A4. Existing Definitions

existing definitions of sustainability The most used definition of sustainability, or actually, of “sustainable development”, is derived from the 1987 United Nations report called Our Common Future, written by the Brundtland Commission. This definition is adhered to in most policy and development trajectories globally. It states that: “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.“ Brundtland Commission of the United Nations (1987) This definition has inspired many, and has been instrumental at achieving the realization that sustain­ ability relates to time and to people. It’s been the source of insight for many that it is our children that will bear the consequences of our choices. Unfortunately, that’s also what makes the definition hard to use, and, in the end, creates confusion and indecisive situations. We surmise that the Brundtland definition was probably never written to be used so extensively as it is, but as a de-facto standard, it needs to be evaluated for what it has become. Let’s look at why the Brundtland commit­ tee’s definition is problematic. Firstly, this definition is not describing what sustainable development is, but what it should result in. Meeting the needs of current and future generations is an outcome of sustainable development, not the process or the thing itself. This makes it not be an actual definition. This makes all the difference in trying to get to the heart of the sustainability issue. You can’t use it to evaluate what you’re doing. It’s like trying to explain the rules of soccer by telling you the score of a match. In order to evaluate sustainability, the Brundtland commission definition misses quite a bit. Second, it’s great to preserve options for future generations, but future generations do not have a voice. We can’t call up the future to ask wether or not we did something right or wrong, so it’s difficult to evaluate based on this definition. These, and several other issues, makes the Brundtland definition, while important, inspiring, and useful in some cases, not useful as a foundational definition, and a source of confusion and debate. When pitted against some of the more confusing issues of our time, or when used to solve difficult questions, the Brundtland commission’s definition rarely creates clarity. Other definitions of sustainability exist, such as the following: “A strong, just and wealthy society consistent with a clean environment, healthy ecosystems, and a beautiful planet.” Thomas and Graedel (2003) “A sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace. “ Earth Charter (2009) These exhibit similar issues, mostly defining what sustainability should lead to or looks like, and not pinpointing what it actually is. We found that for SiD we needed to fill this gap. So what is sustain­ ability then? Let’s find out in week 2.