Nachhaltigkeitsverständnis
Perspectives on sustainability at the Kassel Institute for Sustainability
The term sustainability and its understanding are characterized by imprecision, ambiguity and, in some cases, contradictions. The environmental economist David W. Pearce speaks of a "gallery of definitions" of sustainability. We are aware of this diversity stemming from the evolution of the concept with its beginning commonly traced to the Brundtland definition of sustainable development in the Our Common Future report, and with first mentions of the concept going as far as the 18th century. This was followed by the very popular so-called “triple bottom line” (also known as people, planet, profit) approach to sustainability which takes environmental, social and financial outcomes into account. The triple bottom line conceptualization often comes in two versions proposed by economists: weak and strong sustainability. Weak sustainability permits mutual substitutability between natural capital on the one hand and social or economic capital on the other hand, while strong sustainability does not allow substitutability, nor compensation and discounting into the future. Following approaches adopted a(n) (eco)systems perspective and brought more complexity to defining sustainability, e.g. ‘the capacity to create, test, and maintain adaptive capability’, by introducing notions of adaptability and resilience, i.e. a system’s ability to self-organize and adapt to change. The Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS) and the Helmholtz Association’s developed the Integrative Concept of Sustainable Development (Integratives Konzept Nachhaltiger Entwicklung) meaning carefully managing the available resources to ensure a good life in the present and in the future. The next milestone for defining sustainability was marked by the notion of “ecosystem services” and synonymous notions which link human-wellbeing to nature. This milestone led to defining sustainability as the preservation of services derived from ecosystems.
More recent approaches to global sustainability emphasize the notions of: planetary boundaries (2009), i.e. critical thresholds for Earth system processes, beyond which the risk of environmental destruction increases significantly which advances a notion of sustainability as “living within planetary boundaries” → a safe spacefor humanity; and the interrelated notions of social foundations (representing the needs of all societies) and the doughnut (economics) delineating the space between the planetary boundaries (the means of the planet) and the social foundations (the needs of humanity) which advances a notion of sustainability as “living within the doughnut” → a safe and just space for humanity.
In 2015, the United Nations adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), marking a shift from the Millenium Development Goals, a development agenda adopted in 2000 for the year 2015, to a global sustainability agenda, taking Global North countries into accountability. At KIS, we critically reflect upon the 17 SDGs, analyze and envision alternative transformation pathways, especially in the Global South, in relation to these.
Most recent approaches emphasize notions of (environmental) justice, transformation and relationships. Novel definitions subscribe to the relational and transformative turn in sustainability science or are moving away from anthropocentrism to an emphasis on a multispecies perspective, expanding the scope of discussions on how to address biodiversity crisis and assure climate justice while transitioning to sustainable futures. The relational turn, instead of focusing on separate entities andtheir states, understands any two or more entities as entangled and permanently co-evolving, sees perpetual states of ‘becoming’ and continually unfolding processes and relations between the world’s entities, as well as between inner and outer worlds. The transformative turn in sustainability science argues that dominant ways of ‘doing’ science are not enough to respond to the current crises, and that new ways of researching and teaching are needed. The transformative turn in the sustainability debate considers that incremental changes in the system are no longer appropriate for tackling contemporary crises, and instead fundamental changes in/of the systems are necessary. Consequently, sustainability can be defined as:
- intra- and inter-generational equity within planetary boundaries or
- just and empathetic i) intra- and inter-generational, ii) intra- and inter-individual, iii) human- and other-than-human relationships. These relationships can be mediated by numerous factors, e.g. emotional affects, values, knowledge, formal and informal (institutional) structures, etc.
Within the KIS, we mostly agree to advance a notion of sustainability that departs from the initial definitions of the concept and tends towards the recent evolution of the concept (see above), and does the following:
- Is normative and future-oriented
- Encompasses justice in space and time, between humans and other-than-humans
- Acknowledges that according to transdisciplinary transformative sustainability science, sustainability needs to be (locally) co-defined, co-framed, and co-created
- Integrates across academic disciplines beyond the social and the ecological, including conventional and alternative branches of the economics, the humanities, technical sciences, psychology, etc.
- Considers the relational and transformative turns in sustainability science and in the sustainability debate
- Acknowledges the connection of outer (systems, governance, power structures, behaviors, demographics, etc.) and inner (individual and collective mindsets, values, worldviews and paradigms, and associated cognitive, emotional and relational inner qualities) dimensions of sustainability
- Reflects postcolonial, postcategorial, postgrowth- and postanthropecentrism-related questions
- Is critical towards, and sometimes incompatible with:
- the possibility of continuous “green” growth,
- the possibility to substitute,
- the possibility to discount, and
- the possibility to compensate for the destruction of ecological capital.
As the concept of sustainability has evolved, 'sustainability science' began to emerge (to be differentiated from sustainability research). Here, at KIS, we approach sustainability science as a scientific program that deploys a broad spectrum of among others natural, economics, engineering, social sciences and humanities, in order to both understand complex socio-technical-ecological systems, but also to guide societal transformations where each and every one is an agent of change and transformation. It is therefore, a normative, interdisciplinary and often transdisciplinary, solution-oriented scientific program. Ultimately, sustainability science is a social learning process, and universities can provide the frame for transformative and social learning to occur.
This understanding of sustainability has theoretical and practical implications in research, teaching and at the organizational level. We invite all members of the KIS and all those interested in the work of the KIS to actively reflect on this concept of sustainability in order to enhance its further development, implementation and operationalization in the theory, practice and teaching of sustainability science and sustainability research,
By having this brief broad-brush semi-chronological overview, students can seek to form their own view on sustainability by being able to observe and critically understand which stances their teachers or other members of the society, individually have and how (different) social, economic, political, educational or environmental programs relate to sustainability. They are able to recognize and become critically aware of the different perspectives on sustainability and sustainability transformation in the various media and academic discourses. This overview ensures students are familiar with the evolution of some more established perspectives on sustainability, while comprehending there is no one “sustainability” or “transformation”, but a diversity of cultures and narratives of sustainability or transformation, within which equity, intent and values increasingly play a role.