Home  ›  Which Economic System Is Most Closely Associated With the Activities Shown in This Art Work?

Which Economic System Is Most Closely Associated With the Activities Shown in This Art Work?

Written By Saturday, 30 April 2022 Add Comment Edit

Capacity to endure in a relatively ongoing mode

Unremarkably used schematics of the tripartite description of sustainability: Left, typical representation of sustainability as three intersecting circles. Right, alternative depictions: literal 'pillars' and a concentric circles approach.[1]

Sustainability is a normative concept that stresses intergenerational disinterestedness and is usually considered to have iii dimensions (too chosen pillars): the environmental, economic and social dimension. The concept can be used to guide decisions at all scales: at the global, national and individual consumer level scale. A closely related and overlapping concept is that of sustainable development. Both terms are oftentimes used synonymously.[2] UNESCO formulated a distinction as follows: "Sustainability is often thought of every bit a long-term goal (i.e. a more than sustainable world), while sustainable evolution refers to the many processes and pathways to attain it."[3]

For many people, sustainability is closely associated with environmental issues, in which example it is referred to as "environmental sustainability". In fact, the modern environmental movement gave rise to a college prominence of the concept of environmental sustainability.[ii] The public is concerned about human impacts on the environs.[four] : 21 The most ascendant issues since about the year 2000 take been climate modify, loss of biodiversity and ecology pollution and land degradation (such as deforestation and general deposition of ecosystems).[v] [6] These bug are too included in the concept of planetary boundaries.[7]

The economic dimension of sustainability is as controversial every bit the concept of sustainability itself.[ane] This is partly because of the inherent contradictions betwixt "welfare for all" and environmental conservation.[8] In order to resolve this dilemma, the concept of eco-economic decoupling comes into play. The decoupling of economic growth from environmental deterioration is peculiarly difficult because environmental and social costs are not mostly borne by the entity that causes them, and are therefore not expressed in the market cost.[9] Normally, externalities are left to be addressed by regime policy. Some examples are: taxing the action (the polluter pays); subsidizing activities that have a positive ecology or social effect (rewarding stewardship); or outlawing the practice (legal limits on pollution).[9]

The social dimension of sustainability is the to the lowest degree defined and least understood dimension of sustainability.[ten] [eleven] Some academics take proposed additional dimensions of sustainability such equally institutional, cultural, and technical dimensions.[1] ·

The concept of sustainability has been criticized from dissimilar angles. Some run across it as paradoxical in that they see evolution as inherently unsustainable. Others are sobered by the lack of progress achieved so far,[12] [xiii] [14] and remember of "sustainability" as a buzzword.[i] Another criticism is that sustainability can exist described as an "exhausted roadmap" given that our consumer-oriented societies are socially and ecologically self-destructive.[15] [xvi]

Overview [edit]

Sustainability Venn diagram where "sustainability" is thought of as the area where the 3 dimensions overlap.

Previous use of the term [edit]

Originally, "sustainability" meant making only such utilise of natural, renewable resources that people could continue to rely on their yields in the long term.[17] [18] The concept of sustainability, or Nachhaltigkeit in German, can be traced back to Hans Carl von Carlowitz (1645–1714), and was applied to forestry (now: sustainable forest management).[19] He used this term in the sense of a long-term responsible utilize of a natural resources in 1713 in his piece of work Silvicultura oeconomica.[20]

Still, the idea itself goes back to times immemorial, equally communities take e'er worried almost the chapters of their environment to sustain them in the long term. Many ancient cultures had traditions restricting the apply of natural resources, e.k. the Māori of New Zealand,[21] the peoples of coastal British Columbia, Indonesia, Oceania, India and Republic of mali.[22]

Etymology [edit]

The term sustainability is derived from the Latin sustinere (tenere, to concur; sub, under). "To sustain" can mean to maintain, support, uphold or endure.[23] [24] The original semantic meaning of sustainability and of "to sustain" refers to the ability to proceed over a long period of fourth dimension.

Mod utilise of the term [edit]

Modern utilise of the term "sustainability" was strongly influenced by the 1983 UN Commission on Environs and Development, also known every bit the Brundtland Commission. In the commission's 1987 study titled Our Mutual Time to come (too known as the Brundtland Written report), sustainable development is defined as development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to see their ain needs."[25] [26] The report helped bring "sustainability" into the mainstream policy discourse and popularize the concept of "sustainable development".[1]

The study states that environs and development are inseparable, when working for sustainability. Farther, sustainable development is a global concept that links ecology and social issues and is equally important for developing countries and industrialized countries:

The 'surround' is where nosotros all live; and 'evolution' is what we all practise in attempting to meliorate our lot within that dwelling. The two are inseparable. [...] We came to run into that a new development path was required, one that sustained human progress not only in a few pieces for a few years, but for the entire planet into the afar hereafter. Thus 'sustainable evolution' becomes a goal not just for the 'developing' nations, but for industrial ones as well.

— Our Common Future (also known as the Brundtland Report), [25] : Foreword and Section I.1.10

Sustainability is regarded as a "normative concept".[27] : 26 [28] [29] This can exist illustrated as follows: "The quest for sustainability involves connecting what is known through scientific study to applications in pursuit of what people want for the future".[29] Important considerations that are linked to the application of the sustainability concept include: Choices matter (i.e. "It is not possible to sustain everything, everywhere, forever."); sustainability is a normative concept (this means sustainability is connected to "what nosotros meet as desirable"); sustainability is a fuzzy or vague concept; scale matters, in both space and fourth dimension; place matters; systems thinking is an organizing concept; limits exist (see planetary boundaries); sustainability is interconnected with other essential concepts (e.one thousand. resilience, adaptive chapters, and vulnerability); modify is an essential consideration and challenge for sustainability.[29]

Relationship with the concept of sustainable development [edit]

The terms "sustainability" and "sustainable development" are closely related and are oftentimes used synonymously.[2] Both terms are intrinsically linked with the "three dimensions of sustainability" concept.[1] One distinction that can be made is that sustainability is a general concept, whereas sustainable development is a policy.

UNESCO formulates the human relationship betwixt sustainability and sustainable development equally follows: "Sustainability is often thought of as a long-term goal (i.eastward. a more sustainable world), while sustainable development refers to the many processes and pathways to achieve it."[3]

Sustainable development was first institutionalized with the Rio Procedure initiated at the 1992 Globe Elevation in Rio de Janeiro. In 2015 the Un Full general Assembly adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and explained how the goals are integrated and indivisible to reach sustainable evolution at the global level.[1]

Three main dimensions of sustainability [edit]

Development of iii pillars [edit]

A diagram indicating the relationship between the "three pillars of sustainability", in which both economy and society are constrained by environmental limits.[thirty] This concentric circle diagram also emphasizes a hierarchy.

Three different areas (too called dimensions or pillars) of sustainability are commonly distinguished: the environmental, the social, and the economic. Near concepts of sustainability share this understanding, even though they might differ in the details. Several terms are in use for this concept in the literature: authors speak of three interconnected pillars, dimensions, components, stool legs, aspects, perspectives, factors or goals.[1] They are used interchangeably.[one] For example, the 2005 World Summit Effect certificate used the term "aspects".[31] Nevertheless, the stardom itself is rarely being questioned. The emergence of the iii-pillar paradigm has trivial theoretical foundation nor a theoretically rigorous description: It gradually emerged without a single point of origin.[1] [32]

The Brundtland written report from 1987 emphasized that surroundings and development should be regarded inseparable. Furthermore, the Calendar 21 from 1992 explicitly talks about economic, social and ecology dimensions equally follows:[33] : eight.6

Countries could develop systems for monitoring and evaluation of progress towards achieving sustainable development by adopting indicators that measure changes across economic, social and environmental dimensions.

The "Calendar 2030" conceived the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with their 169 targets as balancing "the three dimensions of sustainable evolution, the economical, social and environmental."[34]

Environmental sustainability [edit]

The principle of sustainability (with a focus on the environmental dimension and forestry) was kickoff formulated in writing in 1713 past Hans Carl von Carlowitz (commemorative plaque with quote).

The increasing environmental pollution in the 1960s and 1970s led to growing environmental concern, eastward.g. Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring in 1962;[35] establishment of the Club of Rome in 1968; establishment of Greenpeace in 1971. Sensation of pollution provided the footing for what was later discussed equally sustainable development. This process began with concern for environmental problems (natural resource and human being environment) in the 1970s, and was later extended to all the systems that support life on World.[4] : 31

While environmental pollution is not a new miracle it remained a local or regional business organization for most of man history. This changed in the 20th century when the awareness of the global grapheme of environmental issues increased.[4] : 5 The harmful effect and global spread of pesticides like Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane was first discussed in the 1960s.[35] In the 1970s it was adamant that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) deplete the Earth'southward ozone layer. This led to the de facto-ban of CFCs with the Montreal Protocol in 1987.[27] : 146

The effect of greenhouse gases on the global climate was discussed by Arrhenius in the early on 20th century (see also history of climatic change scientific discipline).[36] However, climate change became a hot topic in the academic and political discourse simply after the establishment of the IPCC in 1988 and the UNFCCC in 1992.

In 1972, the United nations held its starting time conference on environmental bug. The UN Briefing on the Human Surroundings stated the importance of the protection and improvement of the homo surround.[37] : 3 Furthermore, the written report emphasized the demand to protect wildlife and its habitat and to prevent pollution:[37] : iv

The natural resources of the earth, including the air, water, land, flora and fauna and [...] natural ecosystems must be safeguarded for the benefit of present and future generations through careful planning or management, as appropriate.

In 2000, the UN launched 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), to be achieved past the global community by 2015. Goal seven was to "ensure ecology sustainability", nonetheless without mentioning the concepts of social or economic sustainability.[1]

The public discussion of the environmental dimension of sustainability oftentimes revolves around prevailing problems of the time. The well-nigh dominant bug since about the yr 2000 have been climatic change, loss of biodiversity and environmental pollution and land degradation (such as deforestation and general deposition of ecosystems).[5] [6] The public is concerned about human impacts on the surround, such every bit impacts on the temper, land and water resources.[4] : 21 These issues are also included in the concept of planetary boundaries.[7]

The overall impact of humans' activities not only on the biosphere simply even on the geological germination of the Earth led Paul Crutzen to speak of the current geological epoch every bit the Anthropocene.[38]

Measuring human impacts on the environment [edit]

Different ways have been suggested to measure humans' impact, east.one thousand. ecological footprint, ecological debt, carrying capacity, sustainable yield, I = PAT. The affect of man activeness on the global ecosystems can attain tipping points beyond which irreversible harmful developments will be triggered (encounter e.thousand. tipping points in the climate system). This is the thought behind the concept of planetary boundaries, a concept which was introduced by a grouping of scientists led past Johan Rockström from the Stockholm Resilience Centre in 2009.[39]

The planetary boundary concept holds that humanity must not allow critical thresholds in the earth system to exist exceeded considering that will sharply increment the likelihood of irreversible harmful effects for the earth's ecosystems. The planetary boundaries include: climatic change, biodiversity loss (changed in 2015 to "change in biosphere integrity"), biogeochemical (nitrogen and phosphorus), bounding main acidification, land employ, freshwater, ozone depletion, atmospheric aerosols, chemical pollution (changed in 2015 to "Introduction of novel entities"), for which control variables have been suggested in 2022.[vii] [twoscore]

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment from 2005 measured 24 ecosystem services and concluded that simply four take shown improvement over the final 50 years, while 15 are in serious decline and v are in a precarious condition.[41] : 6–nineteen Healthy ecosystems are important because they provide vital appurtenances and services to humans and other organisms.

Economic sustainability [edit]

To some, the economical dimension of sustainability is as controversial as the concept of sustainability itself.[1] If the term "development" in sustainable development is understood in economic terms ("economical development") or even identified with economical growth, the notion of a sustainable development tin can get a way of whitewashing an ecologically subversive economic organization.[42] [43] [44] This is because of the inherent contradictions between "welfare for all" and environmental conservation.[8]

On the other manus, especially for less developed countries, economic development is an imperative. Target ane of Sustainable Evolution Goal eight calls for economic growth, which is a driving force for societal progress and well-beingness. Target 8.1 is: "Sustain per capita economic growth in accordance with national circumstances and, in particular, at least seven per cent gross domestic product growth per annum in the least developed countries".[45] Regardless of differences in the understanding of the concept of sustainability, it is clear that humanity volition have to resolve the issue of how societal progress (potentially past economic development) can be reached without boosted strain on the environs. Accordingly, in 2011 UNEP cited the big challenge to social club to "expand economic activities" while at the same fourth dimension reducing the use of natural resources and reducing the environmental impacts of economical activities.[46] : viii

High life expectancy can be achieved with low COii emissions, for example in Republic of costa rica, a country which also ranks high on the Happy Planet Index.

Decoupling economic growth from environmental deterioration [edit]

In lodge to resolve this dilemma, the concept of eco-economical decoupling comes into play. This means "using less resource per unit of economic output and reducing the environmental bear upon of whatever resource that are used or economic activities that are undertaken" [46] : 8 Force per unit area on the environment can be measured past the intensity of pollutants emitted. Decoupling can and so be measured past following changes in the emission intensity associated with economic output.[46] Examples of absolute long-term decoupling are rare, only recently some industrialized countries have decoupled GDP growth from both production and, to a lesser extent, consumption-based CO2 emissions.[47] Only even in this example decoupling lone is not sufficient and needs to be complemented by "sufficiency-oriented strategies and strict enforcement of absolute reduction targets".[47] : 1

The decoupling of economic growth from environmental deterioration is peculiarly difficult because environmental and social costs are not generally borne by the entity that causes them, and are therefore not expressed in the marketplace price.[9] For instance, the cost of packaging is factored into the price of a product, but the cost of disposing of that packaging is non factored in. In economic science, such factors are considered externalities, in this case a negative externality.[48] Companies do not have an incentive to reduce packaging or to choose recyclable materials considering they aren't required to pay for disposal. Unremarkably, externalities are left to be addressed by government activity. Some examples are: taxing the activity (the polluter pays principle); subsidizing activities that have a positive ecology or social effect (rewarding stewardship); or outlawing the practice (legal limits on pollution).[9]

Government activeness [edit]

Without government activeness, natural resources are often over-exploited and destroyed in the long-term. See for example this statement in a textbook on natural resources and environmental economics in its 4th edition: "Nobody who has seriously studied the bug believes that the economy's relationship to the natural surroundings can be left entirely to market forces."[49] : 15

Related to this aspect, Elinor Ostrom (winner of the 2009 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economical Sciences) stated that the choice should not be limited to either the market place or the national regime, and that local governance (or cocky-governance) tin in fact exist a suitable third selection.[l] Her empirical work involved field studies on how people in small, local communities manage shared natural resources.[51] She showed that over time, communities using natural resources such as pastures, fishing waters and forests can establish rules for use and maintenance that can lead to both economic and ecological sustainability.[50] An important requirement for success of self-governance is to have groups in which participants are frequently communicating. In this case groups tin can manage the usage of common goods without overexploitation.[27] : 117 Based on Ostrom'due south work, it has been pointed out that: "Common-pool resource today are overcultivated because the unlike agents practice non know each other and cannot straight communicate with i some other."[27] : 117

Tools [edit]

The field of ecology economics has proposed unlike methods for calculating the cost (or price) associated with the use of public natural resources. For example, the harm to ecosystems and the loss of biodiversity has been calculated in the project The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) from 2007 to 2011.[52]

Sustainability economics means taking a long-term view of human welfare. I fashion of doing this is by considering the social discount charge per unit, i.eastward. the charge per unit past which future costs and benefits should exist discounted when making decisions about the hereafter. The more one is concerned about future generations, the lower the social disbelieve rate should be.[53] Another method is to quantify the services that ecosystems provide to humankind and put an economic value on them, so that environmental impairment may be assessed against perceived short-term welfare benefits. For instance, according to the World Economic Forum, half of the global Gdp is strongly or moderately dependent on nature. Also, for every dollar spent on nature restoration there is a profit of at least 9 dollars.[54]

The doughnut model, with indicators to what extent the ecological ceilings are overshot and social foundations are not met even so

In recent years, the concept of doughnut economics has been adult past the British economist Kate Raworth to integrate social and ecology sustainability into economic thinking. The social dimension is here portrayed every bit a minimum standard to which a society should aspire, whereas an outer limit is imposed past the carrying capacity of the planet.[55]

[edit]

The social dimension of sustainability is the least defined and to the lowest degree understood dimension of sustainability.[ten] [eleven] [56] A possible definition is that a socially sustainable society should ensure that people are non hindered by structural obstacles in the areas of health, influence, competence, impartiality and meaning-making.[57] Despite this anchoring of the social dimension of sustainability in the Brundtland report, "social sustainability" can exist addressed in different ways. Some scholars place social issues at the very centre of sustainability discussions.[58]

Some scholars suggest that all of the domains of sustainability are social: including ecological, economic, political and cultural sustainability. These domains of social sustainability are all dependent upon the relationship between the social and the natural, with the "ecological domain" divers as man embeddedness in the environment. In these terms, social sustainability encompasses all human activities.[59] It is not just relevant to the focused intersection of economics, the environment and the social.[threescore]

Broad-based strategies for more than sustainable social systems include: improved education and the political empowerment of women, especially in developing countries; greater regard for social justice, notably equity betwixt rich and poor both within and between countries; and, perhaps most of all, intergenerational equity.[61]

Social sustainability is thought to lead to liveable communities which would be "equitable, various, connected and democratic and provide a proficient quality of life".[62]

Poverty [edit]

According to the Brundtland report, "poverty is a major cause and also effect of global environmental bug. It is therefore futile to attempt to deal with environmental issues without a broader perspective that encompasses the factors underlying globe poverty and international inequality."[25] : Department I.1.eight The report demands a new evolution path for sustained human progress and highlights that this is a goal for both the developing and the industrialized nations.[25] : Section I.1.10

UNEP and UNDP launched the Poverty-Surround Initiative in 2005, which aims at the triple vision of having neither whatsoever extreme poverty, nor greenhouse gas emissions nor internet natural asset loss which is proposed to guide the structural reform that will enable poor groups and countries to reach the SDGs at scale.[63] [64] : xi Such initiatives might be seen as a measure out to mitigate the merchandise-off between loftier ecological footprint and loftier status of economical development.[27] : 82

Relationship between the iii dimensions [edit]

Information technology has long been discussed what the relation between these 3 dimensions should exist: Proponents of a concept of "weak" sustainability presume that "natural capital" (or environmental resources) tin be replaced or substituted with "human being-fabricated capital".[65] This is because technological progress can in certain cases solve environmental problems. This applies for example to capturing emissions from combustion of fossil fuels, recycling minerals, reforresting forests and filtering polluted air.[66] The concept of "stiff sustainability" on the other hand states that nature (or "natural capital") provides some functions that are non replaceable past technology or "homo-fabricated capital".[67] Strong sustainability refers to resources that once lost cannot be recovered or repaired within a reasonable timescale, such every bit biodiversity or loss of certain species, pollination, fertile soils, assimilation chapters, clean air, clean water, climate regulation.

Even so, the concept of planetary boundaries which was kickoff proposed in 2009, identifies limits and emphasizes that there are accented thresholds of the conveying chapters of the planet which must not exist exceeded in social club to prevent irreversible harmful developments of the Globe organisation.[seven]

Also, with regards to the economic dimension of sustainability, this tin can be understood by making a distinction between weak versus potent sustainability.[68] In the onetime, loss of natural resources is compensated by an increment in homo capital. Potent sustainability applies where human and natural capital are complementary, but non interchangeable. Thus, the problem of deforestation in England due to demand for forest in shipbuilding and for charcoal in iron-making was solved when ships came to exist built of steel and coke replaced charcoal in iron-making – an example of weak sustainability. Prevention of biodiversity loss, which is an existential threat, is an example of the strong blazon. What is weak and what is potent depends partially on applied science and partially on ane's convictions.[68] Different policies and strategies are needed for the two types.

The notion of "trade-offs" between dissimilar dimensions, for example environmental management and economic growth is ofttimes discussed in the literature.[1] This may include discussions of the relative importance of the three dimensions or objectives. The language involved frequently invokes the need to "integrate", "remainder", and "reconcile" the pillars without necessarily articulating what this means in practice.[1]

Proposed boosted dimensions [edit]

Some sustainability experts and practitioners take proposed additional dimensions of sustainability, such as institutional, cultural, and technical dimensions.[1] Other frameworks bypass the compartmentalization of sustainability completely.[1]

Cultural sustainability [edit]

Some academics and institutions (for example Calendar 21 for culture and the United Cities and Local Governments) have pointed out that a fourth dimension should be added to the dimensions of sustainability since the triple-bottom-line dimensions of economic, environmental and social do not seem to be enough to reflect the complexity of contemporary society.[70] This give-and-take points to the relation between culture and sustainable development through developing a solid cultural policy and advocating a cultural dimension in all public policies.

Another example of this 4-dimensional view was the Circles of Sustainability approach, which included cultural sustainability.[71]

Financial sustainability [edit]

There is also an stance that considers resources employ and financial sustainability as ii boosted pillars of sustainability.[72] In infrastructure projects, for instance, one must ask whether sufficient financing capability for maintenance exists.[72]

Critique [edit]

Impossible goal [edit]

The concepts of sustainability and sustainable development take been criticized from different angles. While some run into it as paradoxical and regard development as inherently unsustainable, others are sobered by the lack of progress which has been achieved so far.[12] [xiii] [14]

According to Dennis Meadows, 1 of the authors of the first report to the Club of Rome, chosen "The Limits to Growth", many people deceive themselves by using the Brundtland definition of sustainability.[42] This is because the needs of the present generation are actually non met today, and the economical activities to meet nowadays needs will substantially diminish the options of future generations.[73] [27] : 27 Another criticism is that the paradigm of sustainability is no longer suitable as a guide (or "road map") for transformation due to the fact that our societies are "socially and ecologically self-subversive consumer societies".[15]

Some scholars accept even proclaimed the end of the concept of sustainability due to the realities of the Anthropocene (unprecedented rates of biodiversity loss, exponential increases in per-capita resources consumption, and climate change).[74] Therefore, it might get impossible to pursue a goal of sustainability when faced with these complex, radical and dynamic issues.[74]

Unclear goals and operational targets [edit]

The Rio Protocol was a huge leap forward: for the outset time, the world agreed on a sustainability calendar. Nevertheless, a global consensus was facilitated by neglecting concrete goals and operational details. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) now have concrete targets (unlike the results from the Rio Process) only no methods for sanctions.[75] [27] : 137

Buzzword [edit]

"Sustainability" has a reputation equally a buzzword.[ane] [76] On the other mitt information technology has been pointed out that "sustainability will be vague and contested but non meaningless".[77] As sustainability is a concept that provides a normative structure (describing what human society regards every bit proficient or desirable), a specific definition may never exist possible.[77]

Measurement [edit]

Sustainability measurement is the quantitative basis for the informed direction of sustainability.[78] The metrics used for the measurement of sustainability (involving the sustainability of environmental, social and economic domains, both individually and in diverse combinations) are still evolving: they include indicators, benchmarks, audits, sustainability standards and certification systems like Fairtrade and Organic, indexes and accounting, also as cess, appraisal[79] and other reporting systems. They are applied over a wide range of spatial and temporal scales.[80] [81] Some of the widely used sustainability measures include corporate sustainability reporting, Triple Bottom Line bookkeeping, Earth Sustainability Society, and estimates of the quality of sustainability governance for individual countries using the Environmental Sustainability Alphabetize and Environmental Operation Index. An alternative approach, measures sustainable evolution using the UN's Man Development Index and the ecological footprints[82] to visually rails sustainable development[83] over fourth dimension.

Barriers [edit]

The political goal of sustainability is 1 of the most comprehensive and most ambitious global goals in man history, the 2030 Calendar is "of unprecedented scope and significance".[34] : three/35 Due to the high complexity of this goal, at that place are many reasons why sustainability is then difficult to accomplish – this is the idea for the written report of "sustainability barriers".[27] [84]

Some sustainability barriers are rooted in nature and its complication (everything is related) or in the human being condition called "value-activity gap", significant nosotros often do not act according to our convictions. These barriers take been called "intrinsic" to the concept of sustainability as such.[27]

Other barriers are "extrinsic" to the concept of sustainability which means they could in principle exist overcome, e.m. past putting a price tag on the consumption of public goods.[27] : 35 A number of extrinsic sustainability barriers are related to the dominant institutional frameworks: market mechanisms neglect for public goods, legal frameworks rarely consider questions of intergenerational justice.

Furthermore, there are several barriers related to the difficulties of implementing sustainability policies. There are merchandise-offs to be made between objectives of environmental policies (such as nature conservation) and those focused on economical development (such every bit poverty reduction).[84] [27] : 65 In that location are likewise merchandise-offs between short-term profit and long-term viability. For instance the question might arise: "Is information technology more sustainable to invest in protecting the rainforest or to convalesce the hunger of people in need?".[27] : 66

Barriers working against sustainability can besides exist rooted in the Zeitgeist, such as consumerism and brusk-termism.[27] : 205

Lack of effective governance for global issues [edit]

Questions of global concern are difficult to tackle because global issues telephone call for global solutions for which the existing global organizations (e.m. Un, WTO) are not sufficiently equipped: they have inappreciably any sanctioning mechanisms to enforce existing global regulation, they are not always accustomed by all nations (eastward.g. International Criminal Court), their agendas are non aligned (eastward.chiliad. UNEP, UNDP and WTO), or they are being accused of nepotism and mismanagement (eastward.1000. UN).[27] : 135–145  Further challenges that multilateral international agreements, treaties and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) are confronted with and which event in barriers to sustainability include: Dependence on voluntary commitments (for instance Nationally Determined Contributions for climate action), existing (national or international) regulation not effectively enforced, regulatory white spaces – control deficits for international actors (e.1000. multi-national enterprises), international public organizations lacking legitimacy and republic.[27] : 135

Approaches by different stakeholders [edit]

Action principles [edit]

A framework has been proposed to explain how actors need to behave in gild to facilitate more sustainable societies, post-obit four groups of principles:[27] : 206

  • Nature-related principles: Decarbonize; reduce human environmental touch on by efficiency, sufficiency and consistency; be "cyberspace-positive" – build up ecology and societal capital letter; adopt local, seasonal, plant-based and labor-intensive; polluter-pays principle; precautionary principle; appreciate and gloat the beauty of nature
  • Personal principles (due east.g. practise contemplation, apply policies cautiously, celebrate frugality)
  • Lodge-related principles: Grant the least privileged the greatest support; seek mutual understanding, trust and multiple wins; strengthen social cohesion and collaboration; engage the stakeholders; foster instruction – share knowledge and collaborate.
  • Systems-related principles: Apply systems thinking, foster diverseness, increase transparency of the publicly relevant, maintain or increase option diversity.

Authorities policies [edit]

One attempt to express human impact on the environment mathematically was developed in the 1970s and is called the "I = PAT formula".[85] This formulation attempts to explain human consumption in terms of three components: population numbers, levels of consumption (which it terms "abundance", although the usage is unlike), and impact per unit of resources use (which is termed "technology", because this bear upon depends on the applied science used). The equation is expressed to say that environmental affect is proportional to population, abundance and engineering.[85]

Strategies for reaching sustainability tin can generally be divided into the following three categories (almost governments and international organizations that aim to achieve sustainability apply all three approaches, though they may disagree on which deserves priority):

  1. Abundance: Many believe that sustainability cannot exist achieved without reducing consumption. This theory is represented most conspicuously in the idea of a steady-state economy, meaning an economy without growth. Methods in this category include for case increasing free energy efficiency. In 2020, scientific inquiry published by the Earth Economic Forum determined that affluence is the biggest threat to sustainability.[86]
  2. Population: Others call up that the nearly effective means of achieving sustainability is population control, for instance by improving access to birth control and education (specially education for girls).[87]
  3. Technology: Still others concord that the most promising path to sustainability is new technology.[88] This theory may be seen as a form of technological optimism. One popular tactic in this category is transitioning to renewable energy.[89] Other methods to attain sustainability that are associated with this theory include climate engineering or genetic engineering science (GMO, Genetically modified organism).

Businesses [edit]

Sustainable business practices integrate ecological concerns with social and economic ones (i.east., the triple bottom line).[90] [91] The idea of sustainability equally a concern opportunity has led to the germination of organizations such every bit the Sustainability Consortium of the Club for Organizational Learning,[92] the Sustainable Business Establish,[93] and the World Business Council for Sustainable Evolution.[94] Supply chain sustainability refers to companies' efforts to consider the environmental and homo touch of their products' journey through the supply chain, from raw materials sourcing to production, storage, delivery and every transportation link in between.

Problematic aspects of "sustainable business" initiatives include:

  • Greenwashing is the practice of deceptive marketing by a company or organization and so they appear more than environmentally friendly or more ecological (more than natural, healthier, costless of chemicals, recyclable, less wasteful of natural resources...) when in practice its activities pollute the environs.[95] This practice is increasingly being called into question by investors as it exposes them to risk.[96]
  • Ecolabelling is a voluntary method of environmental performance certification and labelling that is attached to food and consumer products. Eco-label reliability is increasingly existence questioned.[97] The most apparent eco-labels are the ones that are adult with close participation from all relevant stakeholders.[98]

[edit]

In that location are many warning publications or letters from the scientific community virtually the growing threat to sustainability, in detail with regards to environmental sustainability and - more recently - climate alter. The World Scientists' Alert to Humanity in 1992 begins with: "Human beings and the natural world are on a standoff grade." About 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including about Nobel Prize laureates in the sciences, signed it. The letter mentions severe harm to atmosphere, oceans, ecosystems, soil productivity, and more. It warned humanity that life on earth as nosotros know it can get impossible, and if humanity wants to prevent the damage, some steps demand to be taken: amend use of resources, carelessness of fossil fuels, stabilization of human population, elimination of poverty and more than.[99]

Further prominent warning letters or reports rom the scientific community include:

  • In 2017, scientists wrote a second alert to humanity. In this alarm, the scientists mention some positive trends like slowing deforestation, merely despite this, they merits that except ozone depletion, none of the problems mentioned in the first alarm received an adequate response. The scientists called to reduce the use of fossil fuels, meat, and other resources and to stabilize the population. It was signed past xv,364 scientists from 184 countries, making it the letter with the most scientist signatures in history.[100]
  • In 2019, more than eleven,000 scientists from 153 countries published a alphabetic character in which they warn about serious threats to sustainability from climatic change unless large changes in policies happen. The scientists declared "climate emergency" and called to end overconsumption, move away from fossil fuels, eat less meat, stabilize the population, and more.[101]

Religious communities [edit]

Religious leaders and teachings take stressed the importance of caring for nature and the sustainability of the surround

For case, in 2015 over 150 leaders from various faiths issued a joint statement to the United nations Climate Summit in Paris 2015.[102] In information technology they reiterated a argument made in the interfaith top in New York made in September 2014: Nosotros every bit religious leaders: "stand together to express deep concern for the consequences of climate modify on the earth and its people, all entrusted, as our faiths reveal, to our common intendance. Climatic change is indeed a threat to life. Life is a precious gift we have received and that nosotros demand to care for".[103]

Individuals [edit]

Moving towards sustainability tin involve social challenges that require individuals to change their lifestyles and practice ethical consumerism. Sustainable living approaches tin reduce ecology impacts past altering the congenital environment to make cities more sustainable. That could include sustainable ship and zero emission housing too as sustainable architecture and circular catamenia land utilise direction.[ citation needed ]

See also [edit]

  • Listing of sustainability topics
  • Outline of sustainability

References [edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e f chiliad h i j k 50 m north o p q Purvis, Ben; Mao, Yong; Robinson, Darren (2019). "Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins". Sustainability Science. fourteen (3): 681–695. doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5. ISSN 1862-4065. CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is bachelor nether a Artistic Commons Attribution four.0 International License
  2. ^ a b c "Sustainability". Encyclopædia Britannica . Retrieved 31 March 2022.
  3. ^ a b "Sustainable Development". UNESCO. 3 Baronial 2015. Retrieved 20 January 2022. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-condition (link)
  4. ^ a b c d Cracking transition : the promise and lure of the times ahead. Paul Raskin, Global Scenario Group. Boston: Stockholm Environment Institute. 2002. ISBN0-9712418-ane-3. OCLC 49987854. {{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  5. ^ a b Diamond, Jared Thou. (2011). Collapse: how societies choose to neglect or succeed. New York. ISBN978-1-101-50196-2. OCLC 748370928.
  6. ^ a b UNEP (2021). "Making Peace With Nature". UNEP - UN Environs Program . Retrieved xxx March 2022.
  7. ^ a b c d Steffen, Will; Rockström, Johan; Cornell, Sarah; Fetzer, Ingo; Biggs, Oonsie; Folke, Carl; Reyers, Belinda. "Planetary Boundaries - an update". Stockholm Resilience Heart . Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  8. ^ a b Kuhlman, Tom; Farrington, John (2010). "What is Sustainability?". Sustainability. 2 (11): 3436–3448. doi:ten.3390/su2113436. ISSN 2071-1050.
  9. ^ a b c d Jaeger, William Chiliad. (2005). Environmental economics for tree huggers and other skeptics. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN978-1-4416-0111-7. OCLC 232157655.
  10. ^ a b Boyer, Robert H. West.; Peterson, Nicole D.; Arora, Poonam; Caldwell, Kevin (2016). "Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Frontward". Sustainability. 8 (ix): 878. doi:ten.3390/su8090878.
  11. ^ a b Doğu, Feriha Urfalı; Aras, Lerzan (2019). "Measuring Social Sustainability with the Developed MCSA Model: Güzelyurt Case". Sustainability. 11 (nine): 2503. doi:10.3390/su11092503. ISSN 2071-1050.
  12. ^ a b Brownish, James H. (1 October 2015). "The Oxymoron of Sustainable Evolution". BioScience. 65 (10): 1027–1029. doi:x.1093/biosci/biv117.
  13. ^ a b "Sustainability and Sustainable Development". Circular Ecology . Retrieved 17 July 2018.
  14. ^ a b Williams, Colin C; Millington, Andrew C (June 2004). "The various and contested meanings of sustainable development". The Geographical Journal. 170 (2): 99–104. doi:10.1111/j.0016-7398.2004.00111.x. S2CID 143181802.
  15. ^ a b Blühdorn (2017). "Post-commercialism, post-growth, mail-consumerism? Eco-political hopes beyond sustainability". Global Soapbox. seven (ane): 42–61. doi:10.1080/23269995.2017.1300415. ISSN 2043-7897.
  16. ^ Kevlar (2014). "Eco-Economics On The Horizon". A whitepaper that examines the mindset required by civilisation if humanity is to reach sustainability with the biosphere
  17. ^ "Sustainability Theories". World Bounding main Review. Retrieved xx June 2019. The concept of 'sustainability' comes from forestry and originally meant something like: using natural resources mindfully so that the supply never runs out.
  18. ^ Compare: "sustainability". Oxford English language Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Printing. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.) The English-language word had a legal technical sense from 1835 and a resource-management connotation from 1953.
  19. ^ "Hans Carl von Carlowitz and Sustainability". Environment and Gild Portal . Retrieved xx June 2019.
  20. ^ Dresden, SLUB. "Sylvicultura Oeconomica, Oder Haußwirthliche Nachricht und Naturmäßige Anweisung Zur Wilden Baum-Zucht". digital.slub-dresden.de (in German language). Retrieved 28 March 2022.
  21. ^ UNEP (26 April 2017). "Indigenous people and nature: a tradition of conservation". Retrieved 30 August 2021.
  22. ^ Gadgil, M.; Berkes, F. (1991). "Traditional Resource Management Systems". Resources Direction and Optimization. 8: 127–141.
  23. ^ Harper, Douglas. "sustain". Online Etymology Lexicon.
  24. ^ Onions, Charles, T. (ed) (1964). The Shorter Oxford English language Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 2095.
  25. ^ a b c d United Nations General Assembly (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Mutual Hereafter. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment.
  26. ^ United nations General Assembly (xx March 1987). "Report of the World Commission on Surround and Development: Our Common Future; Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment; Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development; Paragraph ane". Un General Assembly. Retrieved one March 2010. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  27. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k fifty grand n o p Berg, Christian (2020). Sustainable action : overcoming the barriers. Abingdon, Oxon. ISBN978-0-429-57873-1. OCLC 1124780147.
  28. ^ Scoones, Ian (2016). "The Politics of Sustainability and Development". Annual Review of Environs and Resource. 41 (1): 293–319. doi:x.1146/annurev-environ-110615-090039. ISSN 1543-5938.
  29. ^ a b c Harrington, Lisa M. Butler (2016). "Sustainability Theory and Conceptual Considerations: A Review of Primal Ideas for Sustainability, and the Rural Context". Papers in Practical Geography. 2 (iv): 365–382. doi:10.1080/23754931.2016.1239222. ISSN 2375-4931. S2CID 132458202.
  30. ^ Scott Cato, Thou. (2009). Dark-green Economics. London: Earthscan, pp. 36–37. ISBN 978-1-84407-571-three.
  31. ^ "Resolution adopted past the Full general Assembly on 16 September 2005, 60/one. 2005 Globe Summit Outcome" (PDF). United Nations Full general Assembly. 2005. Retrieved 17 January 2022. {{cite spider web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  32. ^ Aachener Stiftung Kathy Beys, 2005-2022 (13 November 2015). "Lexikon der Nachhaltigkeit | Definitionen | Nachhaltigkeit Definition". Lexikon der Nachhaltigkeit (in German). Retrieved xix January 2022. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors listing (link)
  33. ^ a b "Agenda 21" (PDF). United Nations Conference on Surround & Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992. 1992. Retrieved 17 Jan 2022. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-condition (link)
  34. ^ a b United nations (2015) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, Transforming our earth: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/ane Archived 28 November 2020 at the Wayback Motorcar)
  35. ^ a b Carson, Rachel (2002) [1st. Pub. Houghton Mifflin, 1962]. Silent Spring. Mariner Books. ISBN978-0-618-24906-0.
  36. ^ Arrhenius, Svante (1896). "XXXI. On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground". The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science. 41 (251): 237–276. doi:x.1080/14786449608620846. ISSN 1941-5982.
  37. ^ a b c UN (1973) Written report of the United nations Conference on the Human Environment, A/CONF.48/14/Rev.i, Stockholm, 5–16 June 1972
  38. ^ Crutzen, Paul J. (2002). "Geology of mankind". Nature. 415 (6867): 23. Bibcode:2002Natur.415...23C. doi:10.1038/415023a. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 11780095. S2CID 9743349.
  39. ^ "X years of ix planetary boundaries". Stockholm Resilience Centre . Retrieved xix April 2020.
  40. ^
  41. ^ Millennium Ecosystem Cess (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis (PDF). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
  42. ^ a b Zukunftsstreit (in German language). Wilhelm Krull, Volkswagenstiftung (1st ed.). Weilerwist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. 2000. ISBN3-934730-17-5. OCLC 52639118. {{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  43. ^ Redclift, Michael (2005). "Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age". Sustainable Development. 13 (4): 212–227. doi:10.1002/sd.281. ISSN 0968-0802.
  44. ^ Daly, Herman Due east. (1996). Beyond growth : the economics of sustainable development (PDF). Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN0-8070-4708-ii. OCLC 33946953.
  45. ^ Un (2017) Resolution adopted by the Full general Assembly on six July 2017, Work of the Statistical Committee pertaining to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Evolution (A/RES/71/313)
  46. ^ a b c Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economical growth, A Report of the Working Group on Decoupling to the International Resource Console. Fischer-Kowalski, Grand., Swilling, M., von Weizsäcker, East.U., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, Y., Crane, W., Krausmann, F., Eisenmenger, N., Giljum, S., Hennicke, P., Romero Lankao, P., Siriban Manalang, A., Sewerin, S.
  47. ^ a b Haberl, Helmut; Wiedenhofer, Dominik; Virág, Doris; Kalt, Gerald; Plank, Barbara; Brockway, Paul; Fishman, Tomer; Hausknost, Daniel; Krausmann, Fridolin; Leon-Gruchalski, Bartholomäus; Mayer, Andreas (2020). "A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resources use and GHG emissions, role II: synthesizing the insights". Environmental Research Letters. fifteen (6): 065003. Bibcode:2020ERL....15f5003H. doi:x.1088/1748-9326/ab842a. ISSN 1748-9326. S2CID 216453887.
  48. ^ Arthur Cecil Pigou (1932) The Economics of Welfare (fourth ed.) London: Macmillan
  49. ^ Natural resource and environmental economics. Roger Perman, Roger Perman (fourth ed.). Harlow, Essex: Pearson Addison Wesley. 2011. ISBN978-0-321-41753-4. OCLC 704557307. {{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  50. ^ a b Anderies, John M.; Janssen, Marco A. (16 October 2012). "Elinor Ostrom (1933–2012): Pioneer in the Interdisciplinary Science of Coupled Social-Ecological Systems". PLOS Biology. 10 (10): e1001405. doi:ten.1371/journal.pbio.1001405. ISSN 1544-9173. PMC3473022.
  51. ^ "The Nobel Prize: Women Who Changed the World". thenobelprize.org . Retrieved 31 March 2022.
  52. ^ TEEB (2010), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB
  53. ^ Groth, Christian (2014). Lecture notes in Economical Growth, (mimeo), Chapter eight: Choice of social discount charge per unit. Copenhagen Academy.
  54. ^ UNEP, FAO (2020). UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. 48p. https://wedocs.unep.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/31813/ERDStrat.pdf?sequence=i&isAllowed=y
  55. ^ Raworth, Kate (2017). Doughnut economic science : vii ways to think similar a 21st-century economist. London. ISBN978-1-84794-138-1. OCLC 974194745.
  56. ^ Davidson, Marking (2010). "Social Sustainability and the City: Social sustainability and city". Geography Compass. 4 (seven): 872–880. doi:10.1111/j.1749-8198.2010.00339.x.
  57. ^ Missimer, Merlina; Robèrt, Karl-Henrik; Broman, Göran (2017). "A strategic approach to social sustainability – Part ii: a principle-based definition". Journal of Cleaner Product. 140: 42–52. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.059.
  58. ^ Boyer, Robert; Peterson, Nicole; Arora, Poonam; Caldwell, Kevin (2016). "Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Frontward". Sustainability. eight (nine): 878. doi:10.3390/su8090878. ISSN 2071-1050.
  59. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practise: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN9781315765747.
  60. ^ Liam Magee; Andy Scerri; Paul James; James A. Thom; Lin Padgham; Sarah Hickmott; Hepu Deng; Felicity Cahill (2013). "Reframing social sustainability reporting: Towards an engaged approach". Environment, Development and Sustainability. xv (1): 225–243. doi:10.1007/s10668-012-9384-2. S2CID 153452740.
  61. ^ Cohen, J.Due east. (2006). "Human being Population: The Next Half Century." In Kennedy D. (Ed.) Science Magazine's Land of the Planet 2006-vii. London: Isle Press, pp. xiii–21. ISBN 9781597266246.
  62. ^ "The Regional Institute - WACOSS Housing and Sustainable Communities Indicators Project". www.regional.org.au. 2012. Retrieved 26 Jan 2022.
  63. ^ "Un Surround | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative". Un Environment | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative . Retrieved 24 January 2022.
  64. ^ PEP (2016) Poverty-Environment Partnership Articulation Paper | June 2016 Getting to Zero - A Poverty, Surroundings and Climate Call to Action for the Sustainable Development Goals
  65. ^ Pearce, David W.; Atkinson, Giles D. (1993). "Capital theory and the measurement of sustainable development: an indicator of "weak" sustainability". Ecological Economics. 8 (2): 103–108. doi:10.1016/0921-8009(93)90039-nine.
  66. ^ Ayres, Robert; van den Berrgh, Jeroen; Gowdy, John (2001). "Potent versus Weak Sustainability". Environmental Ethics. 23 (ii): 155–168. doi:ten.5840/enviroethics200123225. ISSN 0163-4275.
  67. ^ Cabeza Gutés, Maite (1996). "The concept of weak sustainability". Ecological Economic science. 17 (three): 147–156. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(96)80003-6.
  68. ^ a b Robert U. Ayres & Jeroen C.J.1000. van den Bergh & John G. Gowdy, 1998. "Viewpoint: Weak versus Strong Sustainability," Tinbergen Establish Give-and-take Papers 98-103/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  69. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN9781315765747.
  70. ^ United Cities and Local Governments, "Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Evolution".
  71. ^ James, Paul; Magee, Liam (2016), "Domains of Sustainability", in Farazmand, Ali (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. ane–17, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_2760-one, ISBN978-3-319-31816-five , retrieved 28 March 2022
  72. ^ a b Dhakal, Krishna P.; Oh, Jun S. (2011). "Integrating Sustainability into Highway Projects: Sustainability Indicators and Assessment Tool for Michigan Roads". Transportation and Development Institute Congress 2011. Chicago, Illinois, United States: American Society of Civil Engineers: 987–996. doi:10.1061/41167(398)94. ISBN978-0-7844-1167-four.
  73. ^ Gambino, Megan (fifteen March 2012). "Is it Too Late for Sustainable Evolution?". Smithsonian Magazine . Retrieved 12 January 2022. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  74. ^ a b Benson, Melinda Damage; Craig, Robin Kundis (2014). "The Cease of Sustainability". Order & Natural Resource. 27 (7): 777–782. doi:x.1080/08941920.2014.901467. ISSN 0894-1920. S2CID 67783261.
  75. ^ "Why Rio failed in the by and how it can succeed this time". The Guardian. 12 June 2012.
  76. ^ Apetrei, Cristina I.; Caniglia, Guido; von Wehrden, Henrik; Lang, Daniel J. (2021). "Just another buzzword? A systematic literature review of knowledge-related concepts in sustainability science". Global Environmental Modify. 68: 102222. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102222. S2CID 233550566.
  77. ^ a b Ramsey, Jeffry L. (2015). "On Not Defining Sustainability". Journal of Agronomical and Environmental Ideals. 28 (six): 1075–1087. doi:10.1007/s10806-015-9578-three. ISSN 1187-7863. S2CID 146790960.
  78. ^ "Sustainability Accounting in UK Local Government". The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. Archived from the original on 11 April 2008. Retrieved eighteen June 2008.
  79. ^ Dalal-Clayton, Barry and Sadler, Barry 2009. Sustainability Appraisal: A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-i-84407-357-3.[ page needed ]
  80. ^ Hak, T. et al. 2007. Sustainability Indicators, SCOPE 67. Island Press, London. [1] Archived 2011-12-18 at the Wayback Machine
  81. ^ Bong, Simon and Morse, Stephen 2008. Sustainability Indicators. Measuring the Immeasurable? second edn. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-299-six.https://books.google.com/books/about/Sustainability_Indicators.html?id=6DOC13cd9c0C
  82. ^ Wackernagel, Mathis; Lin, David; Evans, Mikel; Hanscom, Laurel; Raven, Peter (2019). "Defying the Footprint Oracle: Implications of Country Resource Trends". Sustainability. 11 (7): 2164. doi:ten.3390/su11072164.
  83. ^ "Sustainable Evolution visualized". Sustainability concepts . Retrieved 24 March 2022. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-condition (link)
  84. ^ a b Howes, Michael; Wortley, Liana; Potts, Ruth; Dedekorkut-Howes, Aysin; Serrao-Neumann, Silvia; Davidson, Julie; Smith, Timothy; Nunn, Patrick (2017). "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?". Sustainability. 9 (2): 165. doi:x.3390/su9020165. ISSN 2071-1050.
  85. ^ a b Ehrlich, P.R.; Holden, J.P. (1974). "Human Population and the global environs". American Scientist. Vol. 62, no. iii. pp. 282–292.
  86. ^ Fleming, Sean. "This is now the globe'due south greatest threat – and information technology's not coronavirus". World Economical Forum. World Economic forum. Retrieved 5 August 2020.
  87. ^ Perkins, Sid. "The best style to reduce your carbon footprint is 1 the authorities isn't telling y'all about". Science . Retrieved 11 Nov 2019.
  88. ^ "The Ultimate Guide to Sustainable Investing | Carbon Collective". world wide web.carboncollective.co . Retrieved 17 April 2022.
  89. ^ M. Parris, Thomas; Westward. Kates, Robert (8 July 2003). "Characterizing a sustainability transition: Goals, targets, trends, and driving forces". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.s.. 100 (14): 8068–8073. doi:10.1073/pnas.1231336100. PMC166183. PMID 12819346.
  90. ^ Kinsley, Chiliad. and Lovins, L.H. (September 1997). "Paying for Growth, Prospering from Development." Archived 17 July 2011 at the Wayback Auto Retrieved 15 June 2009.
  91. ^ Sustainable Shrinkage: Envisioning a Smaller, Stronger Economic system. Thesolutionsjournal.com. Retrieved xiii March 2016.
  92. ^ Zhexembayeva, Northward. (May 2007). "Becoming Sustainable: Tools and Resources for Successful Organizational Transformation". Center for Business concern as an Amanuensis of Earth Benefit. Instance Western University. Archived from the original on 13 June 2010.
  93. ^ "Most Us". Sustainable Business Institute. Archived from the original on 17 May 2009.
  94. ^ "Virtually the WBCSD". World Business concern Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Archived from the original on ix September 2007. Retrieved 1 Apr 2009.
  95. ^ "The troubling evolution of corporate greenwashing". The Guardian. 18 August 2018.
  96. ^ "The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing". world wide web.bloomberg.ca. BNN Bloomberg. 18 August 2018.
  97. ^ "The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing". world wide web.theconversation.com. The Conversation. xviii August 2011.
  98. ^ "What's in a label? Separating credible eco-labels from greenwashing". www.corporateknights.com. Corporate Knights. 3 May 2019.
  99. ^ "World Scientist'south Warning to Humanity" (PDF). Union of Concerned Scientists. Union of Concerned Scientists. Retrieved 11 November 2019.
  100. ^ Ripple, William J.; Wolf, Christopher; Newsome, Thomas M.; Galetti, Mauro; Alamgir, Mohammed; Crist, Eileen; Mahmoud, Mahmoud I.; Laurance, William F. (December 2017). "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice". BioScience. 67 (12): 1026–1028. doi:10.1093/biosci/bix125.
  101. ^ J Ripple, William; Wolf, Christopher; M Newsome, Thomas; Barnard, Phoebe; R Moomaw, William (v November 2019). "World Scientists' Warning of a Climate Emergency". BioScience. biz088. doi:x.1093/biosci/biz088.
  102. ^ "Statement of Faith and Spiritual Leaders on the upcoming United nations Climate change Conference, COP21 in Paris in Dec 2015"
  103. ^ Statement from the Interfaith Summit in New York, 21-22September2014, by the Globe Council of Churches Geneva and Religions for Peace, New York: http://interfaithclimate.org/the-argument

rheationcy.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability

0 Response to "Which Economic System Is Most Closely Associated With the Activities Shown in This Art Work?"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel