What do you all think? Clearly the word sustainability is politically
loaded. That is, if powerful sectors of our economy, led by powerful
people, and supported by powerful politicians, are engaged in activities
that are unsustainable, then the concept of sustainability has political
meaning. That doesn't make it useless, but it does add multiple layers of
meaning and import. I'd argue that the concept also has analytic
usefulness, although definitions are tough. The Natural Step folks have one
that I don't think has a social dimension. We could at least agree that
humankind shouldn't be using up resources faster than they can be
regenerated and that we should not be polluting more than can be absorbed.
I'm a layperson in these matters, lacking precision I'm sure. And I don't
really care whether we lump social concerns within or without the concept of
sustainability. I care about equity regardless, for example. But that's
another matter.
Hal
Hal Hamilton
Center for Sustainable Systems
433 Chestnut St., Berea KY 40403 USA
Phone: (606) 986-5336; Fax: (606) 986-1299
hhamilton@centerss.org
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail