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

Successive global conferences on sustainable development, such as the 1992 Earth Summit, have called for environmental and economic activities to be planned at the same time and in the same institutions, without elucidating how this should be done. This literature review provides a conceptual framework for organising the various approaches to integrated economic and environmental planning, along with supporting tools and techniques. The conceptual framework derived from this analysis illustrates the importance of vertical linkages among planning levels and highlights the paucity of integrated economic and environmental plans at the subnational level in Asia. Both of these issues need to be addressed if a nested hierarchy of integrated economic and environmental plans is expected to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development.

A conceptual framework for integrated economic and environmental planning in asia — a literature review

For some low-lying small island States in the Asia Pacific, a consequence of sea level rise could be partial or even total inundation Little attention has been given to the options these States might have in international law to halt the potential rise of global sea levels, or to seek special assistance if this disaster cannot be avoided or mitigated It is argued that the most fruitful course of action for small island States in international law may be to force compliance with the procedural norms of environmental impact assessment, information provision, and consultation, that are contained within two recent multilateral environmental treaties It is contended that this course of action would not involve having to prove damage and assign liability The only possibility for refugee status would be reliance on a tentative emerging argument that the definition of a refugee is being extended in customary law

Sinking without a life jacket? Sea level rise and the position of small island states in international law

The use of voluntary environmental protection instruments is expanding significantly around the world. Although there is a large literature dealing with what drives companies to adopt voluntary instruments, there has been relatively little research on the impact that some of these tools have on the actual environmental performance of companies. The existing literature in this area presents contrasting results, perhaps because it tends to use perceptual measurement, which may not reflect actual outcomes. To investigate this issue, the primary research reported on in this article undertook a combination of perceptual measurement and 'archival' (or objective) measurement on the same sample of firms. The research concluded that most firms saw some degree of positive response from the introduction of Environmental Management Systems. This was especially the case for 'system' (or 'process') improvements, and to a lesser extent held true for direct environmental performance improvements. It was also clear that there was a very close correlation between the results of the perception-based research and the archival measurement research. At least in the context of this kind of investigation, either research approach would appear to produce a valid outcome.

/pdf/measuring-the-impact-of-voluntary-environmental-protection-4zmppf1xj3.pdf

David Annandale

Papers

A conceptual framework for integrated economic and environmental planning in asia — a literature review

Sinking without a life jacket? Sea level rise and the position of small island states in international law

Measuring the impact of voluntary environmental protection instruments: perceptual vs. archival techniques

Private Companies and Environmental Management: Outcomes of a Survey of Western Australian Business

Book Reviews: "Biodiversity and Environmental Impact Assessment: A Good Practice Guide for Road Schemes", Byron, H.