Blogging for Sustainability: The Intermediary Role of Personal Green Blogs in Promoting Sustainability

The rise of social media radically broadens the sources and platforms used for environmental communication. Especially personal green blogs are worthy of study as they are spaces of everyday cultural politics through which people make sense of sustainability issues, and because they entail a radical break from conventional media in terms of legitimacy, form, and content of environmental communication processes. This paper studies the representation of sustainability on personal green blogs, and the communication processes through which these representations are constructed. It does so through a qualitative study of Swedish-language blogs. We study three blogs in-depth: a living experiment blog on sustainable food practices; a lifestyle blog centered around green family life; and a blog about consuming green beauty products. The analysis shows that all three blogs translate the complex landscape of sustainability to individual everyday practices. Yet, what these sustainability practices entail differs considerably between the blogs, ranging from a-political and doable lifestyle choices to an onset to radical redefining of consumption. Also, the communication processes on the blogs differ in quality and quantity. The paper uses these insights to reflect on the debates about how environmental communication is shaped by blogging and social media practices.     

A new approach to natural capital sustainable development

The three-dimension (3D) ecological footprint makes the analysis of the relationships between the demand and supply of natural capital more credible by importing footprint depth and footprint size. This article used China’s regions as the object to analyze the high-level sustainability of the natural capital from the view of “ecology – efficiency – fairness” multidimensional framework. Research showed that China’s ecological footprint has risen while bio-capacity per capita has descended in recent 20 years. This paper also discusses the spatial distribution of China’s natural capital ecological sustainability, efficiency sustainability and fairness sustainability. Finally, it builds multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) models to get multidimensional sustainability framework taking ecological sustainability, efficiency sustainability, and fairness sustainability into consideration.     

A Systems Based Framework to Examine The Multi-contextural Application of the Sustainability Concept

A conceptual framework is generated through systems principles to explain sustainability’s wide diversity of interpretation and contextual application. Sustainability is reduced to a literal interpretation as the ability to sustain, and then expressed in simple systems as the ability of one system to sustain another system over time. This reinforces the importance of time in the sustainability debate, and suggests the concept can be legitimately applied to timeframes that have absolute limits. The framework is expanded to complex systems as the changing ability of one or many systems to sustain the changing requirements of one or many systems, over time. This accommodates multiple relations and system dynamics, and hints at the extraordinary complexity encompassed by the sustainability concept. Practical implications relate to the evolving meaning of sustainability, the need for continual change to remain sustainable, and that the sustainability concept can be validly applied to virtually any context or situation that exhibits a dimension of continuity. Derived criteria useful for clarifying contextual applications of sustainability include stating the how, what, why, who and for how long of sustainability, along with indicating the most appropriate hierarchical tier at which the concept is being applied.     

Exploring the need for more radical sustainable innovation: what does it look like and why?

It has been argued in recent years that Western economies need to increase their resource productivity by 90% over the next 50 years. This is a radical aim. This paper draws on design for sustainability (DfS) thinking to scope interventions that encourage greater levels of resource productivity through reconfiguring concepts of growth and well‐being within organisational strategies, structures, systems, processes and outputs. Based on research from a UK EPSRC funded project Design Dialogues (2005–2008), this paper links together sustainable design and innovation literatures and dialogue‐based primary research that together inform the development of an approach to innovation for sustainability. The emphasis on sustainable innovation is to understand what is designed (the outputs of business) and why (the inputs: the values, beliefs, visions and objectives) within a context of ecological limits. The foundations of this approach are introduced here in order to demonstrate the potential to provoke a new way of thinking about longer‐term organisational innovation through making explicit the intrinsic connections between natural and human capitals. This paper explores the need to think differently in order to create sustainability and presents the outcome of this research: a methodology for innovation for sustainability.     

Structuring complexity for tailoring research contributions to sustainable development: a framework

Research aiming at generating effective contributions to sustainable development faces particular complexity related challenges. This article proposes an analytical framework disentangling and structuring complexity issues with which research for sustainable development is confronted. Based on theoretical conceptions from fields like policy sciences and transdisciplinary research as well as on an in-depth analysis of the concept of sustainable development, three meta-perspectives on research for sustainable development are introduced and elaborated. The first perspective focuses on notions of sustainable development, sorting out the problem of unclear or ambiguous interpretations of the general sustainability objectives in specific contexts. The second perspective introduces a broad conception of the policy process representing the way societal change towards sustainable development is brought about. It supports identifying those academic and non-academic actors and stakeholders that are relevant for coming up with effective knowledge contributions. The third perspective identifies different forms of knowledge that are needed to tackle sustainability problems as well as the significance of their mutual interrelations. How the framework perspectives support reflecting on the fundamental complexity issues research for sustainable development is confronted with is illustrated using a case example from natural scientific research in the field of land use. We argue that meeting the complexity inherent in the concept of sustainable development requires joint learning in policy processes, working out shared visions being in line with the core objectives of sustainable development and generating knowledge about empirical, normative and pragmatic aspects.     

Framing natural assets for advancing sustainability research: translating different perspectives into actions

Sustainability is a key challenge for humanity in the context of complex and unprecedented global changes. Future Earth, an international research initiative aiming to advance global sustainability science, has recently launched knowledge–action networks (KANs) as mechanisms for delivering its research strategy. The research initiative is currently developing a KAN on “natural assets” to facilitate and enable action-oriented research and synthesis towards natural assets sustainability. ‘Natural assets’ has been adopted by Future Earth as an umbrella term aiming to translate and bridge across different knowledge systems and different perspectives on peoples’ relationships with nature. In this paper, we clarify the framing of Future Earth around natural assets emphasizing the recognition on pluralism and identifying the challenges of translating different visions about the role of natural assets, including via policy formulation, for local to global sustainability challenges. This understanding will be useful to develop inter-and transdisciplinary solutions for human–environmental problems by (i) embracing richer collaborative decision processes and building bridges across different perspectives; (ii) giving emphasis on the interactions between biophysical and socioeconomic drivers affecting the future trends of investments and disinvestments in natural assets; and (iii) focusing on social equity, power relationships for effective application of the natural assets approach. This understanding also intends to inform the scope of the natural asset KAN’s research agenda to mobilize the translation of research into co-designed action for sustainability.     

Towards an umbrella science of sustainability

Sustainability research has gained scholarly attention since the 1980s as the new science investigating the changes in social, environmental and economic systems and their impacts on the future of planetary life support systems. Whilst broad literature on sustainability has expanded significantly over the past decades, academic literature developing sustainability as a distinct science has received little attention. After more than two decades of sustainability research, the time has come for us to begin asking reflective questions about what sort of science we call sustainability science. How has the broader research on sustainability contributed to developing sustainability science as a unique discipline within the past two decades? How has the label science promoted or hindered the interdisciplinary project of integrating the natural and social sciences as well as arts and humanities in addressing human nature problems? I argue in this review paper that special efforts need to be made towards the building and positioning of sustainability as an umbrella science for global sustainability research. The benefits of the new sustainability science advocated for in this paper are that; a) it offers a universal definition of sustainability that accounts for both the needs of life and the capacity of planetary life support systems to provide for those needs and b) proposes ways of bridging gaps among different research traditions, facilitating cross disciplinary communication and addressing the challenge of multiple meanings and definitions of concepts facing sustainability research today.     

Research core and framework of sustainability science

This paper reviews recent achievements in sustainability science and discusses the research core and framework of sustainability science. We analyze and organize papers published in three selected core journals of sustainability science: Sustainability Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, and Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy. Papers are organized into three categories: sustainability and its definition, domain-oriented research, and a research framework for sustainability science. First, we provide a short history and define the basic characteristics of sustainability; then we review current efforts in the following research domains: climate, biodiversity, agriculture, fishery, forestry, energy and resources, water, economic development, health, and lifestyle. Finally, we propose a research framework for sustainability science that includes the following components: goal setting, indicator setting, indicator measurement, causal chain analysis, forecasting, backcasting, and problem–solution chain analysis. We emphasize the importance of this last component for improving situations and attaining goals.     

WSSD 2002, Latin America and Brazil: Biodiversity and Indigenous People

Latin America comprehends notable variations in terms of natural environment, availability of natural resources, living standards, and demographic patterns. Latin America is a mosaic of cultures, post- and pre-Columbian. The rich variety of life forms discovered and described by chroniclers and traveling naturalists in the Neotropics contributed to the proposal, in mid-XVIIIth century, of a new system of classification and a scientific code of nomenclature for all organisms. Biodiversity was, for many centuries, a source of resources to be exploited in natura. In scientific circles, its inventory became the domain of taxonomists. But modern technology showed how important the miriad of life forms really are as sources of chemical molecules to be engineered as drugs and reassembled as novel manufactured products. We are on the brink of a new agricultural and medical revolution, thanks to the techniques of genetic engineering, which will lead eventually to the elimination of hunger and malnutrition.In this essay, the Brazilian environmental and social heterogeneity will serve as an example to illustrate some key points, which have influenced sustainability policies. The Amazon deforestation and indigenous knowledge (IK), subjects often associated with areas of high biodiversity, are usually the focus of environmental debates. The importance of IK in integrating development, reducing poverty and sustainability are considered together with the intellectual property rights of native populations.In the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) Implementation Plan, a few paragraphs were dedicated to Latin America, because of the pre-existing Action Platform on the Road to Johannesburg 2002, approved in Rio de Janeiro in October 2001. This paper calls attention to the need to draw up specific environmental policies for a region which shows an extremely high cultural and biological diversity, associated with a high availability of forests and water, among other resources.     

Understanding and communicating sustainability: global versus regional perspectives

While there is no single definition of sustainability, most would agree that it implies that a system is to be maintained at a certain level, held within certain limits. Sustainability denies run-away growth, but it also precludes any substantial set backs or cuts. This sustainability path is hard to reconcile with the renewal cycle that can be observed in most living systems developing according to their natural intrinsic mechanisms. Besides, since different human dominated systems are in significantly different states and stages of development, sustaining those states assumes maintaining social disparities in perpetuity. This creates a challenge in communicating the ideas of sustainability in different regions. Systems are parts of hierarchies where systems of higher levels are made of subsystems from lower levels. Renewal in components is an important factor of adaptation and evolution. But then sustainability of a system borrows from sustainability of a supra-system and rests upon lack of sustainability in subsystems. Therefore by sustaining certain systems beyond their renewal cycle, we decrease the sustainability of larger, higher level systems. The only way to resolve this contradiction is to agree that the biosphere as a whole with humans as one of its components is the only system which sustainability we are to seek. Readers should send their comments on this paper to BhaskarNath@aol.com within 3 months of publication of this issue.     

Blurred Borderlands: Sustainability and the Urban/Nature Divide at the Frick Environmental Center

ABSTRACT

Sustainable development is rhetorically framed as exhibiting natural processes, reflected both symbolically and materially. Taking the Frick Environmental Center of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania as a rhetorical artifact, I argue that spaces where sustainable human-made structures and human-cultivated landscapes meet, reflect blurred borderlands of a culturally constructed urban/nature divide. Considering the Frick Environmental Center as an experiential landscape, my mixed methodology of textual analysis and rhetorical field work identifies how naturalized framing of sustainability bridges the urban/nature divide, inviting restoration, preservation, and construction efforts that are more environmentally engaged.     

通过可持续认证推动农林牧渔领域自然资源保护

1992年里约环境发展大会后可持续发展成为各国和各界的共识,但经历了二十年的发展,自然资源保护与可持续发展之间的矛盾仍然存在,特别是农林牧渔等领域自然资源的合理开发利用仍待进一步发展。我国作为国际农林牧渔产品的重要消费国和贸易国,在积极推动国内资源的可持续利用同时,也可以通过国际贸易在全球自然资源可持续利用中发挥积极作用。可持续认证作为应对资源保护与经济发展这一矛盾的较为有效的市场手段,经过近二十年的发展已经涵盖了农林牧渔领域的多个产品,在国际上的发展势头强劲,对于自然资源的保护和可持续利用发挥了对政府政策的补充作用。但可持续性认证在我国国内的企业和消费者中还没有得到广泛认识,其通过市场机制引导企业实践可持续经营、落实企业社会责任的作用在国内还没有得到有效的发挥。因此,本研究的目的是通过对可持续认证的分析,为在我国农林牧渔领域更好地发挥其市场推动力提出政策建议。本研究首先综述了可持续认证在国际上的发展历程、产生的影响,详细论述了森林、棕榈油、野生海产品等可持续认证已经在全球贸易中占有一席之地,并在欧美等较发达国家和地区获得了消费者的支持;其次,本研究对可持续认证在农林牧渔领域的进一步发展所面临的挑战进行了剖析,肯定了可持续认证在调动企业和消费者的积极性、推动农林牧渔领域资源保护方面的正面作用,也指出认证对资源保护的预期效果没有完全达到、同一产业内认证体系可靠性参差不齐,着重强调了可持续认证在发展中国家的发展面临的困难,使其对自然资源保护的应有效果受到影响。在此基础上,本研究分析了我国农林牧渔领域在资源利用方面面临的国际和国内压力,尤其是我国在国际贸易中举足轻重的地位和进口大宗产品产地的生态脆弱性使中国在全球资源的可持续利用和保护中可以发挥重要作用,论证了可持续认证在我国的推广有利于提升中国企业的国际形象、促进贸易杠杆发挥资源保护的撬动作用、保障企业在海外开发中的长期效益,同时也有利于我国国内自然资源的可持续利用,明确得出在我国农林牧渔领域推动可持续认证的必要性。本研究建议我国政府部门应关注农林牧渔领域可持续认证在国际和国内的发展,收集相关的信息和案例可用于相关的国际谈判和对企业的指导。同时政府应鼓励国内外认证体系在中国开展认证工作,并为同一产业中的不同体系创造公平的竞争环境。另外,政府应积极支持国内农林牧渔产业的企业、专家、协会等参与到国际认证体系的建立过程中,将中国可持续发展的良好操作范例或规范国际化。政府自身的消费行为对全社会有明确的引导作用,所以在政府采购中应优选可持续认证产品,引导企业加入可持续经营的实践。     

Spaces of flow as technical and cultural mediators between society and nature

Modern societies organize and consume their basic natural resources in great technical infrastructures of transport, supply, communication, and information. Together with these infrastructures a new culture emerged, which influences since the 19th century the perception of nature. This article reflects on technical infrastructures as spaces of flow, which mediate technically and culturally between society and nature and on the necessity to evolve a new cultural perception of them. The vital importance of technical spaces of flow for daily life will be shown in the first part. The second part reveals the history and some characteristics and environmental impacts of technical spaces of flow. Their threefold spatial structure and typical conflicts arising at each spatial segment will be described in the third part. The last part investigates the cultural perception of technical spaces of flow, the natural resources they mediate and the environmental impacts they cause. They are the technical spaces and flowing processes themselves, which lead to a false cultural perception of the modern interaction with nature and to the necessity of political, technical, esthetical, and planning measures in order to make spaces of flow and flowing processes “visible” and to evolve a new, sustainable consumption culture.     

Promoting Sustainability with Ecological,Economic and Social Dimensions in Developing Countries

Abstract

Sustainable development is one of the most important ideas, and goals of our time. It is defined as “development which meets the needs and aspirations of the current generation and develops safe and sound society for future generation”. Achieving sustainable development thus involves a vigorous and urgent debate on different dimensions. The different dimensions of sustainability as a framework involve all issues such as science, technology, economic growth and development, health, education, finance investment and trade, politics, natural disasters, population growth and terrorism, etc. No single dimension is responsible to develop sustainable society. This article mainly described the integrated relationship among the three dimensions of sustainability.     

The disappearing sustainability triangle: community level considerations

This article challenges the application of the sustainability triangle to conceptualise sustainable development by looking at how weak sustainability can be obtained via the reinforcing increase in social capital and natural capital. Sustainable development is often visualised as a triangle consisting of social, environmental, and economic aspects. Would it be possible to conceive a flattened system, with diminishing economic resources or without refilling financial resources? The possibility involves mutual reinforcement between social capital and natural capital. The consideration of the diminishing economic dimension relates to the concept of development without economic growth, such as degrowth, zero-growth, and sustainable growth, that has been revived in the face of the recent economic crisis. Several countries have imposed extreme budget cuts in development collaboration and in other government expenditures. When the economic resource is not at a satisfactory level, can we rely on the reinforcement between social and environmental aspects for sustainability? Although it is not new to acknowledge the contribution of social capital to environmental conservation, research has long ignored the reinforcing relationship between environmental and social dimensions. This article provides a prototype model to demonstrate how social capital and natural capital can reinforce each other. The prototype is studied and verified at the community level using a comparative method. This article concludes with principles and practices that may encourage sustainability with merely the reinforcement between social capital and natural capital.     

Multiscale Methodological Framework to Derive Criteria and Indicators for Sustainability Evaluation of Peasant Natural Resource Management Systems

Design and implementation of more sustainable natural resource management systems is the current objective of many research institutions, development agencies, NGOs and other stakeholders. But, how to assess whether a system is sustainable? How do we know whether the alternatives designed will increase the sustainability of the system? How to evaluate or assess the sustainability of natural resource management systems?In this paper we present a multiscale methodological framework for sustainability evaluation. The framework is based on a systems approach from which five general attributes of sustainable natural resource management systems are defined based on scale- and discipline-independent properties (productivity, stability, resilience, reliability and adaptability).A general operational strategy to derive ‘site-specific’ criteria and indicators for the attributes at different scales is also presented. This strategy is based on the definition of ‘impact scales’, at which the different stakeholders can or want to design alternatives, as well as the main stakeholders’ objectives and constraints. The application of the multiscale framework is illustrated with a case study in the Purhepecha Region of Michoacán, a peasant mountainous region in the west of Mexico. We used stakeholder consultation to identify the main objectives and constraints as well as to select criteria and indicators. The sets of criteria and indicators suggested for the different scales of analysis of the Purhepecha Region are comprehensive, yet not exhaustive, and represent the main issues related to natural resource management in the region. Further work will be directed towards the quantification of indicators at different scales and their relationships and trade-offs.     

External Communication About Sustainability: Corporate Social Responsibility Reports and Social Media Activity

External communication about corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability activities may vary significantly across firms. Communication channel, content, and frequency may reflect a company’s resource allocation priorities, its culture, and its leadership in the sustainability domain. This empirical research compares n?=?11 global consumer apparel companies, with brands ranging from Adidas to Prada to Wrangler, in terms of their communication about CSR and sustainability in both formal outlets (annual CSR reports), informal channels (Twitter and Facebook social media), and voluntary participation in external rankings (the Global Reporting Initiative). In addition, the sample is divided into “High-Ranked” and “Low-Ranked” subsamples, using Newsweek’s Greenest Companies 2014 rankings, to examine if companies ranked highly by Newsweek communicate more often and display higher levels of engagement in sustainability reporting, compared to low-ranked firms. Results provide support for our research propositions. We conclude with recommendations for companies seeking to strengthen their CSR external communication.     

A “measurable” definition of sustainable development based on closed cycles of resources and its application to energy systems

Human society consumes resources that it is not able to reproduce. Human activities are still based on “open cycles,” starting from a condition of natural environmental balance and reaching an environmental imbalance. The challenging scope of scientific and technological research towards sustainability appears clear if it is based on this analysis: to find development systems based on “closed cycles” of resources. The challenging objective of realizing closed cycles leads to a definition of sustainability that indicates the path to sustainable development, as well as stating the general principle. It also provides a key to the qualitative measurement of sustainability. This means that the sustainability level of a system can be measured by measuring its capacity to avoid the consumption of resources. Zero consumption is a necessary condition for sustainability, and brings about as a side effect the highly desired “zero-waste” result. Materials entering the proposed endless scheme pass through the process of usefulness without losing their capacity to feed the system again after being used. Thus, the concept of “consumption” itself is replaced by one of “use” when resources are inserted into closed loops capable of feeding human development. The application of the closed cycle sustainability criterion particularly displays its feasibility, and a theoretical guiding role, in the energy sector. Energy vectors such as hydrogen and electricity enable the closure of the energy resources loop by effectively approaching the objective of “zero consumption” (and the side result of “zero waste”) through already demonstrated technological solutions.     

The use of DPSIR framework to evaluate sustainability in coastal areas. Case study: Guanabara Bay basin,Rio de Janeiro,Brazil

The Guanabara Bay basin, SE Brazil, is shown as an experimental site to evaluate development and sustainability in coastal areas. We developed a Driver–Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) framework in a practical context to integrate natural and socio-economic indicators. Sustainability reflects public policies towards the utilization of natural resources. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) included in DPSIR evaluates losses and benefits resulting from such policies. CBA has some limitations due to the difficulty of valuating environmental goods and services. Instead of valuating them we propose to combine sustainability indicators and defensive expenditures for the implementation of public policies. This approach agrees with the environmental conservation paradigm implicit in sustainable development. It allows an estimation of the physical natural capital depreciation (PNCD), by using it to correct the gross domestic product (GDP) of the study area, and demonstrating the present non-sustainable characteristics of the current policies applied to the area.