The Analysis of Sustainability Indicators as Socially Constructed Policy Instruments: benefits and challenges of ‘interactive research’

Sustainability indicator sets are increasingly being discussed on the policy level as fruitful contributions to the improvement of political decision- making and to the implementation of programs oriented towards the achievement of strategic goals of sustainable development. The vast number of different indicator type tools, their varying contexts of use and their differing objectives indicate that there is no simple answer to what sustainable indicator type tools should look like or could be used for. Instead, more than the final products (e.g. a specific indicators set), the analyses of the discourse on this topic reveal a lot of information. Thus, an innovative research approach is recommended focusing on understanding the production of social meaning and processes of social interaction within political-administrative systems. Firstly, there is a need to identify the development, purpose and use of sustainability indicator sets, which depend on the different interests of policy actors, their relationships and existing governance structures. Secondly, one should identify any reasons for the ineffective use of indicator sets where the goals of sustainability are concerned. The approach of ‘interactive research’ understood as a research process, in which ‘researchers’ and ‘practitioners’ develop knowledge for solving problems in a communicative, reflexive and collaborative way, facilitates this challenging research task. This paper critically examines the approach of interactive research and sheds some light on benefits as well as challenges of it via extracting the lessons learnt in an EU-funded project called ‘Promoting Action for Sustainability through Indicators at the Local Level in Europe’ (PASTILLE), which applied an interactive research approach.     

Embracing sustainability: the incorporation of sustainability principles in municipal planning and policy in four mid-sized municipalities in Ontario,Canada

The issue of planning for sustainability is becoming more established within Canadian municipal planning. As municipalities begin to align their planning policy to reflect a more sustainable approach, there is an increased interest in how sustainability is being operationalised within municipal documents. This research aims to better understand how principles of sustainability are imbedded within Ontario municipal documents, with a specific focus on the Integrated Sustainability Community Planning approach that has emerged in Canada. Drawing on a nested comparative case study of four mid-sized municipalities, we uncover the language and strategies employed by the municipalities as they relate to the principles of sustainability developed by Gibson [2006a. Sustainability assessment: basic components of a practical approach. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 24 (3), 170–182]. The findings suggest that current policy-based approaches to sustainability are considering more socially oriented strategies focused on promoting community involvement, inclusive decision-making, equity, socio-ecological civility, long-term integrative planning, and responsibility through stewardship. However, there are potential limitations that will require future research to examine policy outcomes associated with sustainability uptake. The ICSP approach must still overcome the issues relating to lack of regulatory authority and the incorporation of policies based on popular trends rather than empirical evidence.     

Making the Business Case for Sustainability: How to Account for Intangible Benefits—A Case Study Approach

Sustainability is continuing to change the way businesses operate. Stakeholders are insisting that corporations implement more responsible business practices, and they are holding them increasingly accountable for their associated environmental and social impacts. Research has provided significant contributions toward sustainability‐related tools and best practices, allowing sustainability to be integrated even farther across business operations. However, challenges still exist, preventing many companies from fully integrating sustainability. Although intangible benefits are not commonly included in business case assessments, such benefits can be derived through sustainability initiatives and may offer additional value in evaluating the business case for sustainability. In this article, we review current literature on accounting methods for the business case for sustainability as well as currently available methods or tools that are capable of estimating intangible benefits. In addition, we use case studies to illustrate if, and how, companies are accounting for intangible benefits, and we identify best methods for accounting for intangible benefits.     

Global sustainability: Toward definition

Sustainability is increasingly viewed as a desired goal of development and environmental management. This term has been used in numerous disciplines and in a variety of contexts, ranging from the concept of maximum sustainable yield in forestry and fisheries management to the vision of a sustainable society with a steady-state economy. The meaning of the term is strongly dependent on the context in which it is applied and on whether its use is based on a social, economic, or ecological perspective, Sustainability may be defined broadly or narrowly, but a useful definition must specify explicitly the context as well as the temporal and spatial scales being considered. Although societies differ in their conceptualizations of sustainability, indefinite human survival on a global scale requires certain basic support systems, which can be maintained only with a healthy environment and a stable human population. A clearer understanding of global sustainability and the development of appropriate indicators of the status of basic support systems would provide a useful framework for policy making.     

Environmental Indicators of Biofuel Sustainability: What About Context?

Indicators of the environmental sustainability of biofuel production, distribution, and use should be selected, measured, and interpreted with respect to the context in which they are used. The context of a sustainability assessment includes the purpose, the particular biofuel production and distribution system, policy conditions, stakeholder values, location, temporal influences, spatial scale, baselines, and reference scenarios. We recommend that biofuel sustainability questions be formulated with respect to the context, that appropriate indicators of environmental sustainability be developed or selected from more generic suites, and that decision makers consider context in ascribing meaning to indicators. In addition, considerations such as technical objectives, varying values and perspectives of stakeholder groups, indicator cost, and availability and reliability of data need to be understood and considered. Sustainability indicators for biofuels are most useful if adequate historical data are available, information can be collected at appropriate spatial and temporal scales, organizations are committed to use indicator information in the decision-making process, and indicators can effectively guide behavior toward more sustainable practices.     

Incorporating sustainable development concerns into an urban regeneration project: how politics can defeat procedures

It is often thought that new procedural arrangements can help embed sustainable development as a policy goal into policy practice. This is the hope of tools such as environmental assessment, sustainability audits and sustainability indicators. Using a case study of urban regeneration in the London Borough of Southwark, this paper critically examines these claims. It shows how sustainable development was sidelined as a policy goal during the evaluation of the Master Plan for the area, the appraisal of individual projects for funding under the Single Regeneration Budget and the development of two local sustainability indicator projects. In each case the local political circumstances were key factors in shaping policy practice and outcomes. This leads to a re-evaluation of such procedural policy tools, emphasizing the importance of local governance contexts.     

Sustainability Appraisal of Water Governance Regimes: The Case of Guanacaste,Costa Rica

Sustainability appraisals produce evidence for how well water governance regimes operate and where problems exist. This evidence is particularly relevant for regions that face water scarcity and conflicts. In this study, we present a criteria-based and participatory sustainability appraisal of water governance in a region with such characteristics—the dry tropics of NW Costa Rica. Data collection included 47 interviews and three stakeholder workshops. The appraisal was conducted through a collaborative and iterative process between researchers and stakeholders. Out of the 25 sustainability criteria used, seven posed a significant challenge for the governance regime. We found challenges faced by the governance regime primarily clustered around and were re-enforced by failing coordination related to the use, management, and protection of groundwater resources; and inadequate leadership to identify collective goals and to constructively deliberate alternative ways of governing water with diverse groups. The appraisal yielded some positive impact in the study area, yet we found its application provided only limited strategic information to support broader problem-solving efforts. Insights from this study suggest key starting points for sustainable water governance in the Central American dry tropics, including investing in increasingly influential collective organizations that are already active in water governance; and leveraging policy windows that can be used to build confidence and disperse more governing authority to regional and local governing actors that are in-tune with the challenges faced in the dry tropics. We conclude the article with reflections on how to produce research results that are actionable for sustainable water governance.     

Advancing Sustainable Bioenergy: Evolving Stakeholder Interests and the Relevance of Research

The sustainability of future bioenergy production rests on more than continual improvements in its environmental, economic, and social impacts. The emergence of new biomass feedstocks, an expanding array of conversion pathways, and expected increases in overall bioenergy production are connecting diverse technical, social, and policy communities. These stakeholder groups have different—and potentially conflicting—values and cultures, and therefore different goals and decision making processes. Our aim is to discuss the implications of this diversity for bioenergy researchers. The paper begins with a discussion of bioenergy stakeholder groups and their varied interests, and illustrates how this diversity complicates efforts to define and promote “sustainable” bioenergy production. We then discuss what this diversity means for research practice. Researchers, we note, should be aware of stakeholder values, information needs, and the factors affecting stakeholder decision making if the knowledge they generate is to reach its widest potential use. We point out how stakeholder participation in research can increase the relevance of its products, and argue that stakeholder values should inform research questions and the choice of analytical assumptions. Finally, we make the case that additional natural science and technical research alone will not advance sustainable bioenergy production, and that important research gaps relate to understanding stakeholder decision making and the need, from a broader social science perspective, to develop processes to identify and accommodate different value systems. While sustainability requires more than improved scientific and technical understanding, the need to understand stakeholder values and manage diversity presents important research opportunities.     

Urban sustainability – a segmentation study of Greater Brisbane,Australia

Setting universal goals for sustainability is problematic and may hinder the adoption of sustainable pathways as different sectors of society often have differing opinions on not just what sustainability means for them, but also what is of priority to them. This paper tests a set of psychographic, behavioural, lifestyle and social identities to segment the public on sustainability. We evaluate general knowledge, apply social-choice tools to identify public priorities, and then apply segmentation to reveal broad strata of community profiles around these choices. We discuss our findings in the context of moving beyond knowledge on sustainability and general public choices, to more nuanced messaging and engagement that respects differences in sustainability orientations. We suggest that by focusing on what matters most for different segments of society, there is potential to design effective processes to engage with people and acquire better ownership of sustainability.     

Beyond sustainability indicators

Sustainability indicators are an increasingly popular tool for the identification of policies and monitoring of progress towards sustainable development. The need for indicators is clearly set out in Agenda 21 and has been taken up by the Commission for Sustainable Development. Devising alternative measures of progress to gross national product has been the subject of much research in the past few years. There are many local sustainability indicator initiatives now under way, co-ordinated by local authorities and involving local communities. However useful these exercises have been (not least to those engaged in them) there is little evidence, so far, that sustainability indicators are leading to substantial shifts in policy at national or local level. Evidence points, in fact, to substantial barriers to progress in several key areas: for example, the necessity for the greater integration of environmental, social and economic policy, the tackling of inequality and poverty and the encouragement of greater public participation in action on sustainable development. In order for indicators to make any progress in surmounting these barriers there is a need to address issues of trust and to examine existing institutional structures and practices. In parallel with the development of indicators, national, and particularly local, government will need to experiment with new and creative techniques for community participation in decision making, engage in dialogue with new cultural networks and implement practical initiatives to improve the quality of life in particular communities.     

Beyond sustainability indicators

Abstract

Sustainability indicators are an increasingly popular tool for the identification of policies and monitoring of progress towards sustainable development. The need for indicators is clearly set out in Agenda 21 and has been taken up by the Commission for Sustainable Development. Devising alternative measures of progress to gross national product has been the subject of much research in the past few years. There are many local sustainability indicator initiatives now under way, co‐ordinated by local authorities and involving local communities. However useful these exercises have been (not least to those engaged in them) there is little evidence, so far, that sustainability indicators are leading to substantial shifts in policy at national or local level. Evidence points, in fact, to substantial barriers to progress in several key areas: for example, the necessity for the greater integration of environmental, social and economic policy, the tackling of inequality and poverty and the encouragement of greater public participation in action on sustainable development. In order for indicators to make any progress in surmounting these barriers there is a need to address issues of trust and to examine existing institutional structures and practices. In parallel with the development of indicators, national, and particularly local, government will need to experiment with new and creative techniques for community participation in decision making, engage in dialogue with new cultural networks and implement practical initiatives to improve the quality of life in particular communities.     

Critical reflections on the theory and practice of social sustainability in the built environment – a meta-analysis

This article presents a critical reflection on the theory and practice of social sustainability in the built environment, identifies areas of agreement and disagreement, explores theoretical and conceptual gaps and challenges, and suggests practical implications for future research and urban policy. It argues that despite revisionist approaches which challenge the tripartite structure of sustainable development, social dimension of sustainability remains an essential valid pillar. Utilising a qualitative meta-analysis methodology for undertaking critical analysis of previous research and publications on the topic, key themes of theory and practice of social sustainability are identified and critically examined. Accordingly, 10 key formative characteristics of social sustainability and their research and policy implications are introduced. The article concludes with institutional observations for policy-makers to achieve greater success in addressing largely underestimated dimensions of social sustainability in urban settings.     

The Use of Local Sustainability Indicators: case studies in two Swedish municipalities1

This article contributes to the debate on the role of local sustainability indicators in ongoing democratisation efforts. We examine the extent to which five different systems of local sustainability indicators within two Swedish municipalities—Stockholm and Sundsvall—are either expert or citizen oriented, and relate these findings to the indicator systems' profile, function and political/ administrative context. Even though three of the indicator systems can be classified as citizen oriented, there are few signs of true engagement and dialogue with the citizens over a longer period of time. The remaining two indicator systems are expert oriented with an environmental focus. Hence, we conclude that the systems in use are largely symbolic responses to the demands for democracy within the agenda for sustainable development albeit attempts to include environmental, economic, social and democratic perspectives of sustainability. Despite the fact that Stockholm and Sundsvall show differences in governing styles in their approaches to sustainability indicators it seems difficult for both municipalities to put sustainable development into practice in terms of citizen participation.     

Social sustainability and neighbourhood design: an investigation of residents' satisfaction in Delhi

Social and environmental goals are often mutually reinforcing. Urban forms may encourage social sustainability as well as social inclusion or may have the potential to create areas of crime and social exclusion. The issues of relationship between sustainable development and urban form have given birth to new paradigms of design approach such as new urbanism, the compact city and the eco-city. This paper examines the impact of urban form on social sustainability at the neighbourhood level. It seeks to better understand the relationship between urban form and social sustainability by comparing three neighbourhoods with dissimilar urban forms in Delhi, India. Household surveys and observation surveys in these three neighbourhoods were conducted, and it was found that the urban form of a neighbourhood plays a very important role in creating a socially sustainable residential neighbourhood. The study established that social interactions within the communities are higher when dwelling units are placed around the public realm or common open space. The study demonstrated that provision of high quality and well-located open space at the precinct level, mixed land use and good accessibility to the public realm and social infrastructure play an important role in increasing the social sustainability of the neighbourhood.     

A comparison of sustainability theory with UK and European airports policy and practice.

There are three main theoretical difficulties involved in relating sustainability to aviation, and which a research agenda for sustainable aviation needs to address. The first is uncertainty regarding the critical thresholds of global environmental systems. The second is a lack of protocols for allocating permissible environmental consumption shares to, and hence targets for, individual enterprises or sectors. The third is differing value judgements of what natural features should be sustained. For the time being, these difficulties preclude determination of the degree of sustainability or unsustainability of any individual airport with respect to global environmental systems. Nevertheless, at this stage it can at least be said that since most economic activity has an adverse environmental impact, airports with higher throughputs of material and people will tend to be less sustainable than smaller-scale airports given similar technologies and regulatory compliance. This is theoretically supported and illustrated with waste arising as an indicator at reviewed airports. Despite governmental policies of sustainable mobility, there is a disjunction between EU and UK policy on airports and individual airport practice, and environmental sustainability theory. In the UK and EU, airport practice and governmental policy is to mitigate the impacts of aviation, but not at the expense of its aviation growth. This mitigation practice is summarised for the reviewed airports and presented in a framework that accounts for the suggested, interim approach to sustainability assessment.     

Social capital networks for achieving sustainable development

There have been few empirical studies investigating whether and how social capital (SC) relates to better achievement of sustainability goals and, if so, how. This research investigates the roles three types of SC, namely, bonding, bridging, and bracing SC, play in achieving sustainable development (SD), using a case study of the Japanese region to explore the process of SC accumulation leading to collective action. The research question as to whether SC accumulation makes a difference in the progress towards sustainability is addressed qualitatively and quantitatively using a case study, and network and regression analysis; in particular the impact and functions of bracing SC are closely investigated. The study concludes that SC accumulation can indeed make a difference in achieving sustainability and that bracing SC plays an essential role in expediting the processes of goal sharing and resource flow by connecting various networks across sectors and scales, thereby making collective action possible. These findings suggest that creating an environment in which the generation of all three types of SC is encouraged may help local governments to achieve their desired policy goals for SD.     

An innovative sustainability assessment for urban wastewater infrastructure and its application in Chengdu, China

Sustainability assessments are an increasingly common tool for measuring progress towards sustainable development. Despite their popularity, sustainability assessments and the indicators that compose them are said to have had little impact on the policy arena. In this paper we discuss four attributes that we contend will improve the use of sustainability assessments to guide decision making: non-compartmentalization, site specificity, built-in guidance for target setting, and ability to measure active sustainability. We present a novel assessment tool for wastewater treatment infrastructure that illustrates these attributes. The assessment is composed of two-dimensional indicators we call “burden to capacity” ratios, that reveal and quantify the local value of resources embodied in wastewater and treatment byproducts, and the tradeoffs between designing systems for disposal versus reuse. We apply the sustainability assessment framework to an existing treatment plant in Chengdu, China and discuss the results.     

The Use of Local Sustainability Indicators: case studies in two Swedish municipalities1

This article contributes to the debate on the role of local sustainability indicators in ongoing democratisation efforts. We examine the extent to which five different systems of local sustainability indicators within two Swedish municipalities—Stockholm and Sundsvall—are either expert or citizen oriented, and relate these findings to the indicator systems' profile, function and political/ administrative context. Even though three of the indicator systems can be classified as citizen oriented, there are few signs of true engagement and dialogue with the citizens over a longer period of time. The remaining two indicator systems are expert oriented with an environmental focus. Hence, we conclude that the systems in use are largely symbolic responses to the demands for democracy within the agenda for sustainable development albeit attempts to include environmental, economic, social and democratic perspectives of sustainability. Despite the fact that Stockholm and Sundsvall show differences in governing styles in their approaches to sustainability indicators it seems difficult for both municipalities to put sustainable development into practice in terms of citizen participation.     

Evaluation of sustainable development strategies and policies: The need for more timely indicators

Indicators are commonly used as tools to identify and highlight socio‐economic and ecological trends and to assess progress towards sustainability. Different quality criteria can be considered for indicators. This paper focuses on the timeliness of indicators used in the evaluation of sustainable development strategies. The analysis is based on indicators included in four assessment reports of the sustainable development strategy of the European Union and three assessment reports of the national strategy of Finland. Furthermore, a web‐based national level indicator portal is analysed. The results show that the timeliness of indicators has generally not improved during the past decade and that indicators used in strategy evaluations have a time lag of approximately two years. It is suggested that more attention should be given to efforts to improve the timeliness of indicators in order to increase the effectiveness of the evaluations. More generally, it is suggested that greater emphasis should be put on the empirical research on actual use of indicators.