Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos

doi.org/10.35321/term31-12 Problems in the Use of Lithuanian Equivalents for the Term “Sustainable Development” in the Social Sciences Challenges in Using Lithuanian Equivalents of “Sustainable Development” in Social Sciences ROMUALDAS GINEVIČIUS Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Faculty of Business Management, Institute of Dynamic Management ORCID id: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2067-4398 INTRODUCTION The topic of sustainable development has been examined extensively and from a variety of perspectives in the social sciences in recent decades—specialist scholarly journals are published, monographs are printed, conferences are held, and so on. In the context of sustainability, systems at every level are analyzed, from microsystems (companies) to macrosystems (countries, regions) and megasystems (humanity). By their nature, all are socioeconomic systems (SES). These are social systems into which various resources are integrated—material, technical, informational, financial, and so on. Such exceptional attention is devoted to the problem of sustainable development because humanity’s future depends to a large extent on its resolution. However, despite scientific recommendations, decisions made at the highest levels, and the efforts of international and global institutions, the situation is currently worsening. This is manifested first and foremost in global warming and the resulting increase in the frequency of various types of catastrophes. The main causes are the disproportionate use of non-renewable natural resources and environmentally polluting technologies, growing volumes of waste, inefficient methods of recycling it, and so on. This is determined by both objective and subjective conditions. The essence lies in the nature of SES functioning. The condition for the existence of all such systems is continuous development, since, as open systems, they are shaped by their environment. Thus, continuous exchanges take place between SES and the environment: the system affects the environment by performing certain functions (production, Terminologija | 2024 | 31 229 services, healthcare, education, etc.). In turn, in performing these functions, SES obtain from the environment the resources necessary for their functioning—trees, equipment, finance, information, and so on. Every SES is always a formation at a lower level than its environment and must therefore continually adapt to the environment’s requirements. This is a condition for the survival of SES. The interaction between SES and the environment is characterized by the fact that environmental requirements are constantly increasing; therefore, in order to survive, SES must also develop. Moreover, the changes arising from this development must be faster than, or at least keep pace with, external needs. On the other hand, they must comply with the requirements of sustainable development, that is, economic, social, and ecological development must be coordinated with one another. In English-speaking countries, such development is unambiguously called sustainability or sustainable development. The situation is different in non-English-speaking countries: in some cases, these English terms are translated as darnumas, darni plėtra; in others, as tvarumas, tvari plėtra—that is, the terms in question are used synonymously. After the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language (hereinafter VLKK) clarified that the aforementioned terms are not equivalent, a rather active discussion about them began. The situation was complicated by the fact that the qualifying components tvari and darni acquire meaning only when combined with the generic components plėtra and vystymasis (VLKK KB; Žičkienė, Guogis, Gudelis 2019; Baležentis 2019; Stunžinas 2015). The literature shows that in all cases this problem is examined as a linguistic one. However, a pragmatic approach is also of both scholarly and practical importance, since it is connected with the purposeful management of SES. A pragmatic approach is possible if there is a way to quantify possible formations of related terms (tvara, darna and plėtra, vystymasis). The aim of the article is to position and conceptualize the characteristics of SES development and/or growth, and the related compound terms sustainability of development, harmony of development, sustainability of growth, and harmony of growth. LITERATURE REVIEW In response to the worsening situation on Earth, the idea of sustainable development was put forward in 1987. The term sustainable development was canonized by Gru Harlem Brutland in the report “Our Common Future” at the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (United Nations World Commission Environment and Development – WCED). Instead of economic growth, a different approach was formulated—balanced economic, social, and ecological growth, designated by the term sustainable development (Burton 1987; Freyman 2012). 230 Romualdas Ginevičius Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos The literature shows that in non-English-speaking countries, including Lithuania, the English term sustainability is translated in various ways—as tvarumas, darnumas, tvára, darna, tausumas—and, combined with modifiers specifying the type, these words form compound terms, e.g.: energijos gamybos tvarumas, miesto darnumas, socialinė darna, biologinis tausumas (Stunžinas 2015). Thus, the essential features that would make it possible to distinguish unambiguously between the use of the terms tvarumas, tvara and darnumas, darna remain unspecified; moreover, all the literature sources indicate that their meanings differ (Žičkienė, Guogis, Gudelis 2019; Stunžinas 2015; VLKK KB; DLKŽ). Methodologically, the term sustainability is related to the term sustainable development, whose Lithuanian equivalents are darnus vystymasis, tvarus vystymasis (Stunžinas 2015). In addition, it is noted that the terms darni plėtra and tvari plėtra may also exist (Žičkienė, Guogis, Gudelis 2019) (see Fig. 1). Fig. 1. Lithuanian equivalents of the term sustainable development The literature indicates that the Lithuanian equivalents tvarumas, tvara and darnumas, darna of the English term sustainability are not equivalent, yet they are often used when referring to the same things. For example, the terms tvarumas, tvara are used in reference to various areas of state activity and their phenomena, while darnumas, darna are used in relation to environmental policy, the economy, energy, general policy matters, social policy, tourism, transport, agriculture, fisheries, cities, and so on (Stunžinas 2015). These terms are thought to be derivatives belonging to the same word-formation category, sharing the same root but differing in their derivational formants (Vaskelienė, Kučinskienė 2012; Pikčilingis 1969; Stunžinas 2015). The use of these terms can be situated on the basis that they denote one Terminologija | 2024 | 31 231 particular feature. Tvarumas, tvara means “durability, permanence” (tvarus 1. “strong, durable,” 2. “constant, unchanging,” 3. “immune, enduring, resistant,” 4. “lasting, imperishable” (LKŽe); darnumas, darna means “balance, harmony” (darnus “that which is coordinated, harmonized” DLKŽe); tausumas (tausūs “economical, conserving, thrifty” LKŽe). This is also how tvarumas and darnumas are understood by other authors (Baležentis 2019; Žičkienė, Guogis, Gudelis 2019; Stunžinas 2015). However, despite the difference in meaning between these terms, they are still used as equivalents of the English term sustainable development (VLKK KB; Stunžinas 2015). In some cases, this term is translated by the equivalent tvarumas (Kabulova 2023; Sviderskė 2014; Volkov 2018), and in others by darnumas (Činčikaitė 2013; Gedvilaitė 2019; Oželienė 2019; Starynina 2020). Fig. 1 shows that development is also understood in Lithuanian in two ways. It is translated by the equivalents plėtra and vystymasis. The literature emphasizes that these concepts are not equivalent. The preamble to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe emphasizes harmonious and sustainable development. The term plėtra is more appropriate when referring to quantitative changes, whereas vystymasis is used when qualitative changes are meant (the latter is the equivalent of the international word evolution) (VLKK KB). According to Skaidrė Žičkienė, Arvydas Guogis, and Dangis Gudelis, the term development should be translated only by the equivalent vystymasis and cannot be translated by plėtra, since the latter means “growth,” which fundamentally contradicts the concept of sustainable development, based not on quantitative but on qualitative changes (Žičkienė, Guogis, Gudelis 2019). This assertion rests on the fact that, from the perspective of development theories, quantitative parameters entail significant social and environmental risks. The experience of the newly industrialized countries of South Asia is given as an example: they unconditionally “sacrificed” social and environmental development to the goals of economic development. In reality, the causes of this situation are more profound and, it can be argued, temporary. Failure to comply with (or inability to comply with) the principles of sustainable development is characteristic of developing countries. However, the higher their level of economic development rises, the more attention is paid to social and environmental development. The experience of developed European Union countries attests to this. By relating the Lithuanian equivalents tvarumas and darnumas of the term sustainability to the Lithuanian equivalents plėtra and vystymasis of the term sustainable development, it is possible to construct a matrix of SES development terms (see Fig. 2). 232 Romualdas Ginevičius Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos Expansion Development Sustainability Sustainable expansion Sustainable development Harmony Harmonious expansion Harmonious development Fig. 2. Lithuanian terms for SES expansion The ultimate goal of changes in SES expansion is harmonious development, i.e., continuous qualitative changes. On the other hand, they are the result of its quantitative changes. It is often said, not without reason, that it is difficult to achieve quality without quantity. On this basis, Fig. 3 depicts the relationships between SES expansion and development. Fig. 3. The SES expansion cycle Fig. 3 shows that the situations arising from changes in SES expansion (the sustainability and harmony of expansion, and the sustainability and harmony of development) are the result of expansion. Essentially, these are its quantitative or qualitative characteristics. Their conceptualization makes it possible to assess the state quantitatively. Terminologija | 2024 | 31 233 METHODOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR THE QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CHANGES IN SES EXPANSION The literature sources cited in the article show that the term sustainable development is examined as a linguistic problem. There are no studies that examine it systematically, i.e., assess possible relationships and dependencies in SES expansion. However, a pragmatic approach has both scientific and practical significance. All real SES, from companies to states and their unions, seek to continuously increase the efficiency of their functioning. This is directly related to their purposeful expansion, which is possible if the current state can be assessed quantitatively (Ginevičius 2009). Fig. 3 shows that the ultimate goal of SES functioning is harmonious development, which depends on the sustainability and harmony of expansion. In turn, the harmony of expansion depends on its sustainability. Neither VLKK nor other sources indicate what determines the use of the terms sustainable expansion and harmonious expansion. A general recommendation is provided, i.e., one that depends on context (VLKK KB; Stunžinas 2015). The term sustainable expansion is used in relation to various areas of state activity and their phenomena: politics (political communities, strategies), the economy (finance, markets, procurement, lending, enterprises), social policy (the pension system), energy (energy supply, fuel), environmental policy, ecology (rural areas, fish stocks), transport (aviation), agriculture, fisheries (fleets), tourism, manufacturing, construction, and cities. The term harmonious expansion is used in texts on environmental policy, economic and energy issues, general matters, social policy, tourism, transport, agriculture, fisheries, and cities (Stunžinas 2015; VLKK KB). These examples do not make the use of the terms sustainable expansion and harmonious expansion particularly clear. To clarify their usage, it is necessary to examine existing approaches to assessing sustainability and harmony. Including an ever-increasing number of indicators in their system improves the adequacy of assessing the state of SES expansion, not its harmony. This state is the basis for assessing the harmony of SES expansion, not harmony itself. At present, most studies focus on assessing the state of the components of SES sustainable development. This is evidenced by the fact that more than 500 sustainable development indicator models have been identified worldwide—70 global, over 100 national, more than 70 regional, and about 300 local (Kates et al. 2001; Parris, Kates 2003; Čiegis, Ramanauskienė, Šimanskienė 2010)—which assess the components of SES sustainable development: the environment and the state of socioeconomic development (Lancker, Nijkamp 2000; Prescott-Allen 1995; Nordhaus, Tobin 1973; Morris 1979; Berke, Manta 1999; Zolotas 1981; Wackernagel, Rees 1997). Fewer studies, 234 Romualdas Ginevičius Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos focus on the overall state of SES expansion (its harmony). For example, the state of socioeconomic development in Lithuanian regions was assessed at one point and termed an integrated sustainable development index (Čiegis, Ramanauskienė, Šimanskienė 2010). In assessing the expansion of a region in Thailand, three indicators were combined: GDP per capita, CO2 emissions, and energy consumption (Chansarn 2013). The harmony of expansion in developing countries (Peru, Mauritius, the Philippines, Bangladesh, Ghana, India, etc.) was also analyzed, and assessed using GDP alone (Babu, Datta 2015). Another study used multicriteria methods to determine the state of expansion in Italian regions. The assessment model included 18 indicators: 9 for environmental expansion and 9 for socioeconomic expansion (Boggia, Cortina 2010). An assessment of expansion in China’s Suihua region was based on 28 indicators: 10 for economic, 10 for environmental, and 8 for social expansion (Jia Zhou et al. 2007). The assessment of expansion in Kermanshah, Iran, was based on 44 indicators: 23 for social progress, 8 for economic growth, and 13 for environmental protection (Somayeh Zinatizadeh et al. 2017). In these studies, all indicators of the state of SES expansion are described as measures of expansion harmony, even though they do not analyze how the development of different indicator groups was coordinated with one another. A key characteristic of the assessment is its long-term nature (VLKK KB), which can be treated as a quantitative characteristic of the expansion process. Thus, the state of sustainability can be assessed only after the period under consideration has ended. The essential characteristic of harmony is the coordination of the development of SES components (VLKK KB). This is therefore a qualitative result, revealing the structure of the expansion process; harmony can be measured at any desired point in time. It is customary to do so at the end of the period under consideration (at year-end). Although the sustainability of expansion is a condition for harmony, it is often almost entirely overlooked. There have been attempts to assess expansion dynamics quantitatively (Ginevičius 2019; Gedvilaitė 2019). One reason for this situation is that the term sustainable development is translated into Lithuanian in the same way as harmonious expansion. There is not even an unambiguous understanding of how the terms sustainable expansion and harmonious expansion should be translated into English. The answer lies in the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” adopted by the United Nations in 2015. It sets out 17 goals, and Goal 8 is: “Promote sustainable, inclusive and harmonious economic growth <...>” (“Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth <...>”) (UN. Transforming our World: <...> 2015). Thus, the English equivalent of the word sustainable is sustained, while the English equivalent of harmonious is sustainable. The English term development is translated using the equivalents expansion and development, which causes considerable confusion. Taking into account that expansion encompasses Terminologija | 2024 | 31 235 Fig. 4. English terms for sustainability and harmony in SES development quantitative, whereas development denotes qualitative changes; the English equivalent of the term expansion could be growth, and that of the term development could be development (see Fig. 4). To determine the situation regarding the quantitative assessment of sustainability in SES development, existing approaches must be reviewed. Their suitability criterion may be an essential feature of sustainable development—the degree of compatibility between the development status of the SES components (economic, social, and environmental). The literature shows that, at present, sustainability in development is assessed in two ways: by evaluating groups of indicators for individual SES development components, or by evaluating the SES as a whole. All such proposals, methodologies, and indicator systems share the same methodological shortcoming. They are assumed to indicate sustainability in SES development, although they have nothing to do with sustainability assessment. Studies of sustainable and harmonious development show that the use of these terms depends on the nature of the phenomenon being assessed. This may be the socioeconomic system as a whole or its individual components. In the first case, all three components essential to the concept of harmonious development—economic, social, and environmental—can be distinguished, and the extent to which their development statuses were compatible can be determined, that is, the harmony of their development can be assessed. This cannot be done when an individual component or its groups of indicators are being assessed. For example, it would hardly make sense to seek to determine the harmony of environmental development in this way. In summary, it is appropriate to speak of the harmony of development in a city, company, country, or its regions as SES, and of the sustainability of the economic, social, and environmental development of a city, company, country, or its regions. Likewise, one should speak not of the harmony of politics, the economy, energy, social policy, transport, tourism, agriculture, or fisheries, but of their sustainability in development (provided that their status can be assessed quantitatively). 236 Romualdas Ginevičius Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos The quantitative assessment of sustainability in SES development is carried out in several stages. First, a list of indicators of the SES’s socioeconomic development is compiled (many of the current so-called sustainable indicator systems are suitable). The indicators are then assigned to the components of sustainable development—economic, social, and environmental. Next, the development of the components is assessed quantitatively (Ginevičius et al. 2022; Gedvilaitė 2019; Volkov 2018; Trishch et al. 2021; Trishch et al. 2023). Finally, these estimates are used to assess harmony in SES development (see Fig. 5). Fig. 5. Structural diagram of the quantitative assessment of sustainability in SES development Figure 3 shows that all characteristics of the relationship in SES development are interconnected: sustainability of development and harmony in development are outcomes of sustainability in development, while harmony of development is the outcome of sustainability of development and harmony in development. Thus, the basic indicator is sustainability in development. As noted, it reflects development as a process. It is not possible to determine whether an SES developed sustainably on the basis of the results for only one year. The VLKK KB also states that this is a long-term process. As a characteristic of development, it refers to quantitative changes that occurred over the period under consideration. This period, too, has not been discussed in detail in the scientific literature. It could be suggested that this is the shortest time interval from which the development of the phenomenon under consideration can be adequately assessed. On this basis, a graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of sustainability in SES development can be presented (see Fig. 6). Fig. 6. Graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of sustainability in SES development Terminologija | 2024 | 31 237 The quantitative assessment of development sustainability is based on values for the state of development at the end of the periods (years) within the period under consideration. These are units of measurement of development sustainability. Sustainability is the result of the development process, showing its structure and quality, i.e., the compatibility of economic, social, and environmental development. The graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of SES development sustainability is shown in Fig. 7. Fig. 7. Graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of SES development sustainability Sustainable development is a continuous process; therefore, its assessment is based on a period covering a single time interval, which reveals changes in the values of development sustainability (positive or negative development). The graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of SES development sustainability is shown in Fig. 8. Fig. 8. Graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of SES development sustainability Sustainable development is the objective of SES functioning. It is defined unambiguously as a coordinated development process (VLKK KB), understood as evolution. Compared with development sustainability, sustainable development spans a much longer period. Its assessment is based not on a period covering a single time interval, but on positive or negative changes in development sustainability over a certain number of periods. The graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of SES development sustainability is shown in Fig. 9. 238 Romualdas Ginevičius Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos Fig. 9. Graphical analytical model for the quantitative assessment of SES development sustainability Fig. 9 shows that the sustainability and harmony of SES development can be assessed quantitatively only if we know how to assess development sustainability and development harmony. However, few studies have addressed this, they are episodic, and no universally accepted methodologies exist. Development sustainability is an essential condition for its harmony, so its quantitative assessment is particularly important. With this capability, it is possible to discuss the purposeful management of development harmony and pursue the ultimate goal—harmonious development—declared by all international institutions responsible for humanity’s future. CONCLUSIONS In the social sciences, there is considerable uncertainty about the use of Lithuanian equivalents for the English term sustainable development. Derivatives of the word roots tvar- and darn- are used as two equivalent translations. Moreover, these equivalents have not been conceptualized in a way that would make quantitative assessment possible. According to VLKK KB, the words tvara, tvarus, -i refer to the long-term nature and continuity of a process, whereas the words darna, darnus, -i refer to compatibility. In that case, the English equivalent of the word tvarus, -i would be sustained, darnumas would be sustainability, and darnus, -i – sustainable. VLKK KB also notes that the word plėtra is more suitable when referring to quantitative changes, expansion, or growth; therefore, its English equivalent could be growth. The term development could be translated by the equivalent vystymas(-is) (VLKK). Possible English equivalents for the compound terms tvari plėtra, darni plėtra, tvarus vystymas(-is) and darnus vystymas(-is) could be: sustained growth, sustainable growth, sustained development and sustainable development. VLKK advises using the terms tvari plėtra and darni plėtra according to the context (VLKK KB). Thus, methodologically, the term darni plėtra Terminologija | 2024 | 31 239 It is appropriate to use this term when the phenomenon under consideration is a socioeconomic system in general, that is, when all three components of sustainable development—the economic, social, and environmental—can be distinguished within it. The term sustainable expansion should be used when referring to the expansion of these components over a certain period. Of the four characteristics of SES functioning (the sustainability of expansion, the coherence of expansion, the sustainability of development, and the coherence of development), the first is fundamental, since the others can also be evaluated on its basis. The sustainability of expansion can describe the expansion of an SES as a process and the quantitative changes that occur during it; therefore, its indicator must assess these changes over the entire period under consideration. Although this characteristic is important, there is almost no research devoted to it. The coherence of expansion may be defined as the structural quality of expansion as a process, that is, the degree to which economic, social, and environmental expansion is coordinated. The coherence of expansion is assessed over the duration of each period under consideration, on the basis of estimates of the expansion of SES components. There are currently many proposals for measuring coherence. They all have a methodological shortcoming: indicators of the state of SES expansion are treated as indicators of coherence, although they have nothing to do with the coherence of expansion, since their values are not coordinated. Thus, current methodology assesses not the coherence of expansion, but the state of expansion of SES components or groups of their indicators. On the other hand, the assessment discussed above is necessary because it can be used to determine the extent to which their expansion has been coordinated—that is, to determine the coherence of SES expansion. As a qualitative characteristic, the sustainability of development allows SES expansion to be assessed as a process; therefore, its state is assessed quantitatively on the basis of changes in estimates of the sustainability of expansion over a given period under consideration, which may be either positive or negative. The coherence of development is the goal of SES functioning. It encompasses both its quantitative and qualitative expansion. This is similar to the coherence of expansion, which is assessed on the basis of changes in estimates of the coherence of expansion over a given period under consideration. In advancing sustainable development research, methodologies for the quantitative assessment of the sustainability and coherence of SES expansion should be proposed first. In assessing the coherence of expansion, one will encounter an essential contradiction in the sustainable development concept. On the one hand, social and environmental expansion are equally important; on the other, further SES expansion is determined by the priority given to economic expansion. Its importance, compared with that of the other two components (social and environmental), should be greater. 240 Romualdas Ginevičius Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos LITERATŪRA Babu Swati Sinha, Datta Soumyendra Kishore 2015: Revisiting the link between socio-economic development and environmental status indicators focus on panel data. – Environment Development and Sustainability 17(3), 567–586. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-014-9561-6. Baležentis Alvydas 2019: Darnus vystymasis: sampratos problemos. – Konferencija „Darnus vystymasis: teorija ir praktika“. 2019 m. balandžio 18–19 d., Druskininkai, 7–8. Berke Philip, Manta Maria 1999: Planning for Sustainable Development: Measuring Progress in Plans. Cambridge. – MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Prieiga internete: http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/pub-detail.asp?id=58. Boggia Antonio, Cortina Carla 2010: Measuring sustainable development using a multi-criteria model: A case study. – Journal of Environmental Management 91(11), 2301–2306. Brundtland Report: Our Common Development, by World Commission On Environment and Future (Oxford Paperbacks), 1st Edition, Oxford University Press, 1987. Burton Ian 1987: Report on Reports: Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and Development. – Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 29(5), 25–29. Prieiga internete: https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.1987.9928891. Chansarn Supachet 2013: Assessing the Sustainable Development of Thailand. – Procedia Environmental Sciences 17, 611–619. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2013.02.077. CSD. Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies. Commission on Sustainable Development, New York, USA, 2001. Čiegis Remigijus, Ramanauskienė Jolita, Šimanskienė Ligita 2010: Lietuvos regionų darnaus vystymosi vertinimas, Klaipėda: Klaipėdos universiteto leidykla. Činčikaitė Renata 2013: Miestų konkurencingumo kompleksinis vertinimas remiantis darnios plėtros principais: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Technika. DŽ – Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas, vyr. red. S. Keinys, 8-as patais. ir papild. leid., el. variantas, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2021. Prieiga internete: https://ekalba.lt/dabartines-lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/. Freyman Monika 2012: An Exploration of Sustainability and its Application to Corporate Reporting. Prieiga internete: http://iri.hks.harvard.edu/files/iri/files/an-exploration-of-sustainability-and-its-application-to-corporate-reporting.pdf. Gedvilaitė Dainora 2019: Šalies regionų darnios plėtros vertinimas: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Technika. Prieiga internete: https://etalpykla.vilniustech.lt/handle/123456789/59423. Ginevičius Romualdas 2009: Socioekonominių sistemų būklės kiekybinio įvertinimo problematika. – Verslas: Teorija ir praktika 10(2), 69–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/1648-0627.2009.10.69-83. Ginevičius Romualdas 2019: Problems of Harmony in the Development of Socio-economic Systems. – Inžinerinė ekonomika=Engineering economics 30(2), 195–202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.30.2.22869. Ginevičius Romualdas, Trišč Roman, Remeikienė Rita, Zielińska Anetta, Strikaitė-Latušinskaja Goda 2022: Evaluation of the condition of social processes based on qualimetric methods: The COVID-19 case. – Journal of International Studies 15(1), 230–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2022/15-1/15. Kabulova, Jelena 2023: Impact of FinTech Innovation on the Financial Sector’s Stability: doctoral dissertation, Vilnius: Technika. Kates Robert, Clark William, Corell Robert, Hall Michael, Jaeger Carlo, Lowe Ian, McCarthy James J., Schellnhuber Hans Joachim, Bolin Bert, Dickson Nancy M. et al. 2001: Sustainability science. – Science 292, 641–642. Lancker Elly, Nijkamp Peter 2000: A policy scenario analysis of sustainable agricultural development options: a case study for Nepal. – Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 18(2), 111–124. LKŽė – Lietuvių kalbos žodynas (t. I–XX, 1941–2002), el. variantas, redaktorių kolegija: G. Naktinienė (vyr. redaktorė), J. Paulauskas, R. Petrokienė, V. Vitkauskas, J. Zabarskaitė, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2005 (atnaujinta versija, 2018). Prieiga internete: www.lkz.lt. Morris David Morris 1979: Measuring the Condition of the World’s Poor – The Physical Quality of Life Index (Overseas Development Council), New York: Pergamon Press. Nordhaus William D., Tobin James 1973: Is growth obsolete? Esantis M. Moss, The Measure ment of Economic and Social Performance: Studies in Income and Wealth. Terminologija | 2024 | 31 241 Oželienė, Danguolė 2019: Įmonės darnįos plėtros veiksnių modeliavimas: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Technika. Parris Thomas M., Kates Robert W. 2003: Characterizing and measuring sustainable development. – Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28(1), 559–586. Pikčilingis Juozas 1969: Leksinė ir gramatinė sinonimika, Kaunas: Šviesa. Prescott-Allen Robert 1995: Barometer of Sustainability: a Method of Assessing Progress towards Sustainable Societies, Victoria, Canada: Padata. Somayeh Zinatizadeh, Aeiz Azmi, Seyed Masoud Monavari, Soheil Sobhanardakani 2017: Evaluation and prediction of sustainability of urban areas: A case study for Kermanshah city. – Iran 66, 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.03.002. Starynina Jovita 2020: Modernizuojamų visuomeninių pastatų energijos vartojimo efektyvumo didinimas taikant darnų projektavimo metodus: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Technika. Stunžinas Robertas 2015: Tvarumas, darnumas, tausumas ir kiti angl. sustainability atitikmenys Europos Sąjungos institucijų dokumentuose. – Terminologija 22, 110–126. Sviderskė Tatjana 2014: Country risk assessment in economic security and sustainability context: doctoral dissertation, Vilnius: Technika. Trishch Roman, Cherniak Olena, Kupriyanov Oleksandr, Luniachek Vadym 2021: Methodology for multi-criteria assessment of working conditions as an object of qualimetry. – Engineering Management in Production and Services 13(2), 107–114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/emj-2021-0016. Trishch Roman Mikhailovich, Sichinava Alexander, Bartoš Vojtěch, Stasiukynas Andrius, Schieg Martin 2023: Comparative assessment of economic development in the countries of the European Union. – Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20–36. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2023.18320. United Nations. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1. Prieiga internete: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf. Vaskelienė Jolanta, Kučinskienė Ramunė 2012: Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos būdvardžių darybiniai sinonimai. – Žmogus ir žodis 1, 153–161. VLKK KB – Valstybinės lietuvių kalbos komisijos Konsultacijų bankas. Prieiga internete: http://www.vlkk.lt/konsultacijos/3772-sustainable-development-darnus-vystymas-is. Volkov Artiom 2018: Bendrosios žemės ūkio politikos tiesioginių išmokų sistemos poveikio žemės ūkio tvarumui vertinimas: daktaro disertacija, Vilnius: Technika. Prieiga internete: https://vb.lcss.lt/object/elaba:30829704/index.html. Wackernagel Mathis, Rees William 1997: Unserökologischer Fußabdruck, Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag. Zolotas Xenophon 1981: Economic Growth and Declining Social Welfare, New York: University Press. Zhou Jis, Haifeng Xiao, Shang Jincheng, Zhang Xuelin 2007: Assessment of sustainable development system in Suihua City, China. – Chinese Geographical Science 17(4), 304–310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11769-007-0304-6. Žičkienė Skaidrė, Guogis Arvydas, Gudelis Dangis 2019: Darnaus vystymosi teorinė samprata ir jos praktinė reikšmė. – Tiltai 82(1), 108–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15181/tbb.v82i1.1970. Gauta 2024-03-03 Romualdas Ginevičius Vilniaus Gedimino technikos universitetas Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius E. paštas [email protected] 242 Romualdas Ginevičius Termino „sustainable development“ lietuviškų atitikmenų vartosenos socialiniuose moksluose problemos