compensated by an increase in human capital. Strong sustainability applies where human and natural capital are complementary, but not interchangeable. Thus, the problem of deforestation in England due to demand for wood in shipbuilding and for charcoal in iron-making was solved when ships came to be built of steel and coke replaced charcoal in iron-making – an example of weak sustainability. Prevention of biodiversity loss, which is an existential threat, is an example of the strong type. What is weak and what is strong depends partially on technology and partially on one’s convictions.[citation needed]

Related conceptsEdit

Planetary boundariesEdit

In 2009 a group of scientists led by Johan Rockström from the Stockholm Resilience Centre and Will Steffen from the Australian National University described nine planetary boundaries. Transgressing even one of them can be dangerous to sustainability. Those boundaries are climate change, biodiversity loss (changed in 2015 to "change in biosphere integrity"), biogeochemical (nitrogen and phosphorus), ocean acidification, land use, freshwater, ozone depletion, atmospheric aerosols, chemical pollution (changed in 2015 to "Introduction of novel entities").[48][49]

Ecological footprint and carrying capacityEdit

The ecological footprint measures human consumption in terms of the biologically productive land and sea area needed to provide for all the competing demands on nature, including the provision of food, fiber, the accommodation of urban infrastructure and the absorption of waste, including carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuel. In 2019, it required on average 2.8 global hectares per person worldwide, 75% more than the biological capacity of 1.6 global hectares available on this planet per person (this space includes the space needed for wild species).[50] The resulting ecological deficit must be met from unsustainable extra sources and these are obtained in three ways: embedded in the goods and services of world trade; taken from the past (e.g. fossil fuels); or borrowed from the future as unsustainable resource usage (e.g. by over exploiting forests and fisheries).

The carrying capacity of an environment is the maximum population size of a biological species that can be sustained by that specific environment, given the food, habitat, water, and other resources available. The carrying capacity is defined as the environment's maximal load, which in population ecology corresponds to the population equilibrium, when the number of deaths in a population equals the number of births (as well as immigration and emigration). The effect of carrying capacity on population dynamics is modelled with a logistic function. Carrying capacity is applied to the maximum population an environment can support in ecology, agriculture and fisheries. The term carrying capacity has been applied to a few different processes in the past before finally being applied to population limits in the 1950s.[51] The notion of carrying capacity for humans is covered by the notion of sustainable population.

Sustainable developmentEdit

Sustainable development is an organizing principle for meeting human development goals while simultaneously sustaining the ability of natural systems to provide the natural resources and ecosystem services on which the economy and society depend. The desired result is a state of society where living conditions and resources are used to continue to meet human needs without undermining the integrity and stability of the natural system. Sustainable development can be defined as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.[52]

ResilienceEdit

Resilience in ecology is the capacity of an ecosystem to absorb disturbance and still retain its basic structure and viability. Resilience-thinking evolved from the need to manage interactions between human-constructed systems and natural ecosystems sustainably, even though to policymakers, a definition remains elusive. Resilience-thinking addresses how much planetary ecological systems can withstand assaults from human disturbances and still deliver the service's current and future generations need from them. It is also concerned with commitment from geopolitical policymakers to promote and manage essential planetary ecological resources to promote resilience and achieve sustainability of these essential resources for the benefit of future generations of life.[53] The resilience of an ecosystem, and thereby, its sustainability, can be reasonably measured at junctures or events where the combination of naturally occurring regenerative forces (solar energy, water, soil, atmosphere, vegetation, and biomass) interact with the energy released into the ecosystem from disturbances.[54]

The most practical view of sustainability is in terms of efficiency.[55] In fact, efficiency equals sustainability since optimum efficiency (when possible) means zero waste.[56] Another not so practical view of sustainability is closed systems that maintain processes of productivity indefinitely by replacing resources used by actions of people with resources of equal or greater value by those same people without degrading or endangering natural biotic systems.[57] In this way, sustainability can be concretely measured in human projects if there is a transparent accounting of the resources put back into the ecosystem to replace those displaced. In nature, the accounting occurs naturally through a process of adaptation as an ecosystem returns to viability from an external disturbance. The adaptation is a multi-stage process that begins with the disturbance event (earthquake, volcanic eruption, hurricane, tornado, flood, or thunderstorm), followed by absorption, utilization, or deflection of the energy or energies that the external forces created.[58][59]

Dimensions of sustainabilityEdit

Environmental dimensionEdit

Environmental managementEdit

At the global scale and in the broadest sense environmental management involves the oceans, freshwater systems, land and atmosphere. Following the sustainability principle of scale, it can be equally applied to any ecosystem from a tropical rainforest to a home garden.[60][61]

Healthy ecosystems provide vital goods and services to humans and other organisms. There are two major ways of reducing negative human impact and enhancing ecosystem services and the first of these is environmental management. This direct approach is based largely on information gained from earth science, environmental science and conservation biology. However, this is management at the end of a long series of indirect causal factors that are initiated by human consumption, so a second approach is through demand management of human resource use.

Management of human consumption of resources is an indirect approach based largely on information gained from economics. Three broad criteria for ecological sustainability were describe in 1990: renewable resources should provide a sustainable yield (the rate of harvest should not exceed the rate of regeneration); for non-renewable resources there should be equivalent development of renewable substitutes; waste generation should not exceed the assimilative capacity of the environment.[62]

According to the Brundtland report, "poverty is a major cause and effect of global environmental problems. It is therefore futile to attempt to deal with environmental problems without a broader perspective that encompasses the factors underlying world poverty and international inequality."[63]

Land use changesEdit

Alterations in the relative proportions of land dedicated to urbanization, agriculture, forest, woodland, grassland and pasture have a marked effect on the global water, carbon and nitrogen biogeochemical cycles and this can impact negatively on both natural and human systems.[64] At the local human scale, major sustainability benefits accrue from sustainable parks and gardens and green cities.[65][66]

Feeding almost eight billion human bodies takes a heavy toll on the Earth's resources. This begins with the appropriation of about 38% of the Earth's land surface[67] and about 20% of its net primary productivity.[68] Added to this are the resource-hungry activities of industrial agribusiness—everything from the crop need for irrigation water, synthetic fertilizers and pesticides to the resource costs of food packaging, transport (now a major part of global trade) and retail. Environmental problems associated with industrial agriculture and agribusiness are now being addressed through such movements as sustainable agriculture, organic farming and more sustainable business practices.[69] The most cost-effective mitigation options include afforestation, sustainable forest management, and reducing deforestation.[70]

FoodEdit

The environmental effects of different dietary patterns depend on many factors, including the proportion of animal and plant foods consumed and the method of food production.[71][72] At the global level the environmental impact of agribusiness is being addressed through sustainable agriculture and organic farming. At the local level there are various movements working towards local food production, more productive use of urban wastelands and domestic gardens including permaculture, urban horticulture, local food, slow food, sustainable gardening, and organic gardening.[73][74]

A sustainable food system is a type of food system that provides healthy food to people and creates sustainable environmental, economic and social systems that surround food. Sustainable food systems start with the development of sustainable agricultural practices, development of more sustainable food distribution systems, creation of sustainable diets and reduction of food waste throughout the system. Sustainable food systems have been argued to be central to many[75] or all[76] 17 Sustainable Development Goals.[77]

EnergyEdit

Energy is sustainable if it "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs".[78] Most definitions of sustainable energy include considerations of environmental aspects such as greenhouse gas emissions and social and economic aspects such as energy poverty. Renewable energy sources such as wind, hydroelectric power, solar, and geothermal energy are generally far more sustainable than fossil fuel sources. However, some renewable energy projects, such as the clearing of forests to produce biofuels, can cause severe environmental damage. The role of non-renewable energy sources in sustainable energy has been controversial. Nuclear power is a low-carbon source whose historic mortality rates are comparable to wind and solar, but its sustainability has been debated because of concerns about radioactive waste, nuclear proliferation, and accidents. Switching from coal to natural gas has environmental benefits, including a lower climate impact, but may lead to a delay in switching to more sustainable options. Carbon capture and storage can be built into power plants to remove their carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, but is expensive and has seldom been implemented.

Renewable energy also has some environmental impacts. They are presented by the proponents of theories such as degrowth, steady-state economy and circular economy as one of the proofs that for achieving sustainability technological methods are not enough and there is a need to limit consumption[79][80]

Materials and wasteEdit

As global population and affluence have increased, so has the use of various materials increased in volume, diversity, and distance transported. Included here are raw materials, minerals, synthetic chemicals (including hazardous substances), manufactured products, food, living organisms, and waste.[81] By 2050, humanity could consume an estimated 140 billion tons of minerals, ores, fossil fuels and biomass per year (three times its current amount) unless the economic growth rate is decoupled from the rate of natural resource consumption. Developed countries' citizens consume an average of 16 tons of those four key resources per capita per year, ranging up to 40 or more tons per person in some developed countries with resource consumption levels far beyond what is likely sustainable. By comparison, the average person in India today consumes four tons per year.[82]

Sustainable use of materials has targeted the idea of dematerialization, converting the linear path of materials (extraction, use, disposal in landfill) to a circular material flow that reuses materials as much as possible, much like the cycling and reuse of waste in nature.[83] Dematerialization is being encouraged through the ideas of industrial ecology, eco design[84] and ecolabelling. The use of sustainable biomaterials that come from renewable sources and that can be recycled is preferred to the use on non-renewables from a life cycle standpoint.

This way of thinking is expressed in the concept of circular economy, which employs reuse, sharing, repair, refurbishment, remanufacturing and recycling to create a closed-loop system, minimizing the use of resource inputs and the creation of waste, pollution and carbon emissions.[85] The European Commission has adopted an ambitious Circular Economy Action Plan in 2020, which aims at making sustainable products the norm in the EU.[86][87]

Economic dimensionEdit

 
The classic image of the doughnut; the extent to which boundaries are transgressed and social foundations are met are not visible on this diagram

On one account, sustainability "concerns the specification of a set of actions to be taken by present persons that will not diminish the prospects of future persons to enjoy levels of consumption, wealth, utility, or welfare comparable to those enjoyed by present persons."[88] Thus, sustainability economics means taking a long-term view of human welfare. One way of doing this is by considering the social discount rate, i.e. the rate by which future costs and benefits should be discounted when making decisions about the future. The more one is concerned about future generations, the lower the social discount rate should be.[89] Another method is to quantify the services that ecosystems provide to humankind and put an economic value on them, so that environmental damage may be assessed against perceived short-term welfare benefits. For instance, according to the World Economic Forum, half of the global GDP is strongly or moderately dependent on nature. Also, for every dollar spent on nature restoration there is a profit of at least 9 dollars.[90] The study of these ecosystem services is an important branch of ecological economics.

A major problem in sustainability is that many environmental and social costs are not borne by the entity that causes them, and are therefore not expressed in the market price. In economics this is known as externalities, in this case negative externalities. They can be solved by government intervention: either by taxing the activity (the polluter pays), by subsidizing activities that have a positive environmental or social effect (rewarding stewardship), or by outlawing the practice (legal limits on pollution, for instance).[citation needed]

In recent years, the concept of doughnut economics has been developed by the British economist Kate Raworth to integrate social and environmental sustainability into economic thinking. The social dimension is here portrayed as a minimum standard to which a society should aspire, whereas an outer limit is imposed by the carrying capacity of the planet.[91]

Decoupling environmental degradation and economic growthEdit

In economic and environmental fields, decoupling refers to an economy that would be able to grow without corresponding increases in environmental pressure. In many economies, increasing production (GDP) currently raises pressure on the environment. An economy that would be able to sustain economic growth while reducing the amount of resources such as water or fossil fuels used and delink environmental deterioration at the same time would be said to be decoupled.[92] Environmental pressure is often measured using emissions of pollutants, and decoupling is often measured by the emission intensity of economic output.[93] Examples of absolute long-term decoupling are rare, but recently some industrialized countries have decoupled GDP growth from both production- and, to a lesser extent, consumption-based CO2 emissions.[94]

Economic opportunityEdit

Sustainable business practices integrate ecological concerns with social and economic ones (i.e., the triple bottom line).[95][96] The idea of sustainability as a business opportunity has led to the formation of organizations such as the Sustainability Consortium of the Society for Organizational Learning,[97] the Sustainable Business Institute,[98] and the World Council for Sustainable Development.[99] The expansion of sustainable business opportunities can contribute to job creation through the introduction of green-collar workers.[100] Research focusing on progressive corporate leaders who have integrated sustainability into commercial strategy has yielded a leadership competency model for sustainability,[101][102] and led to emergence of the concept of "embedded sustainability"—defined by its authors Chris Laszlo and Nadya Zhexembayeva as "incorporation of environmental, health, and social value into the core business with no trade-off in price or quality—in other words, with no social or green premium."[103] Embedded sustainability offers at least seven distinct opportunities for business value creation: better risk-management, increased efficiency through reduced waste and resource use, better product differentiation, new market entrances, enhanced brand and reputation, greater opportunity to influence industry standards, and greater opportunity for radical innovation.[104]

Social dimensionEdit

Social sustainability is the least defined and least understood of the different ways of approaching sustainability and sustainable development. Social sustainability has had considerably less attention in public dialogue than economic and environmental sustainability. There are several approaches to sustainability. The first, which posits a triad of environmental sustainability, economic sustainability, and social sustainability, is the most widely accepted as a model for addressing sustainability. The concept of "social sustainability" in this approach encompasses such topics as: social equity, livability, health equity, community development, social capital, social support, human rights, labour rights, placemaking, social responsibility, social justice, cultural competence, community resilience, and human adaptation.

A second approach suggests that all of the domains of sustainability are social: including ecological, economic, political and cultural sustainability. These domains of social sustainability are all dependent upon the relationship between the social and the natural, with the "ecological domain" defined as human embeddedness in the environment. In these terms, social sustainability encompasses all human activities.[105] It is not just relevant to the focussed intersection of economics, the environment and the social.[106]

Broad-based strategies for more sustainable social systems include: improved education and the political empowerment of women, especially in developing countries; greater regard for social justice, notably equity between rich and poor both within and between countries; and, perhaps most of all, intergenerational equity.[107] After all, to be sustained means to outlast the present.

Peace, security, social justiceEdit

Social disruptions like war, crime and corruption divert resources from areas of greatest human need, damage the capacity of societies to plan for the future, and generally threaten human well-being and the environment.[108]

Cultural dimensionEdit

Cultural sustainability as it relates to sustainable development (to sustainability), has to do with maintaining cultural beliefs, cultural practices, heritage conservation, culture as its own entity, and the question of whether or not any given cultures will exist in the future.[109] From cultural heritage to cultural and creative industries, culture is both an enabler and a driver of the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.[110] Culture is defined as a set of beliefs, morals, methods, institutions and a collection of human knowledge that is dependent on the transmission of these characteristics to younger generations.[111] Sustainability is defined as the ability to sustain or continue.[112] The two concepts have been intertwined within social and political domains, and as such, have become one of the more important concepts of sustainability.

Health and wellbeingEdit

The World Health Organization recognizes that achieving sustainability is impossible without addressing health issues.[113] There is a rise in some interconnected health and sustainability problems, for example, in food production. Measures for achieving environmental sustainability can in many cases also improve health.[114]

For better measuring the well-being, the New Economics Foundation's has launched the Happy Planet Index.[115] In the beginning of the 21st century, more than 100 organizations created the Wellbeing Economy Alliance with the aim to create an economy that will guarantee well-being and heal nature at the same time.[116]

Implementing more sustainable projectsEdit

MeasurementEdit

Sustainability measurement is the quantitative basis for the informed management of sustainability.[117] The metrics used for the measurement of sustainability (involving the sustainability of environmental, social and economic domains, both individually and in various combinations) are still evolving: they include indicators, benchmarks, audits, sustainability standards and certification systems like Fairtrade and Organic, indexes and accounting, as well as assessment, appraisal[118] and other reporting systems. They are applied over a wide range of spatial and temporal scales.[119][120]

At the enterprise scale, carrying capacity now also plays a critical role in making it possible to measure and report the sustainability performance of individual organizations. This is most clearly demonstrated through use of Context-Based Sustainability (CBS) tools, methods and metrics, including the MultiCapital Scorecard, which has been in development since 2005.[121][122] Contrary to many other mainstream approaches to measuring the sustainability performance of organizations – which tend to be more incrementalist in form – CBS is explicitly tied to social, environmental and economic limits and thresholds in the world. Thus, rather than simply measure and report changes in relative terms from one period to another, CBS makes it possible to compare the impacts of organizations to organization-specific norms, standards or thresholds for what they (the impacts) would have to be in order to be empirically sustainable (i.e., which if generalized to a larger population would not fail to maintain the sufficiency of vital resources for human or non-human well-being).[123][124]

Barriers to sustainabilityEdit

There are at least three letters from the scientific community about the growing threat to sustainability and ways to remove the threat.

  • In 1992, scientists wrote the first World Scientists' Warning to Humanity, which begins: "Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course." About 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including most Nobel Prize laureates in the sciences, signed it. The letter mentions severe damage to atmosphere, oceans, ecosystems, soil productivity, and more. It warns humanity that life on earth as we know it can become impossible, and if humanity wants to prevent the damage, some steps need to be taken: better use of resources, abandon of fossil fuels, stabilization of human population, elimination of poverty and more.[125]
  • In 2017, the scientists wrote a second warning to humanity. In this warning, the scientists mention some positive trends like slowing deforestation, but despite this, they claim that except ozone depletion, none of the problems mentioned in the first warning received an adequate response. The scientists called to reduce the use of fossil fuels, meat, and other resources and to stabilize the population. It was signed by 15,364 scientists from 184 countries, making it the letter with the most scientist signatures in history.[126]
  • In November 2019, more than 11,000 scientists from 153 countries published a letter in which they warn about serious threats to sustainability from climate change unless big changes in policies happen. The scientists declared "climate emergency" and called to stop overconsumption, move away from fossil fuels, eat less meat, stabilize the population, and more.[127]

Similarly, in 2005, 12 main problems were described that can be dangerous to sustainability:[128] Deforestation and habitat destruction, soil problems (erosion, salinization, and soil fertility losses), water management problems, overhunting, overfishing, effects of introduced species on native species, overpopulation, Increased per-capita impact of people, climate change, Buildup of toxins in the environment, energy shortages, full human use of the Earth's photosynthetic capacity.

In 2021 the United Nations Environment Programme issued a report describing three major environmental threats to sustainability: climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. The report states that as of the year 2021 humanity fails to properly address the main environmental challenges. The COVID-19 pandemic is also linked to environmental issues, including climate change, deforestation and wildlife trade.[129]

Ecosystems and biodiversityEdit

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment analyzed the state of the Earth's ecosystems and provides summaries and guidelines for decision-makers. It concludes that human activity is having a significant and escalating impact on the biodiversity of the world ecosystems, reducing both their resilience and biocapacity. The report refers to natural systems as humanity's "life-support system", providing essential "ecosystem services". The assessment measures 24 ecosystem services and concludes that only four have shown improvement over the last 50 years, 15 are in serious decline, and five are in a precarious condition.[130]

In 2019, a summary for policymakers of the largest, most comprehensive study to date of biodiversity and ecosystem services was published by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. It recommends that human civilization will need a transformative change, including sustainable agriculture, reductions in consumption and waste, fishing quotas and collaborative water management.[131][132]

Pathways to more sustainabilityEdit

Sustainability is studied and managed over many scales (levels or frames of reference) of time and space and in many contexts of environmental, social, and economic organizations. The focus ranges from the total carrying capacity (sustainability) of planet Earth to the sustainability of economic sectors, ecosystems, countries, municipalities, neighborhoods, home gardens, individual lives, individual goods and services, occupations, lifestyles, and behavior patterns. Since the overarching theme of sustainability includes the prudent use of resources to meet current needs without affecting the ability of the future generation from meeting their needs, sustainability can entail the full compass of biological and human activity or any part of it.[133]

Affluence, population and technologyEdit

Strategies for reaching sustainability can generally be divided into three categories. Most governments and international organizations that aim to achieve sustainability employ all three approaches, though they may disagree on which deserves priority. The three approaches, embodied in the I = PAT formula,[134] can be summarized as follows:

Affluence: Many believe that sustainability cannot be achieved without reducing consumption. This theory is represented most clearly in the idea of a steady-state economy, meaning an economy without growth. Methods in this category include, among others, the phase-out of lightweight plastic bags, promoting biking, and increasing energy efficiency. For example, according to the report "Plastic and Climate", plastic-production greenhouse gas emissions can be as much as 15% of earth's remaining carbon budget by 2050 and over 50% by 2100, except the impacts on phytoplankton.[135][136] The report says that for solving the problem, reduction in consumption will be essential.[137] In 2020, scientific research published by the World Economic Forum determined that affluence is the biggest threat to sustainability.[138]

Population: Others think that the most effective means of achieving sustainability is population control, for example by improving access to birth control and education (particularly education for girls).[139] Fertility rates are known to decline with increased prosperity, and have been declining globally since 1980.[citation needed]

Technology: Still others hold that the most promising path to sustainability is new technology. This theory may be seen as a form of technological optimism. One popular tactic in this category is transitioning to renewable energy.[140][141] Others methods to achieve sustainability, associated with this theory are climate engineering (geo – engineering), genetic engineering (GMO, Genetically modified organism), decoupling.

Management of human consumptionEdit

 
Helix of sustainability—the carbon cycle of manufacturing
 
Waste generation, measured in kilograms per person per day

A major aspect of human impact on Earth systems is the destruction of biophysical resources, and in particular, the Earth's ecosystems. The environmental impact of a community or humankind as a whole depends both on population and impact per person, which in turn depends in complex ways on what resources are being used, whether or not those resources are renewable, and the scale of the human activity relative to the carrying capacity of the ecosystems involved.[142] Careful resource management can be applied at many scales, from economic sectors like agriculture, manufacturing and industry, to work organizations, the consumption patterns of households and individuals, and the resource demands of individual goods and services.[143][144]

One of the initial attempts to express human impact mathematically was developed in the 1970s and is called the I PAT formula. This formulation attempts to explain human consumption in terms of three components: population numbers, levels of consumption (which it terms "affluence", although the usage is different), and impact per unit of resource use (which is termed "technology", because this impact depends on the technology used). The equation is expressed:

I = P × A × T
Where: I = Environmental impact, P = Population, A = Affluence, T = Technology[134]

The underlying driver of direct human impacts on the environment is human consumption.[145] This impact is reduced by not only consuming less but also making the full cycle of production, use, and disposal more sustainable. Consumption of goods and services can be analyzed and managed at all scales through the chain of consumption, starting with the effects of individual lifestyle choices and spending patterns, through to the resource demands of specific goods and services, the impacts of economic sectors, through national economies to the global economy.[146] Analysis of consumption patterns relates resource use to the environmental, social and economic impacts at the scale or context under investigation. The ideas of embodied resource use (the total resources needed to produce a product or service), resource intensity, and resource productivity are important tools for understanding the impacts of consumption. Key resource categories relating to human needs are food, energy, raw materials and water.

In 2010, the International Resource Panel, hosted by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), published the first global scientific assessment on the impacts of consumption and production[147] and identified priority actions for developed and developing countries. The study found that the most critical impacts are related to ecosystem health, human health and resource depletion. From a production perspective, it found that fossil-fuel combustion processes, agriculture and fisheries have the most important impacts. Meanwhile, from a final consumption perspective, it found that household consumption related to mobility, shelter, food, and energy-using products causes the majority of life-cycle impacts of consumption.

According to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, human consumption, with current policy, by the year 2100 will be 7 times bigger than in the year 2010.[148]

Human settlementsEdit

Sustainable living describes a lifestyle[149] that attempts to reduce an individual's or society's use of the Earth's natural resources, and one's personal resources.[150] It is often called as "earth harmony living" or "net zero living". Its practitioners often attempt to reduce their ecological footprint (including their carbon footprint) by altering their methods of transportation, energy consumption, and/or diet.[151] Its proponents aim to conduct their lives in ways that are consistent with sustainability, naturally balanced, and respectful of humanity's symbiotic relationship with the Earth's natural ecology.[152] The practice and general philosophy of ecological living closely follows the overall principles of sustainable development.[153]

Other approaches, loosely based around New Urbanism, are successfully reducing environmental impacts by altering the built environment to create and preserve sustainable cities which support sustainable transport and zero emission housing as well as sustainable architecture and circular flow land use management.

Reactions of different stakeholdersEdit

Religious communitiesEdit

Within the context of Christianity, in the encyclical "Laudato si'", Pope Francis called to fight climate change and ecological degradation as a whole.[154][155] He claimed that humanity is facing a severe ecological crisis and blamed consumerism and irresponsible development. The encyclical is addressed to "every person living on this planet."[156]

Buddhism includes many principles linked to sustainability.[157] The Dalai Lama has consistently called for strong climate action, reforestation, preserving ecosystems, a reduction in meat consumption. He declared that if he will ever join a political party it will be the green party and if Buddha returned to our world now: “Buddha would be green.”[158][159] The leaders of Buddhism issued a special declaration calling on all believers to fight climate change and environmental destruction as a whole.[160]

EtymologyEdit

The name sustainability is derived from the Latin sustinere (tenere, to hold; sub, under). Sustain can mean "maintain", "support", "uphold" or "endure."[161][162]

See alsoEdit

By sectorEdit

ReferencesEdit

  1. ^ a b James, Paul (2014). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice. doi:10.4324/9781315765747. ISBN 978-1-315-76574-7.[page needed]
  2. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge.; Kuhlman, Tom; Farrington, John (1 November 2010). "What is Sustainability?". Sustainability. 2 (11): 3436–3448. doi:10.3390/su2113436.
  3. ^ a b EPA. "Sustainability Primer" (PDF). A sustainable approach is a systems-based approach that seeks to understand the interactions which exist among environmental, social, and economic pillars [...].
  4. ^ "Google Books Ngram Viewer". books.google.com.
  5. ^ State of the World 2013: Is Sustainability Still Possible? worldwatch.org
  6. ^ Strong sustainable consumption governance — precondition for a degrowth path? degrowth.org
  7. ^ a b Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; James, Paul; Thom, James A.; Padgham, Lin; Hickmott, Sarah; Deng, Hepu; Cahill, Felicity (1 September 2012). "Reframing social sustainability reporting: towards an engaged approach". Environment, Development and Sustainability. 15 (1): 225–243. doi:10.1007/s10668-012-9384-2. S2CID 153452740.
  8. ^ a b United Nations General Assembly (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment. Retrieved on: 15 February 2009
  9. ^ a b United Nations General Assembly (20 March 1987). "Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future; Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment; Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development; Paragraph 1". United Nations General Assembly. Retrieved 1 March 2010. Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own 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.
  10. ^ Kates, Robert W., ed. (2010). Readings in Sustainability Science and Technology – an introduction to the key literatures of sustainability science CID Working Paper No. 213. Center for International Development, Harvard University. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, December 2010.
  11. ^ "Sustainability Theories". World Ocean Review. Retrieved 20 June 2019. The concept of 'sustainability' comes from forestry and originally meant something like: using natural resources mindfully so that the supply never runs out.
  12. ^ Compare: "sustainability". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.) The English-language word had a legal technical sense from 1835 and a resource-management connotation from 1953.
  13. ^ "Hans Carl von Carlowitz and Sustainability". Environment and Society Portal. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
  14. ^ UNEP (26 April 2017). "Indigenous people and nature: a tradition of conservation". Retrieved 30 August 2021.
  15. ^ Gadgil, M.; Berkes, F. (1991). "Traditional Resource Management Systems". Resource Management and Optimization. 8: 127–141.
  16. ^ Brown, James H. (1 October 2015). "The Oxymoron of Sustainable Development". BioScience. 65 (10): 1027–1029. doi:10.1093/biosci/biv117.
  17. ^ "Sustainability and Sustainable Development". Circular Ecology. Retrieved 17 July 2018.
  18. ^ Williams, Colin C; Millington, Andrew C (June 2004). "The diverse and contested meanings of sustainable development". The Geographical Journal. 170 (2): 99–104. doi:10.1111/j.0016-7398.2004.00111.x. S2CID 143181802.
  19. ^ Scott Cato, M. (2009). Green Economics. London: Earthscan, pp. 36–37. ISBN 978-1-84407-571-3.
  20. ^ Capra, Fritjof (25 October 2015). "The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Conception of Mind, Matter, and Life". Cosmos and History. 11 (2): 242–249.
  21. ^ Impact Assessment Guidelines. EC Document No. SEC(2005) 791. European Commission. 2005.
  22. ^ "What is Sustainability? - Office of Sustainability - University of Maine". Office of Sustainability. Retrieved 2 September 2021.
  23. ^ Morelli, John (2011). "Environmental Sustainability: A Definition for Environmental Professionals". Journal of Environmental Sustainability. 1: 1–10. doi:10.14448/jes.01.0002.
  24. ^ United Nations General Assembly (2005). 2005 World Summit Outcome, Resolution A/60/1, adopted by the General Assembly on 15 September 2005. Retrieved on: 17 February 2009.
  25. ^ Obrecht A, Pham-Truffert M, Spehn E et al (2021): Achieving the SDGs with Biodiversity. Swiss Academies Factsheet 16 (1). https://api.swiss-academies.ch/site/assets/files/17299/sdg_factsheet_e_def.pdf
  26. ^ Manning, S., Boons, F., Von Hagen, O., Reinecke, J. (2011). "National Contexts Matter: The Co-Evolution of Sustainability Standards in Global Value Chains." Ecological Economics, Forthcoming.
  27. ^ Reinecke, J., Manning, S., Von Hagen, O. (2012). "The Emergence of a Standards Market: Multiplicity of Sustainability Standards in the Global Coffee Industry" Organization Studies, Forthcoming.
  28. ^ SAI Platform 2010. Sustainability Indicators Archived 31 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine. Sustainable Agricultural Initiative. Retrieved on: 4 September 2011.
  29. ^ Alvarez, G. Sustainable Agriculture and Value networks. Lausanne, Switzerland: Latitude. Retrieved on: 4 October 2011.
  30. ^ "The Trade Impact of Voluntary Sustainability Standards: A review of empirical evidence" (PDF).
  31. ^ "Sustainability Map". www.standardsmap.org. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
  32. ^ Adams, W.M. (2006). The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century. Report of the IUCN Renowned Thinkers Meeting, 29–31 January 2006 (PDF). Retrieved 16 February 2009.
  33. ^ Porritt, J. (2006). Capitalism as if the world mattered. London: Earthscan. p. 46. ISBN 978-1-84407-193-7.
  34. ^ Milne, Markus J.; Kearins, Kate; Walton, Sara (17 August 2016). "Creating Adventures in Wonderland: The Journey Metaphor and Environmental Sustainability". Organization. 13 (6): 801–839. doi:10.1177/1350508406068506. S2CID 143576337.
  35. ^ The Earth Charter Initiative (2000). "The Earth Charter." Archived 26 April 2010 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved on: 5 April 2009.
  36. ^ Blewitt, J. (2008). Understanding Sustainable Development. London: Earthscan. pp. 21–24. ISBN 978-1-84407-454-9.
  37. ^ Ratner, Blake D. (February 2004). "'Sustainability' as a Dialogue of Values: Challenges to the Sociology of Development". Sociological Inquiry. 74 (1): 50–69. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.2004.00079.x.
  38. ^ Purvis, Ben; Mao, Yong; Robinson, Darren (3 September 2018). "Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins". Sustainability Science. 14 (3): 681–695. doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5. ISSN 1862-4065. S2CID 158473049.
  39. ^ a b Wandemberg, JC (August 2015). Sustainable by Design. Amazon. p. 122. ISBN 978-1516901784. Archived from the original on 20 June 2017. Retrieved 16 February 2016.
  40. ^ a b United Cities and Local Governments, "Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development".
  41. ^ a b Dhakal, Krishna P.; Oh, Jun S. (2011). "Integrating Sustainability into Highway Projects: Sustainability Indicators and Assessment Tool for Michigan Roads". T&DI Congress 2011. American Society of Civil Engineers. pp. 987–996. doi:10.1061/41167(398)94. ISBN 9780784411674.
  42. ^ James, Paul; Magee, Liam (2016). "Domains of Sustainability". In A. Farazmand (ed.). Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer.
  43. ^ Circles of Sustainability. citiesprogramme.com
  44. ^ World Association of the Major Metropolises, Metropolis. Retrieved on 13 March 2016.
  45. ^ Metropolis Action Plan 2018–2020, at www.metropolis.org James, Paul; Magee, Liam (2016). "Domains of Sustainability". In A. Farazmand (ed.). Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer.
  46. ^ Thomas, Steve A. (2016). The Nature of Sustainability. Chapbook Press. Grand Rapids, Michigan. ISBN 9781943359394.
  47. ^ Ayres, Robert; van den Berrgh, Jeroen; Gowdy, John (2001). "Strong versus Weak Sustainability". Environmental Ethics. 23 (2): 155–168. doi:10.5840/enviroethics200123225. ISSN 0163-4275.
  48. ^ Steffen, Will; Rockström, Johan; Cornell, Sarah; Fetzer, Ingo; Biggs, Oonsie; Folke, Carl; Reyers, Belinda. "Planetary Boundaries - an update". Stockholm Resilience Centre. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  49. ^ "Ten years of nine planetary boundaries". Stockholm Resilience Centre. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  50. ^ Global Footprint Network, or see also World Wide Fund for Nature (2018) Living Planet Report 2018. Retrieved on: 1 October 2019.[verification needed]
  51. ^ Chapman, Eric J.; Byron, Carrie J. (January 2018). "The flexible application of carrying capacity in ecology". Global Ecology and Conservation. 13: e00365. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2017.e00365.
  52. ^ "Sustainable Development". UNESCO. 3 August 2015. Retrieved 6 September 2021.
  53. ^ Walker, Brian, and Salt, David (2012) Resilience Practice: Building Capacity to Absorb Disturbance and Maintain Function. Island Press.
  54. ^ Falk, Ben (2013) The resilient farm and homestead. Chelsea Green Publishing. p. 3. ISBN 978-1603584449
  55. ^ Wandemberg, JC (2015) Sustainable By DesignISBN 978-1980250951[self-published source]
  56. ^ "Zero Waste International Alliance". Retrieved 6 September 2021.
  57. ^ Melvin K. Hendrix, Sustainable Backyard Polyculture: Designing for ecological resiliency. Smashwords Edition, 2014.
  58. ^ Walker, Brian and Salt, David (2006) Resilience Thinking: Sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world. Island Press. p. xiii. ISBN 978-1597260930.
  59. ^ Holling, Crawford S. (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley. p. 11. ISBN 978-1932846072
  60. ^ "The Economics and Social Benefits of NOAA Ecosystems Data and Products Table of Contents Data Users". NOAA. Archived from the original on 25 March 2010. Retrieved 13 October 2009.
  61. ^ Buchenrieder, G., und A.R. Göltenboth: Sustainable freshwater resource management in the Tropics: The myth of effective indicators, 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) on "Reshaping Agriculture's Contributions to Society" in Durban, South Africa, 2003.
  62. ^ Daly, H.E. (1990). "Toward some operational principles of sustainable development". Ecological Economics. 2 (1): 1–6. doi:10.1016/0921-8009(90)90010-r.
  63. ^ "Our Common Future, From One Earth to One World". United Nations. Retrieved 2 April 2011.
  64. ^ Krebs (2001), pp. 560–582.
  65. ^ Organic Gardening Techniques Archived 6 September 2017 at the Wayback Machine, Missouri University Extension. October 2004. Retrieved 17 June 2009.
  66. ^ Sustainable Gardening & Food Production Archived 21 June 2010 at the Wayback Machine, Daniel Boone Regional Library. Retrieved 17 June 2009
  67. ^ Food and Agriculture Organization (June 2006). "Food and Agriculture Statistics Global Outlook." Rome: FAO Statistics Division. Retrieved on: 18 March 2009.
  68. ^ Imhoff, M.L.; et al. (2004). "Global Patterns in Human Consumption of Net Primary Production". Nature (Submitted manuscript). 429 (6994): 870–873. Bibcode:2004Natur.429..870I. doi:10.1038/nature02619. PMID 15215863. S2CID 4431287.
  69. ^ World Business Council for Sustainable Development Archived 10 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine This web site has multiple articles on WBCSD contributions to sustainable development. Retrieved on: 7 April 2009.
  70. ^ "AR5 Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change — IPCC". Retrieved 13 May 2021.
  71. ^ McMichael A.J.; Powles J.W.; Butler C.D.; Uauy R. (September 2007). "Food, Livestock Production, Energy, Climate change, and Health" (PDF). Lancet. 370 (9594): 1253–63. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61256-2. hdl:1885/38056. PMID 17868818. S2CID 9316230. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 February 2010. Retrieved on: 18 March 2009.
  72. ^ Baroni L.; Cenci L.; Tettamanti M.; Berati M. (February 2007). "Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Various Dietary Patterns Combined with Different Food Production Systems" (PDF). Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 61 (2): 279–86. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602522. PMID 17035955. S2CID 16387344. Retrieved on: 18 March 2009.
  73. ^ "Earth Stats." Archived 11 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine Gardensofbabylon.com. Retrieved on: 7 July 2009.
  74. ^ Holmgren, D. (March 2005). "Retrofitting the suburbs for sustainability." Archived 15 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine CSIRO Sustainability Network. Retrieved on: 7 July 2009.
  75. ^ Science Advice for Policy by European Academies (2020). A sustainable food system for the European Union (PDF). Berlin: SAPEA. p. 22. doi:10.26356/sustainablefood. ISBN 978-3-9820301-7-3.
  76. ^ "FOOD SUSTAINABILITY: KEY TO REACH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS". BCFN Foundation: Food and Nutrition Sustainability Index. 1 October 2018. Retrieved 26 November 2019.
  77. ^ "Sustainable food systems" (PDF). Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.
  78. ^ Kutscher, Milford & Kreith 2019, pp. 5–6.
  79. ^ Foramitti, Joël; Tsagkari, Marula; Zografos, Christos. "Why degrowth is the only responsible way forward". Open Democracy. Retrieved 23 September 2019.
  80. ^ "Embodied Carbon of Solar PV: Here's Why It Must Be Included In Net Zero Carbon Buildings". Circular Ecology. Retrieved 26 January 2020.
  81. ^ Bournay, E. et al.. (2006). Vital waste graphics 2. The Basel Convention, UNEP, GRID-Arendal. ISBN 82-7701-042-7.
  82. ^ UNEP (2011). Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth. ISBN 978-92-807-3167-5. Retrieved on: 30 November 2011.
  83. ^ Anderberg, S (1998). "Industrial metabolism and linkages between economics, ethics, and the environment". Ecological Economics. 24 (2–3): 311–320. doi:10.1016/s0921-8009(97)00151-1.
  84. ^ Fuad-Luke, A. (2006). The Eco-design Handbook. London: Thames & Hudson. ISBN 978-0-500-28521-3.
  85. ^ Geissdoerfer, Martin; Savaget, Paulo; Bocken, Nancy M. P.; Hultink, Erik Jan (1 February 2017). "The Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm?". Journal of Cleaner Production. 143: 757–768. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048. S2CID 157449142.
  86. ^ European Commission (2020). Circular economy action plan. Retrieved on: 10 November 2021.
  87. ^ "EUR-Lex - 52020DC0098 - EN - EUR-Lex". eur-lex.europa.eu. Retrieved 9 November 2021.
  88. ^ Bromley, Daniel W. (2008). "sustainability," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract.
  89. ^ Groth, Christian (2014). Lecture notes in Economic Growth, (mimeo), Chapter 8: Choice of social discount rate. Copenhagen University.
  90. ^ UNEP, FAO (2020). UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. 48p. https://wedocs.unep.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/31813/ERDStrat.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  91. ^ Raworth, Kate (2017). Doughnut economics : seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. London. ISBN 978-1-84794-138-1. OCLC 974194745.
  92. ^ Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth, Summary for policymakers, Foreword
  93. ^ Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth, Summary for policymakers
  94. ^ Haberl, Helmut; Wiedenhofer, Dominik; Virág, Doris; Kalt, Gerald; Plank, Barbara; Brockway, Paul; Fishman, Tomer; Hausknost, Daniel; Krausmann, Fridolin; Leon-Gruchalski, Bartholomäus; Mayer, Andreas (June 2020). "A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights". Environmental Research Letters. 15 (6): 065003. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab842a. ISSN 1748-9326.
  95. ^ Kinsley, M. and Lovins, L.H. (September 1997). "Paying for Growth, Prospering from Development." Archived 17 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved on: 15 June 2009.
  96. ^ Sustainable Shrinkage: Envisioning a Smaller, Stronger Economy. Thesolutionsjournal.com. Retrieved on 13 March 2016.
  97. ^ Zhexembayeva, N. (May 2007). "Becoming Sustainable: Tools and Resources for Successful Organizational Transformation". Center for Business as an Agent of World Benefit. Case Western University. Archived from the original on 13 June 2010.
  98. ^ "About Us". Sustainable Business Institute. Archived from the original on 17 May 2009.CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  99. ^ "About the WBCSD". World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Archived from the original on 9 September 2007. Retrieved 1 April 2009.
  100. ^ Hickman, Leo (12 February 2009). "The future of work is green". The Guardian.
  101. ^ Lueneburger, Christoph; Goleman, Daniel (17 May 2010). "The Change Leadership Sustainability Demands". MIT Sloan Management Review. Retrieved 1 April 2009.
  102. ^ "Leadership competency model". egonzehnder.com. Archived from the original on 28 September 2011. Retrieved 1 April 2009.
  103. ^ Laszlo, Chris; Zhexembayeva, Nadya (25 April 2011). "Embedded Sustainability: A strategy for market leaders". The European Financial Review.
  104. ^ Laszlo, C. & Zhexembayeva, N. (2011). Embedded Sustainability: The Next Big Competitive Advantage. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. ISBN 0-804-77554-0
  105. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge.
  106. ^ Liam Magee; Andy Scerri; Paul James; James A. Thom; Lin Padgham; Sarah Hickmott; Hepu Deng; Felicity Cahill (2013). "Reframing social sustainability reporting: Towards an engaged approach". Environment, Development and Sustainability.
  107. ^ Cohen, J.E. (2006). "Human Population: The Next Half Century." In Kennedy D. (Ed.) Science Magazine's State of the Planet 2006-7. London: Island Press, pp. 13–21. ISBN 9781597266246.
  108. ^ Blewitt, J. (2008). Understanding Sustainable Development. London: Earthscan. p. 96. ISBN 978-1-84407-454-9..
  109. ^ Soini, Katriina; Birkland, Inger (2014). "Exploring the scientific discourse on cultural sustainability". Geoforum. 51: 213–223. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.12.001.
  110. ^ Culture for Sustainable Development. (2020, July 23). Retrieved October 23, 2020, from https://en.unesco.org/themes/culture-sustainable-development
  111. ^ "Definition of CULTURE". www.merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 30 March 2017.
  112. ^ "Definition of SUSTAINABLE". www.merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 30 March 2017.
  113. ^ Borowy, Iris (2014). "Sustainable health: the need for new developmental models". Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 92 (10): 699. doi:10.2471/BLT.14.145219. PMC 4208489. PMID 25378720. Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  114. ^ Kjӕrgård, Bente; Land, Birgit; Bransholm Pedersen, Kirsten (8 January 2013). "Health and sustainability". Health Promotion International. 29 (3): 558–568. doi:10.1093/heapro/das071. PMID 23300191.
  115. ^ Belton, Teresa. "Why becoming a 'happily modest consumer' could help save the planet". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 24 May 2020.
  116. ^ Hough-Stewart, Lisa; Trebeck, Katherine; Sommer, Claire; Wallis, Stewart (3 December 2019). What is a wellbeing economy? (PDF). pp. 1, 5–6. Retrieved 16 October 2020.
  117. ^ "Sustainability Accounting in UK Local Government". The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. Archived from the original on 11 April 2008. Retrieved 18 June 2008.
  118. ^ Dalal-Clayton, Barry and Sadler, Barry 2009. Sustainability Appraisal: A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-357-3.[page needed]
  119. ^ Hak, T. et al. 2007. Sustainability Indicators, SCOPE 67. Island Press, London. [1] Archived 2011-12-18 at the Wayback Machine
  120. ^ Bell, Simon and Morse, Stephen 2008. Sustainability Indicators. Measuring the Immeasurable? 2nd edn. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-299-6.https://books.google.com/books/about/Sustainability_Indicators.html?id=6DOC13cd9c0C
  121. ^ McElroy, Mark (2008). Social Footprints (PDF). University of Groningen. ISBN 978-0-615-24274-3. Retrieved 26 March 2018.
  122. ^ Thomas, Martin; McElroy, Mark (2016). The MultiCapital Scorecard. Chelsea Green Publishing. ISBN 9781603586900.
  123. ^ McElroy, Mark; Jorna, Rene; van Engelen, Jo (2007). "Sustaiability Quotients and the Social Footprint". Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 15 (4): 223–234. doi:10.1002/csr.164.
  124. ^ McElroy, Mark; van Engelen, Jo (2012). Corporate Sustainability Management. Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-911-7.
  125. ^ "World Scientist's Warning to Humanity" (PDF). Union of Concerned Scientists. Union of Concerned Scientists. Retrieved 11 November 2019.
  126. ^ Ripple, William J.; Wolf, Christopher; Newsome, Thomas M.; Galetti, Mauro; Alamgir, Mohammed; Crist, Eileen; Mahmoud, Mahmoud I.; Laurance, William F. (December 2017). "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice". BioScience. 67 (12): 1026–1028. doi:10.1093/biosci/bix125.
  127. ^ J Ripple, William; Wolf, Christopher; M Newsome, Thomas; Barnard, Phoebe; R Moomaw, William (5 November 2019). "World Scientists' Warning of a Climate Emergency". BioScience. biz088. doi:10.1093/biosci/biz088.
  128. ^ Jared Diamond, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive, Penguin Books, 2005 and 2011 (ISBN 978-0-241-95868-1).
  129. ^ Making Peace with Nature: a scientific blueprint to tackle the climate, biodiversity and pollution emergencies (PDF). Nairobi: United Nations Environmental Programm. 2021. pp. 13–17, 26. ISBN 978-92-807-3837-7. Retrieved 25 March 2021.
  130. ^ Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005), pp. 6–19.
  131. ^ Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (PDF). the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. 6 May 2019. Retrieved 10 May 2019.
  132. ^ Deutsche Welle, Deutsche (6 May 2019). "Why Biodiversity Loss Hurts Humans as Much as Climate Change Does". Ecowatch. Retrieved 10 May 2019.
  133. ^ Conceptual Framework Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2003). "Ecosystems and Human Well-being." London: Island Press. Chapter 5. "Dealing with Scale". pp. 107–124. ISBN 9781559634038.
  134. ^ a b Ehrlich, P.R.; Holden, J.P. (1974). "Human Population and the global environment". American Scientist. Vol. 62 no. 3. pp. 282–292.
  135. ^ Plastic & Climate The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet (PDF). Center for International Environmental Law, Environmental Integrity Project, FracTracker Alliance, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, 5 Gyres, and Break Free From Plastic. May 2019. pp. 4–5. Retrieved 20 May 2019.
  136. ^ "Sweeping New Report on Global Environmental Impact of Plastics Reveals Severe Damage to Climate". Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). Retrieved 16 May 2019.
  137. ^ Plastic & Climate The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet (PDF). Center for International Environmental Law, Environmental Integrity Project, FracTracker Alliance, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, 5 Gyres, and Break Free From Plastic. May 2019. pp. 82–85. Retrieved 20 May 2019.
  138. ^ Fleming, Sean. "This is now the world's greatest threat – and it's not coronavirus". World Economic Forum. World Economic forum. Retrieved 5 August 2020.
  139. ^ Perkins, Sid. "The best way to reduce your carbon footprint is one the government isn't telling you about". Science. Retrieved 11 November 2019.
  140. ^ M. Parris, Thomas; W. Kates, Robert (8 July 2003). "Characterizing a sustainability transition: Goals, targets, trends, and driving forces". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 100 (14): 8068–8073. doi:10.1073/pnas.1231336100. PMC 166183. PMID 12819346.
  141. ^ "The IPAT Equation". The Sustainable Scale Project. Retrieved 13 May 2019.
  142. ^ Basiago, Andrew D. (1995). "Methods of defining 'sustainability'". Sustainable Development. 3 (3): 109–119. doi:10.1002/sd.3460030302. ISSN 0968-0802.
  143. ^ Clark, D. (2006). A Rough Guide to Ethical Living. London: Penguin. ISBN 978-1-84353-792-2[page needed]
  144. ^ Brower, M. & Leon, W. (1999). The Consumer's Guide to Effective Environmental Choices: Practical Advice from the Union of Concerned Scientists. New York: Three Rivers Press. ISBN 0-609-80281-X.[page needed]
  145. ^ Michaelis, L. & Lorek, S. (2004). "Consumption and the Environment in Europe: Trends and Futures." Danish Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Project No. 904.
  146. ^ Jackson, T. & Michaelis, L. (2003). "Policies for Sustainable Consumption". The UK Sustainable Development Commission.
  147. ^ Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Consumption and Production: Priority Products and Materials Archived 13 May 2016 at the Portuguese Web Archive 2010, International Resource Panel, United Nations Environment Programme
  148. ^ Pachauri, R.K.; Meyer, L.A. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (PDF). Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC. p. 24. Retrieved 10 May 2020.
  149. ^ Jegou F., Scholl G., Seyrig A. (2013) That aims to decrease ones dependency upon society. Sustainable Street 2030, CORPUS toolkit for collaborative scenario building Archived 27 November 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  150. ^ Ainoa, J., Kaskela, A., Lahti, L., Saarikoski, N., Sivunen, A., Storgårds, J., & Zhang, H. (2009). Future of Living. In Neuvo, Y., & Ylönen, S. (eds.), Bit Bang – Rays to the Future Archived 16 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine. Helsinki University of Technology (TKK), MIDE, Helsinki University Print, Helsinki, Finland, 174–204. ISBN 978-952-248-078-1.
  151. ^ Winter, Mick (2007). Sustainable Living: For Home, Neighborhood and Community. Westsong Publishing. ISBN 978-0-9659000-5-8.
  152. ^ "About CELL | Center for Ecological Living and Learning". Archived from the original on 19 December 2018. Retrieved 19 December 2018.
  153. ^ Lynn R. Kahle, Eda Gurel-Atay, Eds (2014). Communicating Sustainability for the Green Economy. New York: M.E. Sharpe. ISBN 978-0-7656-3680-5.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  154. ^ "Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' Of The Holy Father Francis On Care For Our Common Home (official English-language text of encyclical)". Retrieved 18 June 2015.
  155. ^ "Laudato Si': On Care for Our Common Home". SDG Academy. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Retrieved 30 July 2020.
  156. ^ Yardley, Jim; Goodstein, Laurie (18 June 2015). "Pope Francis, in Sweeping Encyclical, Calls for Swift Action on Climate Change". The New York Times.
  157. ^ "What does Buddhism teach about the environment?". BBC. Retrieved 25 January 2021.
  158. ^ "Dalai Lama says strong action on climate change is a human responsibility". Associated Press. The Guardian. 20 October 2020. Retrieved 25 January 2021.
  159. ^ Guru-Murthy, Krishnan (11 November 2020). "'Buddha would be green': Dalai Lama calls for urgent climate action". The Guardian. Retrieved 25 January 2021.
  160. ^ "The Time to Act is Now A Buddhist Declaration on Climate Change". One Earth Sangha. 20 September 2015. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
  161. ^ Harper, Douglas. "sustain". Online Etymology Dictionary.
  162. ^ Onions, Charles, T. (ed) (1964). The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 2095.

SourcesEdit