Sus ainabili y:
dynamics, pi alls,
and ansi ions
Luísa Schmid
João Gue a
1.
he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
28
in oduc ion
The holis ic no ion o sus ainable de elopmen (sd) — i. e. he in eg a ed
p omo ion o social well-being, economic p ospe i y, and sa egua ding o
he na u al en i onmen — a ose wi h he i s signs o he ecological c isis
in he 1960s and 1970s. Howe e , he concep acqui ed consis ency and
isibili y, abo e all, wi h he publica ion o he B und land Repo , which
de ined i s scope: “Sus ainable de elopmen is de elopmen ha mee s he
needs o he p esen wi hou comp omising he abili y o u u e gene a ions
o mee hei own needs” (wced 1987, 43). La e on, Agenda 21, he ac ion
plan eme ging om he Ea h Summi (unced 1992) con ained p oposals o
ac ion, p omo ing an idea o go e nance o sus ainabili y (i.e. wi h g ea e
in ol emen and pa icipa ion o all in e es ed pa ies, om in e na ional
ins i u ions o ci izens) and aking in o accoun he basic p esc ip ions o he
B und land Repo : o p o ide o cu en and u u e human needs and, a he
same ime, o espec ecological limi s.
This is acco dingly a polysemic idea ha combines wo di e en a eas:
de elopmen (which p omo es quali y o li e) and sus ainabili y (which makes
ha objec i e iable in he long e m). Gi en ha he concep o sus ainabili y
o igina es in he biological and ecological sciences, i was c ea ed o desc ibe
he limi s o he ex ac ion and consump ion o na u al esou ces ha ensu e
hei unde lying ecosys ems a e no h ea ened. In he social science ield, in
line wi h a p ac ice s a ed in he B un land Repo , he e m is usually used as
a esul o sd o as a synonym o i . In he la e case, he ocus is di ec ed o
he ela ionships be ween na u al, social, and economic capi al, highligh ing
he condi ions unde which such complex and in e dependen ela ionships
may las (Vos 2007), bu opening up my iad possibili ies o achie ing ha
du abili y.
In e ec , “ he idea o sus ainabili y assumes ha he e is some app op ia e
con e gence o economy, en i onmen , and equi y ha we should y o
achie e. Bu whose con e gence? I he con e gence we e based on he e y
high-consuming de eloped wo ld model, he wo ld would be deple ed o
esou ces e y quickly. Bu i he wo ld we e o s i e owa ds a model o
subsis ence sus ainabili y, he e would be an ou c y om he mo e de eloped
na ions” (B inkmann 2016, 233).
sd has hus gi en ise o conside able c i icism, wi h many au ho s a guing
ha he need o es ic p oduc ion and consump ion p ac ices has basically
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 29
been igno ed. E en i , as He man Daly s a ed in his seminal 1990 a icle,
de elopmen does no mean g ow h – “g ow h is quan i a i e inc ease in
physical scale, while de elopmen is quali a i e imp o emen o un olding
o po en iali ies” (Daly 1990, 402) – he idea o de elopmen has become
“dis o ed” h ough he imposi ion o economic g ow h as an unques ioned
social objec i e: “as coun ies expe ience inc eased g ow h hei p oduc i e
capaci y expands and hey ‘de elop’…” (Redcli 2005). In o he wo ds, his
close associa ion, which s ubbo nly pe sis s a leas in poli ical discou se and
he social imagina y, has p oduced a kind o icious cycle o inope abili y,
based on he subo dina ion o sd o he ma ke impe a i e i. e. “g ow o pe ish”
(Flinde s 2012).
Pe haps o his eason he exp ession “sus ainable de elopmen ” has o en
been ejec ed in a ou o he simple “sus ainabili y”. Howe e , i should be
emphasised ha despi e he di e en o igins and seman ics ela ed o g ow h
– i. e. “sus ainable de elopmen assumes ha g ow h is possible and desi able,
(…) sus ainabili y does no assume ha economic g ow h is essen ial, no ha
economic g ow h will ine i ably esul in ne en i onmen al ha m” (Redcli
and Sp inge 2015, 113), bo h e ms see he economy, socie y, and he
en i onmen as h ee in e dependen aspec s o he same eali y.
The way he ansi ion o mo e sus ainable pa e ns o de elopmen is
iewed and implemen ed depends, o ha eason, on he expe iences and
oppo uni ies hose pa e ns p o ide, and he ex en o which hey commi
o challenging “dominan alues and goals, as well as cu en p ac ices o
de elopmen ” (Pelling, O’B ien and Ma yas 2015, 124-125). Thus, as Tim
O’Rio dan emphasises, he yea s ahead “will make o b eak he e ec i eness
o any meaning ul ansi ion o sus ainabili y no ma e how his deeply
ambiguous concep is de ined” (O’ Rio dan 2014, 497).
This chap e will acco dingly, in sec ion one, analyse social a che ypes, he
disc epancies be ween discou ses and p ac ices, and he slippage ac o s ha
ha e cha ac e ised sd. Sec ion wo ega ds some indica o s (e. g. ends in he
ecological oo p in and social inequali y) ha e lec he dynamics o global
(un)sus ainabili y. Sec ion h ee makes an o e all assessmen o sus ainabili y
oday as a key p og amma ic concep o ans o ming socie y. The conclusion
seeks o iden i y wha condi ions will make sus ainabili y possible in he
c i ical ci cums ances acing humani y in hese ea ly decades o he wen y-
i s cen u y.
he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
30
om a che ypes o slippage
Conside ing he cu en global si ua ion and indica o s ela ing o aspec s
o sd, we may s a e ha mos o i s ideals wen by he wayside. Fo some,
mo eo e , sd was a kind o “whi e blackbi d, which no-one has e e ound”
(La ouche 2004, 26-27). Behind poo esul s dissec ed below, he e a e a ew
a che ypes (i. e. se s o belie s, in e es s, and basic social alues) ha unde pin
a i udes owa ds sus ainabili y and/o sd ha do no always con e ge.
In day o day li e, hese a che ypes – (a) dominan social pa adigm, (b) hin,
and (c) hick e sions o sus ainabili y (Vos 2007) – in luence choices and
boos posi ions on a pa hway ha has been delimi ed by slippage ac o s such
as: (i) he excessi e a achmen o he idea o sus ainabili y o he en i onmen ,
which makes i di icul o see he p oblems in an in eg a ed way; (ii) he
i ializa ion o he e ms sd and/o sus ainabili y, which d ains hem o
meaning and e ec i eness; (iii) hei subjuga ion o economic g ow h, which
con inues o “colonise” he social imagina y in mode n li e.
a che ypes o sus ainabili y
Le us begin he e o e wi h social a che ypes, adop ing he ad anced de ini ion
sugges ed by Ca oline Myss. Acco ding o his au ho , “al hough a che ypes
a e collec i e symbols (…), hey can also speak o us indi idually, as pe sonal
a che ypal pa e ns ha a e he ounda ion o ou belie s, d i es, mo i a ions,
and ac ions, o ganising and ene gising all ou ela ionships in li e” (Myss
2013, 2-3). Table 1.1 shows hose ounda ional models o beha iou , o e ing
in schema ic o m h ee possible ypes o a che ypes o sus ainabili y, as pu
o wa d by Robe Vos (2007).
The i s app oach is based on he Dominan Social Pa adigm, ocused mainly
on he g ow h impe a i e and an h opocen ic alues in which en i onmen al
issues a e o only esidual signi icance among he mos basic conce ns. In his
app oach na u e is basically seen as a sou ce o esou ces and aw ma e ials,
and echno-scien i ic a ionali y eme ges as an indispensable and e ec i e
ally in o e coming he en i onmen al di icul ies imposed by de elopmen .
This scep ical posi ion in ela ion o he exis ence o an ecological c isis
assumes ha esou ces a e in ini ely enewable, and ha he human capaci y
o o e come he abo e-men ioned di icul ies is likewise in ini e. Hence, he e
a e no limi s o economic o demog aphic g ow h. Issues o social equi y a e
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 31
no ela ed o ecological issues and, since he la e a e no a co e conce n,
hei esolu ion is le o echno-science and he laws o he ma ke . In his line
o hinking, decisions a e mos ly ese ed o echnicians and he poli icians
hey ad ise, wi h no oom o public pa icipa ion and sha ing in decision-
making, which he B und land Repo (wced 1987), he Rio Decla a ion, and
Agenda 21 (unced 1992) all clea ly ad oca e.
The hin e sion add esses sus ainabili y in a p agma ic way. This is a
e o ming and concilia o y ision ha seeks o achie e change based on close
co-ope a ion be ween he a ious sea s o powe and ci il socie y and, in his
way, o in luence decision-making p ocesses. This app oach awa ds na u e
in insic alue, bu subjec o he social and economic alues on which he
success o any ac ion leading o conse a ion and/o p o ec ion o na u e’s
alues depends. A guing abo e all o “win-win” si ua ions, his app oach
ecommends paying special a en ion o social inequali ies (in a iably ied o
en i onmen al inequali ies) and appeals o he in ol emen and pa icipa ion,
as a as possible, o all pa ies and in e es s p esen . Economic and demog aphic
g ow h should he e o e be seen in ha con ex o econciling in e es s, in
A che ypes o sus ainabili y
dominan social
pa adigm
hin e sions
o sus ainabili y
hick e sions
o sus ainabili y
on ology
o na u e
Na u e as aw ma e ials
o he human economy
Some in insic alues
ecognised in na u e
Many in insic alues
ecognised in na u e
subs i u ion o
na u al capi al
In ini e
subs i u ion
Some na u al capi al
canno be subs i u ed
No declines
in na u al capi al
economic
g ow h No limi s Win–win ela ionship
emphasised
Mus slow and e e se
g ow h
popula ion
g ow h No limi s
Popula ion g ow h mus
be accompanied by pe
capi a o se s
Mus slow g ow h
and achie e declining
popula ions
ole o echnology Technological a ionali y Cau ious scep icism Deep scep icism
social
equi y
Le o
he ma ke
Takes connec ions
in o accoun
A en ion
o edis ibu ion
s akeholde
pa icipa ion
Decisions
by expe s
Collabo a i e
s akeholde p ocesses
G ass oo s
democ acy
Sou ce: Vos (2007, 336).
Table 1.1

he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
32
which hey ake on an ambiguous ole oge he wi h science and echnology.
On he one hand, hese d i e s o de elopmen a e seen as being esponsible
o cu en ecological p oblems, albei wi h a ying deg ees o esponsibili y.
On he o he hand, he e is ecogni ion o he c ucial ole hey may play in
some cases in ob aining solu ions o hose same p oblems.
The hick and mos adical e sion o sus ainabili y adop s demanding
posi ions, abo e all in connec ion wi h he need o p o ec he en i onmen
and igh o he main enance and iabili y o ecological condi ions. In gene al
e ms, i assumes ha he e is g ea e di icul y in econciling en i onmen al
and socio-economic in e es s. In his app oach, na u e has an in insic alue,
no dependen on human in e es s. Acco dingly, he e is no belie in any
p odigious solu ions pu o wa d by science and echnology o main ain
ecosys em equilib ium. Ra he , i ad oca es a e-o ien a ion o he economy,
he sys em o p oduc ion, and he consume socie y, wi h a iew o slowing
down o e en e e sing economic g ow h; close a en ion o demog aphic
issues which, in la ge measu e, a e associa ed wi h hose o de elopmen ;
and an e ec i e edis ibu ion o esou ces o p o ide o he needs o less
a ou ed na ions and communi ies. To his end, i is deemed essen ial o ha e
a policy o b oad and cohe en pa icipa ion in decision-making p ocesses,
on he assump ion ha building public consen , by means o pa icipa i e
and delibe a i e me hodologies, is undamen al in ensu ing he success o
es ic i e measu es ha a e no always easy o implemen (Jackson 2009).
Assuming hese a che ypes a e no wa e igh , he sd model chosen will
depend on he in e play o powe , in e es s, and socio-cul u al ci cums ances,
based on many possible con igu a ions (Gue a 2011). Mo eo e , i is his
elas ici y o he concep ha has enabled i o become ubiqui ous, while a he
same ime being de alued in heo e ical and no ma i e-p og amma ic e ms
(Sachs 2015). The wo sening o he ecological c isis o e ecen decades has
con ibu ed o his, alongside he albei in e mi en socio-economic c isis
(Schmid and Gue a 2016). As Oli ia Bina s a es, “ he ansi ion be ween
millennia was ma ked by he exace ba ion o bo h. In de eloped na ions
economic g ow h (in e ms o gdp) umbled, unemploymen and inequali y
o weal h and income eached new heigh s, p oducing a knock-on e ec on
eme ging economies” (Bina 2013, 1023).
Indeed, he Dominan Social Pa adigm, li ing up o i s name – which
assumes he g ow h and cen ali y o humani y in he wo ld as incon es able
alues (Dunlap e al. 2000; Dunlap 2008) – has ended o p e ail, in ol ing
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 33
ce ain cons ain s and ba ie s ha ha e had signi ican slippage e ec s, such
as hose we analyse in g ea e de ail below.
p edominance o he en i onmen
En i onmen al conce ns began o acqui e some isibili y in socie y om he
1960s on, when he i s a owedly en i onmen al disas e s occu ed, signs o
dwindling esou ces eme ged, and i was ecognized “ ha human ac i i ies
a e al e ing he ecosys ems on which ou exis ence – and ha o all o he
li ing species – is dependen ” (Dunlap e al. 2000, 426). This con i ms he idea
ha we a e unde going a socie al eassessmen o ou wo ld iews, ques ioning
he imbalances in ou ela ionship, as humans, wi h he physical en i onmen .
This new social pa adigm – he New En i onmen al Pa adigm – has aken
hold in mos mode n socie ies, albei a di e en speeds and in a non-linea
way, p og ess al e na ing wi h se backs (Dunlap e al. 2000).
Be ha as i may, as a esul o he “ apidi y o change and he speed wi h
which new si ua ions a e c ea ed [and] ollow he impe uous and heedless
pace o man a he han he delibe a e pace o na u e” ( Ca son 1962), conce n
wi h en i onmen al decay has become he condui and bed ock o he idea
o sus ainabili y. Publica ion o Rachel Ca son’s (1962) “Silen Sp ing”, he
“Uni ed Na ions Con e ence on he Human En i onmen ” in S ockholm
(unche 1972), and publica ion o The Limi s o G ow h (Meadows e al.
1972), a e h ee miles ones in he eme gence and g adual consolida ion o
new ecological alues and he esul ing e hink o Humani y’s place in a wo ld
o plane a y limi s.
Ce ainly, i was no he isibili y and p ominence o en i onmen al issues
ha alone blocked implemen a ion o sd, gi en ha he e is no u u e wi hou
he ecological condi ions o sus ain i . Bu he p ojec ion hey achie ed
elega ed o he aspec s – socie al, ins i u ional, economic – o he backg ound,
o a leas ci cumsc ibed hem o disconnec ed ac ion plans, making i di icul
o see he equi ed o e all pic u e. As a esul , he no ion o sus ainabili y o en
coincided wi h “en i onmen al sus ainabili y” and he concep o sd ended up
ha ing an in luence p ima ily on global en i onmen al policies and h ough
hem on na ional en i onmen al policies.
Al hough he e is a deg ee o consensus ha he socie al dynamics ha
b ing abou en i onmen al decay ha e di ec implica ions o public heal h,
socie al well-being, and he economy – a ec ing abo e all coun ies and g oups
he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
34
less well p epa ed o ace up o he challenges o ha en i onmen al decay –
he end o e ecen decades has been o an insis en and coun e p oduc i e
sepa a ion o hese a eas. While on he one hand i has always been a gued ha
“sus ainabili y is no exclusi ely o e en p ima ily an en i onmen al issue”
(undp 2011, i ), on he o he hand i is undeniable ha many p ac ices and
“ heo ies on sus ainabili y iew equi y and he pligh o he poo as sepa a e
and un ela ed” (undp 2011, 19). This means, wi hou denying he cen al
impo ance o en i onmen al issues in mode n socie ies, ha he holis ic (and
o e lapping) socio-en i onmen al hinking behind he o iginal idea o sd has
no p e ailed. Ins ead, disconnec ed ba le on s we e c ea ed. I hey had
come oge he , he de ende s o he holis ic app oach o sus ainabili y a gue,
hey migh ha e p oduced mo e sa is ac o y esul s.
i ialisa ion o language
In spi e o all his, he idea o sd has gained widesp ead accep ance, d i en
by he ecological c isis and i s e ec s on people’s (p esen and u u e) li es.
F om he ime o he B un land Repo on (wced 1987), i became a c oss-
cu ing concep , a leas in e ms o discou se, in many de elopmen policies.
Despi e his b oad consensus, “mu mu s o disenchan men a e also being
hea d. ‘Wha is sd?’ is being asked inc easingly equen ly wi hou , howe e ,
clea answe s o hcoming” (Lélé 1991, 607).
“Su ing he wa es” o he poli ically co ec masks eali y and de e s any
scep ical o p ejudiced eac ion o sus ainabili y, which is hus “in eal dange
o becoming a cliché (…), a ashionable ph ase ha e e yone pays homage o,
bu nobody ca es [abou ]” (ibid.). This gap be ween discou se and eali y has
epe cussions on he s a e o he wo ld and agg a a es inequali ies amongs
coun ies and social g oups, on accoun o he exponen ial g ow h o he
ecological oo p in which, wi h his lame global eac ion, oday h ea ens
ecosys em iabili y and human ci ilisa ion as we know hem, e lec ing he
global and unp eceden ed e ec s o human ac i i y on he plane , which
ha e ushe ed in a new e a: he “An h opocene” (C u zen and S oe me 2000;
La ou 2017).
As we ha e seen abo e, i is ue ha en i onmen al decay was he lei mo i
o sd bu , in a global pe spec i e, i s “ad e se consequences a e ime-delayed
and/o dis an on a huge plane . Time lags and geog aphical dis ance be ween
an h opogenic causes and ha m ul consequences a e condi ions ha push
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 35
unsus ainabili y and dange ou o ocus and make hem e y di e en om
he expe ience o disas e ha becomes a ocusing e en . These condi ions
os e complacency which impedes ac ion o a oid incuba ing disas e s”
(Mu phy 2015, 400). Thus, e en hough sd has become pa o he social,
economic, and poli ical ja gon sp ead by he ins i u ions o global go e nance,
and a slogan o en i onmen al and de elopmen ac i is s, he wo ld si ua ion
is ending o de e io a e, whiche e way i is looked a .
While he p og ess sd has made should no be discoun ed, i s e ec i e
implemen a ion has o en aken place in a undamen ally e asi e ashion
(Adge and Jo dan 2009), supe icially and in la ge measu e wi h no esul s
(Redcli 2005). E ec i e in eg a ed ac ion would be equi ed o deal wi h
he social and en i onmen al e ec s o pollu ion and esou ce sca ci y. In
p ac ice, howe e , c ucial e o ms ha e been delayed, and ac ion has been
limi ed o “wish ul hinking” (D yzek 2003; Gue a and Schmid 2016),
he eby necessa ily diminishing he p ac ical esul s o sd. In sum, we a e
li ing “in an age o sus ainababble” (Engelman 2013), in which he e y e m
“sus ainabili y” is i sel used in a no e y sus ainable way.
g ow h as objec i e
F om ea ly on he p oblems o co-o dina ing de elopmen and sus ainabili y
we e s essed as signi ican ba ie s o unde aking mo e balanced
de elopmen . In a way, sd is he esul o combining wo con adic o y e ms
ha ende i an oxymo on o poo p ac icali y (Daly 1990; Redcli 2005). As
He man Daly wa ned sho ly a e he publica ion o he B und land Repo ,
he idea o g ow h is oo s ongly embedded in he seman ics o sd – and
appa en ly on i s own me i s. See o example he ollowing sen ence, ex ac ed
om he G o Ha lem B und land’s p e ace: “Wha is needed now is a new e a
o economic g ow h – g ow h ha is o ce ul and a he same ime socially and
en i onmen ally sus ainable” (wced 1987, Chai man’s Fo ewo d).
To be ai , B und land was a guing o socially and en i onmen ally
sus ainable g ow h and was hinking abo e all o poo e coun ies less well
equipped o ace he challenges o sus ainabili y. Bu as Daly w o e: “since he
human economy is an open subsys em o a ini e, closed, global ecosys em
which does no g ow (…), he e m ‘sus ainable g ow h’ should be ejec ed as
a bad oxymo on — poe ically une oca i e, as well as li e ally con adic o y.
The e m ‘sus ainable de elopmen ’ is much mo e ap , bu in c i ical need o
he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
42
c oss oads. As Al Go e s a es: “human ci ilisa ion has eached a o k in he
oad we ha e long a elled. One o wo pa hs mus be chosen. Bo h lead
us in o he unknown. Bu one leads owa ds he des uc ion o he clima e
balance on which we depend, he deple ion o i eplaceable esou ces ha
sus ain us, he deg ada ion o uniquely human alues, and he possibili y ha
ci ilisa ion as we know i would come o an end. The o he leads o he u u e”
(Go e 2013, 277).
This inescapable and u gen idea o change is indeed suppo ed by coun less
scien is s and p e-eminen hinke s om all a eas. Fo example, on he
Po sdam Memo andum, adop ed a he Fi s In e disciplina y Nobel Lau ea e
Symposium on Global Sus ainabili y (held a Po sdam, in 2007), scien is s
om all a eas s a ed ha “we a e s anding a a momen in his o y when a g ea
ans o ma ion is needed o espond o he immense h ea o ou plane .
This ans o ma ion mus begin immedia ely and is s ongly suppo ed by all
p esen a he Po sdam Nobel Lau ea e Symposium” (Po sdam Memo andum,
published in Schellnhube e al. 2010, 369).
om c i icism o mobilising o change
To o e come his pe sis en pa e n o unsus ainable de elopmen , “we need
no hing less han a di e en concep o socio-economic p og ess, based on a
new unde s anding o he ela ionship be ween humans and na u e. [Then], he
hope is ha he limi a ions o g eening discou ses will con ibu e o ein igo a e
he discussion a ound sd models o he 21s Cen u y” (Bina 2013, 1042). F om
his poin o iew, some w i e s unde line he impo ance o sus ainabili y as a
discou se o inspi e change in socie y, he economy, and he en i onmen , posi ing
de elopmen and en i onmen as wo sides o he same coin (B own 2001).
In his pe spec i e, he excessi ely he o ical aspec o sd discou se is pa o
i s s eng h, o he ex en ha one o i s aims is o es how in luen ial i can
be, in a kind o pe sis en , d ip- eed e ec . I an icipa es and p omo es public
policies and socie al p ac ices ha ake ime and equi e new condi ions
( Fe ei a de Almeida 2000).
In u h, i is di icul o deny ha seeds ge mina e: he opic is on he
agendas o na ional and in e na ional policymake s; i has cogni i e in luence,
which enables consensus, e en i i is somewha he o ical; i has become pa
o he logic o p oduc ion; i is embedded in scien i ic esea ch p io i ies; and

sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 43
ep esen s a cumula i e p ocess o iumphs. Some indica o s a e pa icula ly
signi ican , no leas he un’s Agenda 2030, as embodied in i s Sus ainable
De elopmen Goals which, unlike he Millennium Goals, a e o uni e sal
applica ion. On he same scale o impo ance is he Pa is Ag eemen , a i ied
by all he coun ies o he wo ld a cop 23 held in Bonn in No embe 2017.
Despi e he announced exi o he us, his ag eemen will in ol e join ac ion
by all coun ies o educe g eenhouse gas emissions, and a se o unding
measu es and p og ammes o deal wi h clima e change speci ically o he
coun ies o he Sou h.
In addi ion, many in e na ional and Eu opean o ganisa ions1 ha e been
encou aged o p oduce mani es os, wi h inno a i e p oposals, o a new,
g eene , mo e sus ainable, and ci cula economy, in he sense o p omo ing
co-ope a ion o he in eg a ed ha nessing o esou ces (Fe ão 2014). These
a e mani es os and p og ammes ha de ine he assump ions o sus ainabili y.
In o he wo ds, hey demons a e how o es o e he “heal h” o he economic
sys em by c ea ing jobs and businesses and a he same ime comba ing he
“c ises” o he c isis: dependency on ossil uels, he de as a ion o ini e
esou ces, he global loss o biodi e si y, he ood disas e , and s ubbo n
po e y – p oblems which in u n ha e e ec s on he clima e cycle and b ing
eno mous isks ega ding clima e change and i s consequences.
Finally, we should s ess he key ole o ci il socie y as a d i e o change. A
he hea o i s mos e ec i e in ol emen a e: (i) he p o ision o in o ma ion
and scien i ic knowledge in a c ea i e and mo i a ing way and (ii) new
mechanisms o public pa icipa ion using inno a i e me hods and spaces
o ci ic engagemen . The coo dina ion o go e nance and sus ainabili y
s a egies is ano he o he equi emen s pu o wa d by, o example Agenda
21 (unced 1992). This is a sine qua non condi ion o an e hics o p ac ical
ac ion, which by ein o cing p oximi y and es ablishing us , is a he hea
o he ansi ion ad oca ed, all he mo e so because weak o weakened s a es
(as oday’s s a es inc easingly a e) need s onge ci il socie ies; and he g ea e
he in ol emen o all, in a balanced way, he g ea e will be he success o sd
policies (Wu hnow 2005).
1 Fo example: ec (Eu opean Commission), eeac (Eu opean En i onmen and Sus ainable De elop-
men Ad iso y Councils), eeb (The Eu opean En i onmen al Bu eau, eosd (Eu opean O ganisa ion o
Sus ainable De elopmen ), oecd (O ganisa ion o Economic Co-ope a ion and De elopmen ), sdc
(Sus ainable De elopmen Commission – uk), unep (Uni ed Na ions En i onmen P og amme), uno
(Uni ed Na ions O ganiza ion), wbgu (Ge man Ad iso y Council on Global Change).
he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
44
The po en ial o public in ol emen de i es om his c oss-cu ing
pe spec i e o sus ainabili y, which is e lec ed in he way ci izens ela e o
en i onmen al alues oday, e en i an h opocen ic alues pe sis and a e
only g adually eplaced, in a dynamic ha depends on economic and social
ci cums ances (Dunlap e al. 2000).
In e ec , i we ake in o accoun some o he issp (In e na ional Social
Su ey P og amme) indica o s and how hey ha e e ol ed in he i s decade
o he wen y- i s cen u y (Figu e 1.5), he e is a clea end o gene al g ow h
in ecological alues2 among in e iewees in 35 coun ies on 5 con inen s.3
The highe a e age sco es (3.53 and 3.55) ob ained by he s a emen ha
ques ions he plane ’s abili y o con inue o suppo he g ow h o he wo ld’s
popula ion should also be no ed. They show ha his is a p oblem ha he bulk
o he wo ld’s popula ion has aken on boa d, e en i in some geog aphical
a eas an ageing popula ion accoun s o a dynamic ha ends in he opposi e
di ec ion.
Two o he a iables eme ge a a second le el, ques ioning “mode n li e”
(3.28 and 3.32) o he idea ha much o wha is said abou he en i onmen
and he ecological c isis is exagge a ed (3.29 and 3.17). The o he emaining
h ee a iables – conce n wi h he en i onmen o he u u e (2.87 and 3.01),
he idea ha economic g ow h ha ms he en i onmen (2.88 and 2.90), and
he excuse ha doing any hing abou he en i onmen is oo di icul (2.82
and 2.76) – ind less ag eemen amongs in e iewees bu , e en so, show
posi i e a e age alues and a e ending consis en ly owa ds p o-ecological
posi ions.
These alues p o ide e idence o some hesi a ion be ween op ing o
an h opocen ic o ecological alues. Bu he gene al end is o a p og essi e
g ea e suppo o ecological alues, e en conside ing he ac ha he
economic and inancial c isis which began in 2008 may ha e caused he p o-
ecological inclina ion o some in e iews o wa e (bu no eg ess). Wi hou
2 Fo a iables ha do no call on en i onmen al alues – “much abou he en i onmen is exagge a ed”
and “doing [some hing] abou he en i onmen is oo di icul ” – he end is nega i e. So he e oo he e
is inc easingly a p o-ecological and p o-sus ainabili y a i ude.
3 In he hi d ound o issp En i onmen (which ook place be ween 2010 and 2012) he ollowing
coun ies we e p esen : A gen ina, Aus ia, Belgium (Flande s), Bulga ia, Canada, Chile, Taiwan,
C oa ia, Czech Republic, Denma k, Finland, F ance, Ge many, Iceland, Is ael, Japan, Sou h Ko ea,
La ia, Li huania, Mexico, Ne he lands, New Zealand, No way, Philippines, Po ugal, Russia, Slo ak
Republic, Slo enia, Sou h A ica, Spain, Sweden, Swi ze land, Tu key, G ea B i ain, and Uni ed S a es.
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 45
his, he ends eco ded could well ha e been much mo e posi i e (Gue a,
Schmid and Valen e 2017).
The 35 coun ies in he sample may no be ep esen a i e o he whole plane ,
so hese esul s should be iewed wi h a deg ee o cau ion. He e oo, mo eo e ,
we can see he plane a y imbalances ha consecu i ely exclude many millions
o human beings. The idea, howe e , is o show how en i onmen , economy,
and mode n ways o li ing a e in ima ely connec ed no jus in hei physical
consequences (social and en i onmen al decay), bu also in pe cep ions o
hem and in he posi ions adop ed by ci izens in he mos di e se geog aphical
con ex s, gi en ha he ends a e global and eme ge ega dless o he a luence
o he coun ies in which he s udy ook place.
To inalise his analysis le us examine whe he hese same in e iewees
eel any e ec s o ecological decay in hei day- o-day li es. The esul s in
Figu e 1.6 show ha almos hal (44.6%) o hem do; abou one qua e o
hem (24.5%) a e undecided, and only one qua e s a e ha hey eel no
di ec e ec o ecological decay on hei day- o-day li es. I is signi ican ,
he e o e, ha a la ge majo i y o in e iewees a e somewha app ehensi e
abou en i onmen al p oblems.
In e es in, and conce n wi h, he en i onmen de i e undoub edly om a
mul iplici y o con ex ual ac o s, in which a i udes abou mode n li e and he
T ends in ag eemen wi h s a emen s ela ing o he en i onmen
Sou ce: Au ho ’s elabo a ion om issp Resea ch G oup (2012): In e na ional Social Su ey P og amme: En i onmen
iii – issp 2010. gesis Da a A chi e, Cologne. ZA5500 Da a ile Ve sion 2.0.0, doi: 10.4232/1.11418.
To do abou
en i onmen is
oo di icul
5
4
3
2
1
Ea h canno
suppo popula ion
g ow h
3.55
3.52
2.76
2.82
2.90
2.88
3.01
2.87
3.17
3.29
3.32
3.28
Mode n li e
ha ms he
en i onmen
Many abou
en i onmen
is exagge a ed
Wo y
abou u u e
en i onmen
2000 2010
Economic
g ow h ha ms he
en i onmen
Figu e 1.5
he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
46
economy a e only pa o a complex
se o in e dependencies. The e a e
many o he a iables in ol ed, bu
hese ha e no been analysed he e, o
lack o space. Fo example, in many
o he coun ies usually ega ded
as being mo e de eloped, g owing
ecological awa eness goes hand in
hand wi h implemen a ion o mo e
e ec i e en i onmen al policies.
Fo his eason, signs o ecological
eco e y may con ibu e o a posi i e
assessmen o na ional pe o mance
and he eby p oduce en i onmen al
dange and isk assessmen s ha
educe people’s conce ns, bu no
hei app ecia ion o he quali y
o he en i onmen , whe he o
p esen o u u e gene a ions. In
ac , when en i onmen al disas e s
do a ise, as occu ed in 2011 wi h
he acciden a he Fukushima
nuclea plan in Japan (Schmid , Ho a and Pe ei a 2014), he c i ical sense
becomes sha pe and mo e p ominen , making in oads in coun ies whe e
en i onmen al policies a e no as well de eloped and ha e p oduced ewe
en i onmen al gains.
conclusions
As Eli da Veiga (2012 [2011]) poin s ou , un il he la e six ies o he las
cen u y, he adjec i e “sus ainable” was jus ja gon used by some scien i ic
communi ies o e oke he possibili y o an ecosys em no losing i s esilience.
Howe e , as we ha e ied o emphasise abo e, a e he “legi imacy” gained
in he B und land Repo and he Agenda 21, he no ion has been pu unde
suspicion on all on s: om he s aunches “g ow-o -pe ish” suppo e s o
he mos undamen alis en i onmen al de ende s. The disconnec be ween
Di ec e ec on e e yday li e
o en i onmen al p oblems
Sou ce: Au ho ’s elabo a ion om ISSP Resea ch G oup
(2012).
Figu e 1.6
Ag ee – 44.6%
Disag ee – 25.7%
Nei he ag ee
no disag ee – 24.5%
NA/DK – 5.2%
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 47
he p oli e a ion o discou ses on Sus ainable De elopmen and he ailu e o
apply hem in p ac ice seems a sou ce o disc edi , which esul s om h ee
basic ac o s:
• Inhe en  con adic ion, which makes he concep  an oxymo on, and
he eby di icul o apply in p ac ice, because o he p e alence o he
economic impe a i e o “g ow-o -pe ish”, in he ace o socie al ine ia
and he ine ec i eness o poli icians and policies. The linea objec i e
o economic p og ess p oduces isks o ecological damage. When i is
claimed by e e yone, ega dless o he le el o economic de elopmen ,
i may become unsus ainable (La ouche 2009);
• Theubiqui ousnessandelas ici yo  he e mssd and/o sus ainabili y,
which, ha ing he ad an age o being dissemina ed and hei p inciples
and objec i es widely known, also i ialise he concep by applying i on
occasions ha o en do no go much beyond he o ic and supe iciali y.
While i is no new, he concep o sus ainabili y has come o be accep ed,
and has been pa ly assimila ed, bu li le implemen ed in p ac ice, in a
slow p ocess ha does no challenge es ablished in e es s (Redcli and
Hin on 2008).
• I sexcessi eassocia ionwi hen i onmen alp oblems,whichul ima ely
weakens sd p og ammes. This is no because en i onmen al p oblems
a e insigni ican , bu because go e nmen and poli ical ins i u ions
end o unde alue he ecological c isis and hence o ope a e and make
decisions in a way ha discoun s he linkages be ween en i onmen al
p oblems and economic dynamics, in a con ex o “o ganised
i esponsibili y” (Beck 1995).
These disconnec s occu because he igou implici in “ hick sus ainabili y”
goes hand in hand wi h g ea e demands (e. g. mo e imp o emen , mo e
commi men , mo e complexi y). While hese p oduce disag eemen and
esis ance, he mo e ob ious choice ( o poli ical decision-make s, bu no only
hem) no mally alls on he “ hin” e sion o sus ainabili y. As Thaddeus Mille
igh ly s a ed, “ he con ex and con lic ha come wi h hickness a e absen in
hin sus ainabili y” (Mille 2011, 30). The op ion o go o less demanding
e sions o Sus ainabili y is hus o en a delibe a e one and, while on he one
hand i enables p og ess on ce ain poin s on which he e is a consensus, i is
also ue ha i helps o pos pone he mo e signi ican decisions.

he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
48
In his no man’s land, he less p essing and less isible consequences o
en i onmen al, socie al, and economic decay a e igno ed, and in gene al e ms
people and ins i u ions become complacen , hinde ing mo e e ec i e ac ion.
The esul s o he inc easing ecological oo p in , and inc easing inequali y,
a e a good demons a ion o he ela i e ailu e o sd policies adop ed in
ecen decades. Wha we ha e wi nessed is no a balance be ween he hin and
hick e sions o sus ainabili y, bu basically he main enance o he dominan
pa adigm, in e sec ed now and again by mo e success ul ac ions gene ally
mo e in line wi h he hin e sion.
E en so, i canno be denied ha he e has been “a con inuous shi ing
o e o s o y o ad ance long- e m sus ainabili y based on local, na ional,
egional, o in e na ional condi ions” (B inkmann 2016, 232). This shi , o e
almos h ee decades, did no go unno iced in he wo ld – by ins i u ions,
poli ical ac o s, and ci izens. Despi e he ela i e lack o success, o which
we ha e gi en an accoun he e, i canno be said ha we would be be e o
wi hou he e o ha was ac ually made o popula ise and e en implemen
Sus ainabili y, e en i in an ad hoc and “ hin” manne . The da a show some signs
ha ex eme po e y has been e e sed and ha en i onmen al awa eness has
become a c oss-cu ing and ongoing phenomenon. Hence he signi icance
o policies ha acknowledge (and pu in o p ac ice) he holis ic na u e o
Sus ainabili y, and he impo ance o dissemina ing he esul s o successi e
wo ld epo s so as o: (i) es ablish ha he pa h he wo ld cu en ly con inues
o pu sue is unsus ainable, and (ii) ou line he u gen need o e e se his
des uc i e p ocess by building Sus ainabili y.
Fo he challenge o change o ha e angible e ec s, ci izen mobilisa ion
and in ol emen ake on a key ole in an inc easingly in e dependen wo ld,
in a si ua ion ha demands collec i e and ac oss- he-boa d commi men
no only in ways o hinking, ac ing, p oducing, and consuming, bu also in
eo ganising, es o ing, and imp o ing, and e en mo e so in a con ex o he
p og essi e weakening o s a es. In his sense sd eme ges as he na a i e mos
likely o o e come he challenges o he wen y- i s cen u y. Because i in ol es
all – ci izens, businesses, go e nmen – in a global p og amme o e i e he
economy in new ways ha will econcile employmen and he conse a ion o
he en i onmen , no o ge ing he mos ulne able g oups and he need o
ensu e equi able access o a ailable esou ces. This may be wish ul hinking
bu , as Tim O’Rio dan emphasises, he ansi ion “is [al eady] happening in
he s ee s and ields o he unexplo ed niches o hea ening sus ainabili y
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 49
ansi ions” (O’Rio dan 2014, 516), e en i e y g adually and while no
being immune o he social and economic s a us quo. These ini ia i es, o en
unde aken by ci il socie y a he local le el, a e speci ic, epheme al ins ances
o sho -li ed esis ance. And hey will con inue o be epheme al i he
ansi ion o Sus ainabili y, ad oca ed by nea ly all and p ac iced by almos no
one, does no become eali y. Bu he e seems o be no o he way.
While i is ue ha social no ms and beha iou s a e esis an o change,
and e en mo e so he ins i u ions o go e nmen ha could in luence hem
h ough ac i e public policies – which su ely makes i mo e di icul o achie e
long- e m change – i is almos ce ain ha we ha e li le oom o manoeu e
and ha he ime emaining o us is apidly unning ou .
The global c isis which, o a la ge ex en , emains ad in ini um in
con empo anei y, can be seen as “a decla a ion o bank up cy by a socie y
ha subsidises i s ‘weal h’ by ex e nalising he main pa o he cos s linked
o p oduc ion and consump ion, imposing hem on coming gene a ions, on
human beings li ing a away, and on na u e’s capi al. These cos s in ol e
he exploi a ion o he en i onmen , as well as inancial deb s and bu dens”
(Töp e 2010, 375).
This means ha all ha is le is o ake compliance wi h he Sus ainable
De elopmen Goals adop ed by he un in Sep embe 2015 se iously. In
s eng hening he socio-economic aspec s o sd, hese goals seek o embed an
e ec i e s a egy o elimina ing po e y, educing he g ow h in consump ion,
and p e en ing he decay o ecosys ems, which will necessa ily in ol e he
di icul challenges o s opping exponen ial popula ion g ow h and educing
ca bon emissions, as p o ided o in he Pa is Ag eemen .
On he o he hand, sus ainabili y is also a ma e o be e a icula ing he
conse a ion o human li e and human quali y o li e wi h he conse a ion
o na u al esou ces and en i onmen al quali y. Fo sd o be e ec i ely
p ac iced, a p oac i e complemen a i y mus be achie ed be ween a
na a i e o ecological limi s (which unde lines di icul ies and he
agg a a ed p essu e on na u al esou ces) and a mo e op imis ic na a i e
ha does no impose he ine ia by discou agemen (Schmid 2017). In line
wi h ecological mode nisa ion (Mol 2002), and coun ing on ingenui y and
inno a ion a a ious le els: echnological, scien i ic, ins i u ional, poli ical,
human… his kind o P ome hean na a i e can also help o e e se he
deg ada ion p ocess i associa ed wi h he idea o limi s and adjus ed o
na u al cons ain s.
he di e se wo lds o sus ainabili y
50
____________________________________
luísa schmid
Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa
A . P o . Aníbal Be encou 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Po ugal
[email p o ec ed]
o cid.o g/0000-0002-7449-8636
____________________________________
joão gue a
Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa
[email p o ec ed]
o cid.o g/0000-0003-1918-2273
____________________________________
e e ences
adge , N., A. Jo dan, eds. 2009. Go e ning Sus ainabili y. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y
P ess.
anand, S., A. Sen 2000. “Human de elopmen and economic sus ainabili y”. Wo ld
De elopmen , 28 (12): 2029-2049.
beck, U. 1995. Ecological Poli ics in an Age o Risk. Camb idge: Poli y P ess.
beck, U. 2009. Wo ld a Risk. Camb idge: Poli y P ess.
bina, O. 2013. “The g een economy and sus ainable de elopmen : an uneasy balance?”.
En i onmen and Planning C-Go e nmen and Policy, 31: 1023-1047.
bi dsall, N. 2017. “Middle class winne s o lose s in a globalized wo ld?”. Vangua dia
Dossie – Juicio a la globalización, 65: 129-132.
b inkmann, R. 2016. In oduc ion o Sus ainabili y. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
b own, L., o g. 2001. S a e o he Wo ld 2001 – A Wo ldwa ch Ins i u e Repo on P og ess
Towa d a Sus ainable Socie y. New Yo k and London: W. W. No on & Company.
ca son, R. 1962. Silen Sp ing. Robbinsdale: Fawce Publica ions.
c u zen, P. J., E. F. S oe me . 2000. “The ‘An h opocene’ ”. Global Change Newsle e , 41: 17-
18.
daly, H. E. 1990. “Sus ainable g ow h: a bad oxymo on”. En i onmen al Ca cinogenesis
Re iews: En i onmen al Ca cinogenesis and Eco oxicology Re iews, 8 (2): 401-407,
doi: 10.1080/10590509009373395
d yzek, J. S. 2003. G een S a es and Social Mo emen s. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
dunlap, R., R. Yo k. 2008. “The globaliza ion o en i onmen al conce n and he limi s o
he pos ma e ialis alues explana ion: E idence om ou mul ina ional su eys”. The
Sociological Qua e ly, 49 (3): 529-563.
dunlap, R. E., e al. 2000. “Measu ing endo semen o he new ecological pa adigm: a e ised
nep Scale”. Jou nal o Social Issues, 56 (3): 425-442.
dunlap, R. E. 2008. “The new en i onmen al pa adigm scale: om ma ginali y o wo ldwide
u s e”. The Jou nal o En i onmen al Educa ion, 40 (1): 3-18.
engelman, R. 2013. “Beyond sus ainababble. In he Wo ld Wa ch Ins i u e (Ed.)”. In S a e o
he Wo ld 2013 – Is Sus ainabili y S ill Possible? Washing on: Island P ess.
sus ainabili y: dynamics, pi alls, and ansi ions 51
e ão, J., ed. 2014. A Economia do Fu u o: A Visão de Cidadãos, Emp esá ios e Au a cas.
Lisbon: Fundação F ancisco Manuel dos San os.
e ei a de almeida, J. 2000. Os Po ugueses e o Ambien e – i Inqué i o Nacional às
Rep esen ações e P á icas dos Po ugueses sob e o Ambien e. Oei as: Cel a Edi o a.
linde s, M. 2012. De ending Poli ics – Why Democ acy Ma e s in he Twen y-Fi s Cen u y.
Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
global oo p in ne wo k. 2017. Na ional Foo p in Accoun s 2017 (n as 2017).
h p://da a. oo p in ne wo k.o g/.
go e, A. 2013. The Fu u e: Six D i e s o Global Change. New Yo k: Random House.
gue a, J. 2011. Municípios, Pa icipação e Sus en abilidade – Dinâmicas Locais de Impe-
a i os Globais. Doc o al Disse a ion in Humani ies. Lisbon: Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais,
Uni e sidade de Lisboa. doi: 10.13140/ g.2.1.4226.0085.
gue a, J., L. Schmid . 2016. “Making wish ul hinking a eali y – om sdgs o cop21”.
Re is a Ambien e & Sociedade, 19 (4): 213-230.
gue a, J., L. Schmid , and S. Valen e. 2017. “Dilemmas o sus ainabili y in u bulen imes
– he Po uguese case in con ex ”. In En i onmen al Beha iou and A i udes in Eu ope
in a His o ical and C oss-Cul u al Compa a i e Pe spec i e, eds. A. Telesiene, M. G oss.
London: Rou ledge, 221-242.
issp Resea ch G oup. 2012. In e na ional Social Su ey P og amme: En i onmen iii – issp
2010. Gesis Da a A qui e, cologne. za5500 Da a File Ve sion 2.0.0, doi: 10.4232/1.11418.
jackson, T. 2009. P ospe i y wi hou G ow h? The T ansi ion o Sus ainable Economy. uk:
Sus ainable De elopmen Comission.
la ouche, S. 2004. Su i e au de elopmen – De la décolonisa ion de l’imagi nai e économique
à la cons uc ion d’une socié é al e na i e. Pa is: Mile e Une Nui s.
la ouche, S. 2005. Décolonise l’imaginai e – La pensée c éa i e con e l’ économie de l’absu de.
Lyon: Pa angon/Vs.
la ouche, S. 2009. Fa ewell o G ow h. Camb idge: Poli y P ess.
la ou , B. 2017. “An h opology a he ime o he An h opocene: a pe sonal iew o wha is
o be s udied B uno La ou ”. In The An h opology o Sus ainabili y – Beyond De elopmen
and P og ess, eds. M. B igh man and J. Lewis. New Yo k: Palg a e Macmillan, 36-49.
lélé, S. M.1991. “Sus ainable de elopmen : a c i ical e iew”. Wo ld De elopmen , 19 (6):
607-621. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/0305-750X(91)90197-P.
meadows, D., e al. 1972. The Limi s o G ow h – Repo o he Club o Rome P ojec on he
P edicamen o Mankind. New Yo k: Uni e se Books.
mille , T. R. 2011. “Cons uc ing sus ainabili y: a s udy o eme ging scien i ic esea ch
ajec o ies”. A izona: A izona S a e Uni e si y.
moo e, F. C. 2011. “Toppling he ipod: sus ainable de elopmen , cons uc i e ambigui y,
and he en i onmen al challenge”. The Jou nal o Sus ainable De elopmen , 5 (1): 141-150.
mol, A. 2002. “Ecological mode niza ion and he global economy”. Global En i onmen al
Poli ics, 2 (2): 92–115.
mu phy, R. 2015. “Sus ainable de elopmen o he c eeping incuba ion o disas e ?”. In
Rou ledge In e na ional Handbook o Sus ainable De elopmen , eds. M. Redcli and D.
Sp inge . London and New Yo k: Rou ledge, 391-403.
myss, C. 2013. A che ypes – Who A e You? Ca lsbad: Hay House, Inc.
no on, B. G. 2005. Sus ainabili y. A Philosophy o Adap i e Ecosys em Managemen . Chicago:
Uni e si y o Chicago P ess.