The sustainability of positive environments

Inspired by the emergence of the positive psychology (PP) movement, recent environmental psychology studies have identified a need for further inquiry into “positive environments” (PEs). Recognizing that PP has largely neglected the role of environmental factors in the appearance of positivity, this paper proposes the study of person–environment relations in order to explain human well-being, psychological growth, sustainable behaviors, and other psychological positive factors, in addition to studying the material and social well-being that a positive environment provides. The traditional view of environmental positivity (i.e., the environment as an inexhaustible and infinite source of resources that satisfy human needs) is contrasted against an ecological vision of PE in which the conservation of the quality of the environment is as important as the satisfaction of human needs. A definition of positive environment is presented and discussed, which conceives PE as a context that promotes individual and collective benefits and that also influences human predispositions to conserve—in the long run—the sociophysical structures on which life depends.     

The idea of weak sustainability is illegitimate

Since the introduction of the sustainability challenge, scientists disagree over the interpretation of the term “sustainability.” Weak and strong sustainability are the two main interpretations of sustainability, which are opposing each other. Some researchers stated that the interpretation of the term depends on the context; others disagree pointing out that it always implies the meaning of continuation. The term “sustainability” can be used as attribute, which adds a certain characteristic to the noun. If something can be attributed as being sustainable, it can also be unsustainable. The sustainability challenge consists of shifting from the current unsustainable towards a sustainable system. This paper outlines that the weak sustainability term is illegitimate, as it leads to a contradiction with the acknowledged assumption that the current state is unsustainable. This contradiction is revealed through an analysis of the occurrence of decoupling in agriculture: Agricultural land use could be decoupled from agricultural production, but only with the trade-off of massive increases in fertilizer, pesticide, energy and water usage. This paper outlines an inherent inconsistency within the ongoing discussion about the interpretation of sustainability. Through identifying the invalidity of the weak sustainability interpretation the focus can be shifted form the discourse to the sustainability challenge itself.     

The importance of human population to sustainability

Human population growth challenges efforts toward sustainability. People who are concerned about the environment, development, and sustainability are in a position to stress the importance of human population and to encourage people to choose small family size (Grossman, in Conserv Biol, 24(6), pp 1435–1436, 2010). Nevertheless, this vital subject has been treated infrequently in this journal. Of more than 500 articles published since its inception, only 15 have touched on human population, few have had population as a primary subject and only three have suggested that readers of this journal can and should have influence over population growth. This article concludes by suggesting ways that we who are concerned about sustainability should promote education about family planning and the advantages of small family size.     

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.     

Structuring sustainability science

It is urgent in science and society to address climate change and other sustainability challenges such as biodiversity loss, deforestation, depletion of marine fish stocks, global ill-health, land degradation, land use change and water scarcity. Sustainability science (SS) is an attempt to bridge the natural and social sciences for seeking creative solutions to these complex challenges. In this article, we propose a research agenda that advances the methodological and theoretical understanding of what SS can be, how it can be pursued and what it can contribute. The key focus is on knowledge structuring. For that purpose, we designed a generic research platform organised as a three-dimensional matrix comprising three components: core themes (scientific understanding, sustainability goals, sustainability pathways); cross-cutting critical and problem-solving approaches; and any combination of the sustainability challenges above. As an example, we insert four sustainability challenges into the matrix (biodiversity loss, climate change, land use changes, water scarcity). Based on the matrix with the four challenges, we discuss three issues for advancing theory and methodology in SS: how new synergies across natural and social sciences can be created; how integrated theories for understanding and responding to complex sustainability issues can be developed; and how theories and concepts in economics, gender studies, geography, political science and sociology can be applied in SS. The generic research platform serves to structure and create new knowledge in SS and is a tool for exploring any set of sustainability challenges. The combined critical and problem-solving approach is essential.     

The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research agenda

Over the last decade, sustainability science has been at the leading edge of widespread efforts from the social and natural sciences to produce use-inspired research. Yet, how knowledge generated by sustainability science and allied fields will contribute to transitions toward sustainability remains a critical theoretical and empirical question for basic and applied research. This article explores the limitations of sustainability science research to move the field beyond the analysis of problems in coupled systems to interrogate the social, political and technological dimensions of linking knowledge and action. Over the next decade, sustainability science can strengthen its empirical, theoretical and practical contributions by developing along four research pathways focused on the role of values in science and decision-making for sustainability: how communities at various scales envision and pursue sustainable futures; how socio-technical change can be fostered at multiple scales; the promotion of social and institutional learning for sustainable development.     

The implications of new information and communication technologies for sustainability

This paper discusses the relationship of new information and communication technologies (ICTs) and sustainable development. It deconstructs popular myths about a sustainable information society. One myth is that telework has reduced the need to travel and hence environmental pollution. The reality is that teleworkers make up only a small share of the total workforce, telework can generate new social relationships and hence the need for more travelling, work-related travel produces only a small amount of the total carbon dioxide emissions, and that the total distance travelled per employee is constantly rising. Another myth is that information economy is weightless and dematerialized which reduces environmental impacts. The energy and resource intensities of the ICT sector are indeed lower than the one of the total economy. The ICT sector also emits less CO₂ than the total economy. But the ICT sector constitutes only a small portion of the total value added and fossil fuel combustion is still the dominant activity of modern industrial economies. Some stakeholders argue that virtual products allow resource, energy, and transport savings. But burning digital music on compact discs and DVDs, printing digital articles and books, etc. results in rebound effects that cause new material and energy impacts, computers have a low life span of 2–3 years, reusable and upgradeable computers and computer equipment are hardly used and might not be as profitable as non-reusable ones, computers are consuming much energy. Alternatives such as energy consumption labels on ICTs and green ICTs that consume less energy contradict dominant economic interests. A sustainable information society is a society that makes use of ICTs and knowledge for fostering a good life for all human beings of current and future generations by strengthening biological diversity, technological usability, economic wealth for all, political participation of all, and cultural wisdom. Achieving a sustainable information society costs, it demands a conscious reduction of profits by not investing in the future of capital, but the future of humans, society, and nature.     

The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice

Sustainability principles are at the forefront of regional planning. In Hawaii, the movement toward “sustainability” gave way to revisiting the State Plan. This paper uses a case study of the Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Plan (Hawaii 2050) to illustrate how adopting popular notions of sustainability, without critical examination of how the respective policy frames diverge or interrelate, can lead to “tautological traps.” In the case of Hawaii 2050, the “triple-bottom-line” (embedded within sustainable development) became the dominant sustainability frame during the solicitation of public input and was thus used to guide the planning discourse. The application of triple-bottom-line concepts at the level of policy and planning led to a process that polarized economic and environmental interests. While the goals of sustainable development and the use of triple-bottom-line concepts are useful for planners, we argue that they should be applied within the parameters of ecological sustainability in a US regional context, lest resulting plans continue to allow the momentum of development to override ecological concerns.     

Systemic design for sustainability

How can we restore the ecological balance of our planet? The present article is aimed at contributing a structural framework for such a restoration. In the quest for ecological recovery, cybernetic–systemic approaches are in demand. They specialize in coping with complexity and offer new, transdisciplinary and non-reductionist ways of system design for renewing sustainability. This contribution uses a proven model from organizational cybernetics—the viable system model—as a frame for sustainable development. The model specifies how the viability of any human or social system can be achieved by means of clearly defined organizational structures. In accord with the logic of recursive organization inherent in the model, a proposal for a structural design aimed at enabling ecological recovery is formulated. That design includes all organizational levels of recursion, from individual to world. The implications of such a novel approach are far-reaching, and the impact powerful.     

Educational initiative of Osaka University in sustainability science: mobilizing science and technology towards sustainability

One of the most important and yet difficult challenges that modern societies face is how to mobilize science and technology (S&T) to minimize the impact of human activities on the Earth’s life support systems. As the establishment of inter-disciplinary education programs is necessary to design a unified vision towards understanding the complexity of human nature, the Research Institute for Sustainability Science (RISS) launched a new program on sustainability science in April 2008. The program expects to address the issue of how to use knowledge more effectively to understand the dynamic interactions between nature and human society. This paper first offers an overview of international and Japanese initiatives on sustainability education in which we highlight the uniqueness of the attempt by the Integrated Research System for Sustainability Science (IR3S). The paper then introduces the RISS program for sustainability science, addressing the principles and curriculum design of the program. The paper discusses the main problems and constraints faced when developing the program, such as institutional barriers in building a curriculum and obtaining cooperation from faculty. To challenge these barriers and limitations, the RISS uses the program as a platform to disseminate the idea of sustainability science across the university. This attempt helps us to obtain the continuing cooperation necessary to improve and maintain the program.

Macroethical systems and sustainability science

The Industrial Revolution and associated economic, demographic, technological and cultural changes have resulted in what many scientists are beginning to refer to as “the Anthropocene” – roughly translated, the Age of Humans. One response to this development is the nascent field of “sustainability science,” a multidisciplinary and systemic attempt to perceive and understand this new era. In doing so, however, methodologies and intellectual frameworks must be developed which extend beyond existing, dominantly reductionist, approaches, and are intended to address emergent characteristics of complex systems that integrate cultural and social systems, the engineered and built environment and natural systems. In the area of ethics, this requires developing a capability for “macroethics,” or ethical systems and processes capable of addressing issues arising from the emergent behavior of the complicated systems that characterize the Anthropocene.     

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.     

Assessing sustainability in nature-inspired design

In the field of sustainable product development, a new perspective for approaching sustainability has been advocated, challenging designers and engineers to aim beyond ‘reducing unsustainability’. Several design strategies – including Biomimicry and Cradle to Cradle – have been suggested for developing truly sustainable, or ‘beneficial’, products. But do these strategies help in developing such products, and how to assess their ‘sustainability’? Based on a review of the objectives in nature-inspired design, we argue that assessing environmental sustainability is not straightforward. Whereas both Biomimicry and Cradle to Cradle build on the perspective of ‘achieving sustainability’, current life-cycle assessment-based tools are geared towards reducing current impacts. As a consequence, existing tools are insufficiently equipped for the purpose of the assessment: they do not cover some of the main results that nature-inspired design is set out to accomplish. To be able to include these results, we propose two new constituents to current life-cycle-based product assessment: assessing against conditions of sustainability and assessing ‘achievement’, the extent to which these conditions of sustainability have been achieved. Furthermore, the product context needs to be included for assessing beneficial impacts. This article discusses how these constituents can contribute to an assessment tool that enables designers and engineers to assess the development of environmentally sustainable solutions.     

Reconnecting with nature for sustainability

Calls for humanity to ‘reconnect to nature’ have grown increasingly louder from both scholars and civil society. Yet, there is relatively little coherence about what reconnecting to nature means, why it should happen and how it can be achieved. We present a conceptual framework to organise existing literature and direct future research on human–nature connections. Five types of connections to nature are identified: material, experiential, cognitive, emotional, and philosophical. These various types have been presented as causes, consequences, or treatments of social and environmental problems. From this conceptual base, we discuss how reconnecting people with nature can function as a treatment for the global environmental crisis. Adopting a social–ecological systems perspective, we draw upon the emerging concept of ‘leverage points’—places in complex systems to intervene to generate change—and explore examples of how actions to reconnect people with nature can help transform society towards sustainability.