Building more sustainable solutions in production–consumption systems: the case of food for people with reduced access

In new product development, the ability to integrate different dimensions of sustainability at a value chain level is still a complex, problematic goal. As product-service approaches are increasingly enabling the introduction of more sustainable paths, this paper describes the authors' experience thus far when building insights into conditions for the implementation of integrated solutions in a process of co-development and testing in real life conditions, which are driven by a social need focusing on food for people with reduced access. Throughout this process, which brought together producers, consumers and other stakeholders to design and test industrialised, sustainable solutions, empirical evidence demonstrates feasibility and usefulness of the approach and insight into the conditions for implementing interactive, comprehensive multi-stakeholder processes in real life situations. In addition, results show that the delivery of innovative solutions enabled to offer social added value, economic profits and environmental improvements under specific experimental conditions.     

秦皇岛市可持续发展状况评估

可持续发展是我国的唯一选择,如何评价可持续发展是可持续发展研究的热点问题.可持续发展的协调度、持续度是评价可持续发展的有效途径.协调度指标由经济系统协调度、经济发展与人口协调度、经济发展与资源协调度、经济发展与生态环境协调度、经济发展与城镇化水平协调度五项指标组成;持续度指标由经济持续度、人力资源持续度、资源持续度、生态环境持续度四项指标组成.通过对秦皇岛市2000年社会、经济、环境系统的深入分析,秦皇岛市可持续发展状况为61.9分,处于具有初步可持续发展水平和能力阶段.     

可持续交通

全球存在有广泛的认知 ,目前的交通趋势是不可持续的。很多学者总结认为 ,我们需要在交通系统的技术、设计、运行和财政上进行根本性的变革。本文探讨了可持续发展的定义 ,以及交通造成的环境影响、能源消费和公平问题 ,并结合国内外文献从 :(1)交通技术 ;(2 )交通供应 ;(3)交通需求 ;(4)交通方式四个方面提出发展可持续交通的基本理念 ,并给出相关的国外的成功实践 ,以期对我国建设生态城市和生态交通提供可借鉴的信息。     

Comparison of sustainability issues in two sensitive areas of China

After 30 years of economic reform since opening to the outside world in 1978, China's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has increased by 150% over the past 15 years. The sustainability of such intense economic activity has been questioned from the perspectives of the social, environmental, and economic dimensions of sustainability. In this study, we assessed the spatial and temporal trends in sustainable development in two sensitive agricultural areas of China: Dezhou district, a well-developed region, and Guyuan district, an underdeveloped region. We used the pressure–state–response (PSR) model and a participatory approach that involved local experts to select and evaluate 27 area-specific indicators, then calculated changes in their values from 1985 to 2002. We aggregated these indicators into dimension- and PSR-specific indices to assess the sustainability of development in both regions. There two regions differed greatly in sustainability, but the current status of sustainable development raises concerns in both areas, especially from the perspective of balancing the three dimensions of sustainability. In 2002, Dezhou district performed well economically, with an index value of 0.78 (where 1.0 = sustainable), followed by environmental and social sustainability (both with index values of 0.48). All three indices have increased since 1985 (by 0.17, 0.25, and 0.13, respectively). In Guyuan district, environmental sustainability was highest (with an index value of 0.73), followed by economic and social sustainability (values of 0.55 and 0.37, respectively), but economic sustainability has decreased by 0.04 since 1985, whereas environmental and social sustainability increased by 0.18 and 0.12, respectively. To promote sustainable regional development, development priorities should be determined by considering both the regional and temporal variation in the three sustainability indices.     

Regional sustainability contrasts in Brazil as indicated by the Compass of Sustainability – CompasSus

The current need for assessing sustainable processes and states is a driving assumption for this article, having as objective to present preliminary results of a new assessment approach, the Compass of Sustainability (CompasSus), applied to administrative regions of Brazil. Its methodological approach is based on a combination of existing assessment methodologies, such as the Human Development Index and the Ecological Footprint. CompasSus is elaborated under the perspective of rather complementary operational concepts of sustainable development, namely weak and strong sustainability, which are often seen as competing ones. In spite of the advances on the perspective of sustainable development perceived in international agreements for conservation of nature, as well as in the implementation of national policies aiming at sustainability, there still exists an operational ambiguity of the concept of sustainability. Thus, its fuzzy theoretical consolidation for clear definition of objectives and lines of action still leads to different assumptions for diverse stakeholders and authors. Looking at the Brazilian case, conservation strategies are needed to protect the world's largest tropical rainforest against a predatory business – as-usual frontier expansion. As for addressing trade-offs between environmental conservation and regional development demands the CompasSus introduces a combined hemispheric assessment of sustainability. In 2006, the state in which the sustainability index had the best performance was DF (Distrito Federal). This, the seat of the capital city, presents an economy based on the public and the service sectors, both very little carbon and energy intensive. Furthermore, the high income per capita, and good social indicators associated with the small relevance of the agrarian sector grants it the best sustainability index, which is determined by performances in two components representing strong and weak sustainability. In the other extreme is São Paulo (SP) where a high population density and major impacts on waterways have implied a worse performance in weak sustainability index, whereas the high consumption of energy together with high carbon emissions have also determined a low performance in strong sustainability index.     

The authority of science in sustainability governance: A structured comparison of six science institutions engaged with the Sustainable Development Goals

Over the past decades, numerous science institutions have evolved around issues of global sustainability, aiming to inform and shape societal transformations towards sustainability. While these science-based initiatives seem to take on an ever growing active role in governance for sustainable development, the question arises how they can claim any political authority in the first place. We present here a structured comparison of six international science-based initiatives, all engaged in governance processes related to the recently established Sustainable Development Goals. We focus on the material and rhetorical strategies employed by these science institutions to acquire authority by fostering perceptions of salience, credibility and legitimacy among governance actors. We distinguish three modes of scientific authority: an assessment-oriented mode that combines a strategy of salience through integration, with credibility by formal mechanisms of review, and legitimacy through representation; an advice-oriented mode, which appeals to salience through the promise of independent and timely science advice, to credibility through the credentials of the scientists involved, and to legitimacy through formal recognition by governance actors; and a solution-oriented mode, with science institutions claiming relevance based on the promise to contribute to solutions for global sustainability, while credibility is sought by invoking support of the scientific community, and legitimacy through a strategy of participation. Based on this analysis, we provide a framework for reflection on the claims and strategies of science-based initiatives, and their role and responsibility in governance for sustainable development.This article is part of a special issue on solution-oriented GEAs.     

EcoDesign: what's happening? An overview of the subject area of EcoDesign and of the papers in this special issue

EcoDesign is a concept including human sustainability priorities together with business interrelations. Its main objective in the improvement of product development methods is to reduce environmental loads. EcoDesign also includes a more open ambition to use inspiration from a wider field of positive examples of smart products and methods, effective system solutions and attractive designs. It is not clear what sustainable product development is; what we can do is to try our best to find better solutions, get going and make sure that we learn from what happens. Our main goal with this issue was to monitor “How to make it happen?” but we ended up with more questions and the lower ambition of, “What's happening”.Life-style elements such as brand label economy, development of new economies in Asia, aging populations in the old economies etc. makes the picture even more complex and we still wonder, “How to make it happen”. However, a few focal points can be observed:The tools in EcoDesign are not as important as specification and goal setting in early product development phases. How to organize product development is crucial in order to reach higher degrees of sustainability. The interrelations between resources and functionality must be enhanced. Environmental affection must be integrated into the human life-style and throughout the entire life-cycle of all products and services. To us it seems impossible to define a sustainable life-style and force everyone to follow. We must engage all stakeholders in envisioning and creating the sustainable societies we hope to achieve.     

Critical perspectives of sustainable development research and practice

Sustainable development has been intensely debated for more than twenty years, but real progress of our societies to become more sustainable is very slow. Therefore this special issue provides a forum for critical perspectives of Sustainable Development Research and Practice. The papers are grouped into three clusters: a. Sustainability Science, b. Economic Problems and c. Corporate Contributions to Sustainable Development.Although a single special issue cannot address the entire array of issues pertaining to progress of sustainability related research, the selected papers highlight special aspects of sustainability research either due to their theoretical contributions or because they report on valuable empirical evidence. The main goal of sustainability research should be to contribute to our understanding of sustainability problems and to develop and help to implement solutions to solve them. This can be described as the relevance of sustainability research. A precondition to gain relevance is the rigor of sustainability science: it has to be based on solid scientific principles and methods. Additionally it has to be regarded that Sustainable Development is dynamic and that it has both normative and practical aspects. It is concluded that sustainability science and practice should be based upon these four central aspects: rigor, relevance, normative aspects and dynamic     

Using qualitative models to define sustainable management for the commons in data poor conditions

Nearly 50 years after Hardin’s “tragedy of the commons” we have not yet found predictive tools to guide us towards sustainable management of common-pool resources (CPR). We often have a good understanding of the qualitative relationships between the principal actors in socioecological systems (SESs), but classical quantitative approaches require a tremendous amount of data to understand the drivers of SESs sustainability. Here we show that qualitative modelling approaches can provide important governance insights for SESs that are understood but not quantified.We used Loop Analysis to test the outcomes of different management regimes on a simple nature-based tourism SES described by economic, social and environmental variables. We tested the sustainability of different management scenarios on this system and we identified the necessary conditions to achieve it.We found that management regimes where property rights and responsibilities are shared between different stakeholders are more likely to be successful. However, the system is generally highly unstable and it is important to tune each strategy to each particular situation.The conditions for sustainability found across the different systems tested were: a low reinvestment rate of tourist revenues into new infrastructures and a low growth rate of the environment. Management strategies based on maximum sustainable yield, which keep the environment far from its carrying capacity, have less chance to be sustainable.Qualitative models of SESs are powerful diagnostic tools; they can help identifying variables that play an important role in determining socioecological sustainability in data-poor circumstances and guide the design of efficient data collection programmes. Our results highlight the importance of careful planning when designing management strategies for nature-based tourism. The application of one-size-fits-all solutions to every situation is likely to lead to the failure of the commons; however tourism-based SESs can be sustainable if management strategies are tuned to each particular case.     

Assessment of eco-labelling criteria development from a strategic sustainability perspective

To turn current patterns of consumption and production in a sustainable direction, solid and understandable market information on the socio-ecological performance of products is needed. Eco-labelling programmes have an important role in this communication. The aim of this study is to investigate what gaps there may be in the current criteria development processes in relation to a strategic sustainability perspective and develop recommendations on how such presumptive gaps could be bridged. First a previously published generic framework for strategic sustainable development is described and applied for the assessment of two eco-labelling programmes. Data for the assessment is collected from literature and in semi-structured interviews and discussions with eco-labelling experts.The assessment revealed that the programmes lack both an operational definition of sustainability, and a statement of objectives to direct and drive the criteria development processes. Consequently they also lack guidelines for how product category criteria might gradually develop in any direction. The selected criteria mainly reflect the current reality based on a selection of negative impacts in ecosystems, but how this selection, or prioritization, is made is not clearly presented. Finally, there are no guidelines to ensure that the criteria developers represent a broad enough competence to embrace all essential sustainability aspects.In conclusion the results point at deficiencies in theory, process and practice of eco-labelling, which hampers cohesiveness, transparency and comprehension. And it hampers predictability, as producers get no support in foreseeing how coming revisions of criteria will develop. This represents a lost opportunity for strategic sustainable development. It is suggested that these problems could be avoided by informing the criteria development process by a framework for strategic sustainable development, based on backcasting from basic sustainability principles.     

Development of a sustainability policy model for promoting cleaner production: a knowledge integration approach

This paper is based upon the understanding that fundamental disciplines of human knowledge such as chemistry, ecology, sociology, geology, economics, engineering or politics, cannot, by themselves, provide the sufficient and necessary solutions to complex problems of sustainability. The paper, therefore, presents an integrated knowledge approach to sustainability policy on industry with the understanding that the essence of such an approach is to enable and support stewardship for building a sustainable society by transcending the conflicts between the paradigm of economics and the paradigm of ecology. This is done by testing the complementarities of three functional modes of knowledge (contextual, technological, and reconciliatory) in actuating the policy science of sustainability. This is based upon an analysis of surveys on CP implementation motives, CP technologies and CP policies. The paper colludes with the finding that even when provided with impressive amounts of data, information and supportive opinion on specific sustainability issues, a society that is not sufficiently cognizant of the necessary knowledge synthesis processes will be unlikely to gain momentum in moving forward in the development, implementation and on-going support of industrial sustainability policy.     

The concept of sustainable islands: cleaner production, industrial ecology and the network paradigm as preconditions for regional sustainable development

This paper introduces a bottom-up approach towards sustainability which is called the Island approach. The basic assumption of ‘Islands of Sustainability’ is that development towards sustainability can be introduced starting from small sustainable regions. An Island is an area where sustainability is reached locally. Key points to create a sustainable region are communication activities, such as exchange of matter, energy, information, culture, capital and persons within the regional network and with the environment. One of the main theses is that sustainability is linked to the complexity of the regional network. The intensity, the speed and the comprehensive of internal and external interactions, as well as the connectedness of the regional network, have to be changed in order to reach local sustainability.Relations between different approaches such as the Cleaner Production approach, the Industrial Ecology approach and the Island approach are investigated. It is assumed that a combination of these approaches will lead to sustainability, which might not be the case with one approach in isolation. All concepts are based on the new Network Paradigm, which is a reduction of the holistic world view. Cooperation on different hierarchical levels, from the interfirm level up to the interregional level, becomes an important part of behaviour. Networks, such as information networks or matter-flow networks, are introduced and become most important with regard to sustainability.     

可持续发展评价指标体系研究综述

可持续发展是当今世界关注的焦点问题之一。作为实施可持续发展战略重要工具的可持续发展评价指标体系是当前可持续性科学的研究热点。在阐明了可持续发展评价指标体系建立的一般过程与方法的基础上,综述了国内外可持续发展评价指标体系的研究现状,指出以下几个方面有望成为今后可持续发展评价指标体系研究的发展方向:可持续性科学内涵和外延的拓展研究;可持续发展评价指标体系的规范分析研究;减少人为主观因素对综合指数的影响研究;探讨评估综合指数可应用性、透明度和测度准确性的一般方法;可持续发展评价指标体系的应用研究。     

Towards phosphorus sustainability in North America: A model for transformational change

Global food production and security rely heavily on finite reserves of newly mined phosphate for fertilizers. However, systemic inefficiencies result in the deposition in aquatic ecosystems of much of the phosphorus mined for food production causing costly eutrophication problems that damage aquatic ecosystems and human health. The Sustainable Phosphorus Alliance (SPA, formerly named North American Partnership for Phosphorus Sustainability) was created to implement sustainable phosphorus solutions through active engagement of stakeholders in both the private and public sectors. This paper describes a conceptual model of transformative change to a sustainable phosphorus system for the North American region. The model emerged from discussions at a series of formal and informal meetings held in conjunction with a ‘Future of Phosphorus’ event (National Science Foundation’s Phosphorus Sustainability Research Coordination Network) and an inaugural SPA Board meeting. Model development drew on the multi-level perspective of socio-technical transitions to develop a series of pathways to a transformed phosphorus system. The uses of the model and transition pathways are discussed in terms of their potential to form an important first step towards the development of a regional vision for improved phosphorus sustainability. The process provides an example of how research in sustainability science can contribute to action on environmental improvement.     

University research for sustainable development: definition and characteristics explored

University research is pivotal for sustainable development, but to succeed, new ways of conducting research are needed. Only recently has the field of “sustainability and higher education” (SHE) started to deal with the issue. In this paper we define “university research for sustainable development” comprehensively as “all research conducted within the institutional context of a university that contributes to sustainable development”, and propose a set of twenty two preliminary characteristics of this concept. We provide foundational information in particular for various university stakeholders, and those of higher education in general, considering the (re)orientation of research towards sustainable development and offer a beginning of dialogue on the subject, within SHE.     

Tools and concepts for sustainable development,how do they relate to a general framework for sustainable development,and to each other?

We present a general framework to plan for sustainability and then relate it to some well-known tools for sustainable development. This framework follows from principles for how a system is constituted (ecological and social principles), and contains principles for a favorable outcome for the system (sustainability), as well as principles for the process to reach this outcome (sustainable development). The principles for sustainability define the favorable outcome and direct problem-solving upstream towards problemsources. A program of activities is then constructed by backcasting from defined outcomes to the current problems. This is followed by “metrics”, i.e. various concepts for measuring and monitoring the activities. Most concepts and tools for sustainable development function as metrics, for instance life cycle assessment (LCA), ecological footprinting (EF), and Factor X. An environmental management system (EMS), like ISO 14001 or EMAS, is an administrative vehicle that should systematically align a firm's specific outcomes, activities and metrics with a general framework for sustainability. From a strategic point of view, metrics should measure alignment of activities with the principles contained in a framework for sustainability. A framework is not an alternative to concepts and tools for metrics. We need them all, because they represent different interrelated levels of strategic planning.     

Engineering education in sustainable development at Delft University of Technology

Is technology hindering sustainable development or can it be used to stimulate sustainable development? It is becoming clearer that technological innovation can be a useful tool for achieving sustainable development. That is, if the technologist is aware of the boundaries that should be considered when working in a sustainable way; and is knowledgeable about how to use the tools that can be used to work in a sustainable way. Therefore, making technology students aware of these boundaries and tools is an important educational task for universities. Such education should, in our view, include two subjects. (1) Giving them insight into the concepts of sustainable development. What is sustainable development? What are sustainability problems? What are the causes of these problems? Which strategies and approaches for solving them are available? (2) Giving them insight into the technology development process. How does the technology development process work? Which factors influence and steer it? What is the influence of technology on society and on sustainable development? The Technology Assessment group at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands has developed several courses on the combination of these two subjects, integrating research results in the fields of sustainable development and technology dynamics. In this article the contents of these courses are described.     

Re-considering product design: a practical “road-map” for integration of sustainability issues

The proliferation of sustainability assessment principles, strategies, actions, and tools has created confusion about pathways forward for companies. It is unclear how existing approaches are complementary or distinct. How does a company assess current products and materials? How could designers create more sustainable products? What criteria, principles, approaches, and tools should be applied? Why? Is there a practical “road map” to guide product designers and product development managers in integrating sustainability issues into their decision-making processes?This article builds on previous frameworks for understanding the interconnections between various assessment principles, strategies, actions, and tools related to industrial ecology, human and labor rights, and corporate social responsibility [Waage S, Geiser K, Irwin F, Weissman A, Bertolucci M, Fisk P, et al. Fitting together the building blocks for sustainability: a revised model for integrating ecological, social, and financial factors into business decision-making. Journal of Cleaner Production 2005;13(12):1117–206; Robèrt K-H, Schmidt-Bleek B, Aloisi de Larderel J, Basile G, Jansen JL, Kuehr R, et al. Strategic sustainable development—selection, design and synergies of applied tools. Journal of Cleaner Production 2002;10(3):197–214; Robèrt K-H. Tools and concepts for sustainable development, how do they relate to a framework for sustainable development, and to each other? Journal of Cleaner Production 2000;8(3):243–54]. Expanding on past work, this piece suggests a “road map” for application by product designers and product development managers. A four-phase process is offered for integrating systems and sustainability perspectives into product design, manufacturing, and delivery decisions.     

净初级生产力的人类占用:一种衡量区域可持续发展的新方法

可持续发展的生态评估是当前国际生态经济学与可持续发展研究的前沿问题之一,净初级生产力的人类占用从生态系统初级生产力的角度可以定量评估一个国家或地区发展的生态持续性程度,是近年来国际上一种重要的生物物理量衡量方法。论文简要介绍了净初级生产力人类占用的基本理论与核算方法,分析了该方法应用于区域可持续发展生态评估的基本原理。综合国外相关研究的最新进展,研究认为,定量表征区域可持续发展的生态上限是净初级生产力人类占用方法的最大优点,而该方法应用于区域可持续发展生态评估的不足之处则主要表现在关键参数的不确定性、可持续性的评价阈值、研究数据的缺乏和生物量进出口问题等4方面。