Is 'Sustainability' Sustainable?

Environmental awareness has grown since the 1970's and sustainability has continued to be a fashionable term competitively used in way to be at the forefront. It is an often used word along with 'green', 'environmental', 'smart' or 'eco-friendly' which are the most accepted common buzzwords that are subject to the same abuse. Usually these terms are indiscriminately used for self or product promotion, which can remove a positive association such as helping the environment, and used to boost profits or public profile leaving an individual feeling exploited rather than empowered. It is also a word that is often misinterpreted and used to encompass a variety of ideas that it starts to mean nothing. But does an umbrella term like sustainability make it unsuitable for use?

 

Source: xkcd.com

How is the word sustainability used? Note that the Oxford English Dictionary has no definition of the word itself but instead defines 'sustainable' as 'capable of being maintained at a certain rate or level' in terms of sustainable economic growth or in commitment towards sustainable development. Yet sustainability is listed as a noun, adjective and an adverb, so it is not surprising that the abundant use of the term proliferates politics, business and media to the point it becomes tired and uninspiring. If the more commonly accepted definition of sustainable development from the Brundtland Commission is applied, 'development which meets the needs of current generations without compromising the needs of future generations' it becomes broad enough to be used internationally but leaving it open to interpretation, raising more questions than answering problems of sustainability.

Determining a universal definition is further complicated by its coverage across dynamically interrelated issues. This means sustainability is problematic in terms of perception and circumstance as an environmentalist will focus on the environment element while developers on the development element. As an undefined concept, this can suggest a lack of homogeneity among the different discourses. One example is that resource extraction and use cross all spheres – environmental, economic and social so opinions on it will differ accordingly. Even if resource extraction and use is measured to be sustainable, by other measures it can represent what is unsustainable about society. Therefore continued use of 'sustainability' increases the concepts it covers which only lowers its perceived value and reputation.

Perhaps since the sustainability word has been so overused into banality it can provide opportunities for groups to carefully define the use of it, educate and communicate better. By careful use and reminders of what it means to the user, it can also be used to link different concepts and highlight their interdependency such as food security with land use, water use, emissions, soils etc. This is fundamentally what is important about sustainability, that it illustrates the need to connect concepts and actions in order to create a better and more equitable future. This is something that requires systemic thinking and separating issues only dilutes the ability to understand and solve them.

As a result of its wide and broad range of use, the definition of sustainability is likely to become less uniform as people will interpret information based on their own understanding of the terminology. Despite the lack of common understanding of sustainability and its concepts, the fact that it has become so mainstream shows that awareness is rising and that it can narrow the gap from theory into practice. The success of sustainability and its use of concepts shows that its progressive adoption is something people want. What really matters is how to find a way to define sustainability and its underlying values that is aligned and able to translate into a workable framework demonstrating what it means to be a sustainable society and how to get there.