Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:10:07.355Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contradictions in Sustainability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Stephen R. Dovers  and
John W. Handmer
John W. Handmer
Affiliation:
Respectively Research Officer, & Research Fellow, Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University (ANU), GPO Box 4, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Issues of environment and development are increasingly being analysed within the framework offered by sustainability and sustainable development. This article explores a number of deep-seated contradictions and tensions that exist within these concepts at least as they are currently construed. It is noted that these contradictions are often glossed over in intellectual and policy debates, but are nonetheless profound and should be made explicit.

The contradictions identified and discussed in the paper are as follows:

–the paradox of technology (cause or cure?);

–uncertainty and decision-making (humility or arrogance in the face of ignorance?);

–intergenerational and intragenerational equity (a politically impossible trade-off?);

–economic growth versus ecological limits (is ‘sustainable development’ an oxymoron?);

–the reconciliation of individual and collective interests, applying both to individuals in their society, and nation states in the international community;

–the potential conflict between the diversity of democracy and purposeful action;

–differing kinds of resilience in the face of change (resistance, marginal change, and adaptability); and

–the question of whether or not optimization is anti-sustainability.

In conclusion we ask what the implications of this labyrinth of contradictions are for moving towards a sustainable state. Are these contradictions too profound and thus insurmountable, or does Homo sapiens' apparently innate ability to live with contradiction and logical inconsistency offer a way out?

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , Autumn 1993 , pp. 217 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bennett, J.W. & Dahlberg, K.A. (1990). Institutions, social organizations, and cultural values. Pp. 69–86 in The Earth as Transformed by Human Action: Global and Regional Changes in the Biosphere Over the Past 300 Years (Ed. Turner, B. L.). Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA: xvi + 713 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Boyden, S. (1987). Western Civilization in Biological Perspective: Patterns in Biohistory. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England, UK: xi + 370 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Boyden, S. & Dovers, S. (1992). Natural-resource consumption and its environmental impacts in the western world: impacts of increasing per capita consumption. Ambio, 21(1), pp. 63–9.Google Scholar
Cohen, P. & Polunin, N. (1990). The viable culture. Environmental Conservation, 17(1), pp. 3–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Common, M. & Perrings, C. (1992). Towards an ecological economics of sustainability. Ecological Economics, 6, pp. 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commonwealth of Australia (1992). Nations Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, ACT, Australia: 128 pp.Google Scholar
Dovers, S. & Handmer, J. (1992). Uncertainty, sustainability and change. Global Environmental Change, 2(4), pp. 262–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekins, P. (Ed) (1986). The Living Economy: A New Economics in the Making. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, England, UK: xviii + 398 pp.Google Scholar
Goldemberg, J. (in press). Guest editorial: The geopolitics of environmental degradation. Environmental Conservation, 20(3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J. & Behrens, W.W. (1972). The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the Predicament of Mankind. Universal Books, New York, NY, USA: 205 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L. & Randers, J. (1992). Beyond the Limits: Global Collapse or a Sustainable Future. Earthscan, London, England, UK: xix + 300 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Norgaard, R. (1989). The case for methodological pluralism. Ecological Economics, 1(1), pp. 37–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Riordan, T. & Rayner, S. (1991). Risk management for global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 1(2), pp. 91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, W.C. (1990). The Energy Alternative: Changing the Way the World Works. Optima, London, England, UK: 186 pp.Google Scholar
Pearce, D., Markandya, A. & Barbier, E.B. (1989). Blueprint for a Green Economy. Earthscan, London, England, UK: xvi + 192 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Polunin, N. (1993). Small can be supreme: a double lesson from the stratospheric ozone shield. Environmental Conservation, 20(2), p. 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postel, S. (1992). Denial in the decisive decade. Pp. 3–8 in State of the World 1992 (Ed. Brown, L.R.). Earthscan, London, England, UK: xv + 256 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Ravetz, J.R. (1986). Usable knowledge, usable ignorance: incomplete science with policy implications. Pp. 415–32 in W.C. Clark & R.E. Munn, Sustainable Development of the Biosphere, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, UK: vi + 491 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Redclift, M. (1987). Sustainable Development: Exploring the Contradictions. Methuen, London, England, UK: 221 pp.Google Scholar
Rees, W.E. (1990). The ecology of sustainable development. The Ecologist, 20(1), pp. 18–23.Google Scholar
Scumacher, E.F. (1973). Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered. Harper & Row, New York, NY, USA: 290 pp.Google Scholar
Smithson, M. (1992). Managing in an age of ignorance. Pp. 39–65 in New Perspectives on Risk (Eds Handmer, J., Smithson, M., Geurin, B. & Dutton, B.). Australian Counter Disaster College, Mount Macedon, Victoria, and Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia: 160 pp.Google Scholar
WCED (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, UK: xv + 400 pp.Google Scholar