Categorising tools for sustainability assessment

The three-pillar conception of (social, economic and environmental) sustainability, commonly represented by three intersecting circles with overall sustainability at the centre, has become ubiquitous. With a view of identifying the genesis and theoretical foundations of this conception, this paper reviews and discusses relevant historical sustainability literature. From this we find that there is no single point of origin of this three-pillar conception, but rather a gradual emergence from various critiques in the early academic literature of the economic status quo from both social and ecological perspectives on the one hand, and the quest to reconcile economic growth as a solution to social and ecological problems on the part of the United Nations on the other. The popular three circles diagram appears to have been first presented by Barbier (Environ Conserv 14:101, doi: 10.1017/s0376892900011449, 1987), albeit purposed towards developing nations with foci which differ from modern interpretations. The conceptualisation of three pillars seems to predate this, however. Nowhere have we found a theoretically rigorous description of the three pillars. This is thought to be in part due to the nature of the sustainability discourse arising from broadly different schools of thought historically. The absence of such a theoretically solid conception frustrates approaches towards a theoretically rigorous operationalisation of ‘sustainability’.

/pdf/three-pillars-of-sustainability-in-search-of-conceptual-3e124slsi3.pdf

Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins

Sustainability assessment is being increasingly viewed as an important tool to aid in the shift towards sustainability. However, this is a new and evolving concept and there remain very few examples of effective sustainability assessment processes implemented anywhere in the world. Sustainability assessment is often described as a process by which the implications of an initiative on sustainability are evaluated, where the initiative can be a proposed or existing policy, plan, programme, project, piece of legislation, or a current practice or activity. However, this generic definition covers a broad range of different processes, many of which have been described in the literature as 'sustainability assessment'. This article seeks to provide some clarification by reflecting on the different approaches described in the literature as being forms of sustainability assessment, and evaluating them in terms of their potential contributions to sustainability. Many of these are actually examples of 'integrated assessment', derived from environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA), but which have been extended to incorporate social and economic considerations as well as environmental ones, reflecting a 'triple bottom line' (TBL) approach to sustainability. These integrated assessment processes typically either seek to minimise 'unsustainability', or to achieve TBL objectives. Both aims may, or may not, result in sustainable practice. We present an alternative conception of sustainability assessment, with the more ambitious aim of seeking to determine whether or not an initiative is actually sustainable. We term such processes 'assessment for sustainability'. 'Assessment for sustainability' firstly requires that the concept of sustainability be well-defined. The article compares TBL approaches and principles-based approaches to developing such sustainability criteria, concluding that the latter are more appropriate, since they avoid many of the inherent limitations of the triple-bottom-line as a conception of sustainability.

Conceptualising sustainability assessment

Sustainability as a policy concept has its origin in the Brundtland Report of 1987. That document was concerned with the tension between the aspirations of mankind towards a better life on the one hand and the limitations imposed by nature on the other hand. In the course of time, the concept has been re-interpreted as encompassing three dimensions, namely social, economic and environmental. The paper argues that this change in meaning (a) obscures the real contradiction between the aims of welfare for all and environmental conservation; (b) risks diminishing the importance of the environmental dimension; and (c) separates social from economic aspects, which in reality are one and the same. It is proposed instead to return to the original meaning, where sustainability is concerned with the well-being of future generations and in particular with irreplaceable natural resources—as opposed to the gratification of present needs which we call well-being. A balance needs to be found between those two, but not by pretending they are three sides of the same coin. Although we use up natural resources at the expense of future generations, we also generate capital (including knowledge) which raises future well-being. A major question is to what extent the one compensates for the other. This debate centres around the problem of substitutability, which has been cast into a distinction between ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ sustainability. It is argued that these two do not need to be in opposition but complement one another.

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/2/11/3436/pdf?y=1

What is Sustainability

The provision of environmental impact assessment (EIA) guidance is generally claimed to be beneficial for improving practice through local capacity building. However, to date no studies have investigated their effectiveness. In Western Australia, EIA guidance materials are intended to allow for better environmental protection; increased certainty; enhanced consistency of advice given to Government; proposals to be designed to meet environmental objectives from the outset; and to provide a clearer basis for Government decision-making. Twenty practicing environmental consultants were interviewed about the effectiveness of guidance materials at achieving these objectives. It was found that EIA guidance influenced the practice of consultants and was perceived as effecttive in enhancing the outcomes of the EIA process overall. However, a number of shortfalls were identified. Suggestions are made for increasing the utility of future guidance materials thereby enhance the effectiveness of EIA practice itself.

/pdf/effectiveness-of-non-legal-eia-guidance-from-the-perspective-2qmvris1sz.pdf

Effectiveness of non-legal EIA guidance from the perspective of consultants in Western Australia

Companies react in different ways to environmental regulation. A prevailing view in the literature suggests that external factors, particularly stakeholder groups, exert the most influence on the environmental responses of firms. This paper reports on research that examines the influence of a range of possible determinants, both internal and external, on the way Australian mining companies respond to environmental approvals regulation. External pressures included stakeholder pressure, jurisdictional culture and market characteristics, and internal pressures included organizational culture, organizational learning, the influence of individuals within firms and company size. The study found that the internal pressures of organizational culture, organiza tional learning and the influence of individuals exert the greatest influence on mining company response to environmental approvals regulation. These results suggest that existing explanations of corporate environmental behaviour, which emphasize external fa...

The Determinants of Mining Company Response to Environmental Approvals Regulation: A Report of Australian Research

Integrated economic and environmental planning in Asia: a review of progress and proposals for policy reform

Mining company approaches to environmental approvals regulation: a survey of senior environment managers in Canadian firms

/pdf/asian-environment-outlook-2005-making-profits-protecting-our-2chduf2ofb.pdf

David Annandale

Papers

Effectiveness of non-legal EIA guidance from the perspective of consultants in Western Australia

The Determinants of Mining Company Response to Environmental Approvals Regulation: A Report of Australian Research

Integrated economic and environmental planning in Asia: a review of progress and proposals for policy reform

Mining company approaches to environmental approvals regulation: a survey of senior environment managers in Canadian firms

Asian Environment Outlook 2005: Making Profits, Protecting Our Planet: Corporate Responsibility for Environmental Performance in Asia and the Pacific