Hi!

Well, we have been using the environmental sustainability for along time now in Sweden and i think its works well and all the people are understanding the benefits of using these terms and whats they mean now.

Regards

Lucio, do you suggest to target sustainability instead of sustainable development, i.e., to freeze economies and to think only about environment?

This will not work because poverty is a problem in many countries that need growth. However, we have reached already the limits of Earth's regenerative ability and have to do something with this. Transition to renewable resources is only one part of the story and it is not easy.

I tend to agree with Dr. Yuri. But there is a danger if we entirely ignore one to promote the other. In my view both could be addressed with a balanced approach. 

Good day Yahya, Yuri, and Harekrisna. 

Yahya, you know that sustainability is more than environmental sustainability; it is more than green growth, it is not just about the environment and the economy, I also about social issues.  Sustainability provides a balance approach to policy.  As Herekrisna says a balance approach is needed.

You may find these two articles interesting:

Beyond traditional sustainable development: Stating specific and general

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242130792_Beyond_traditional_sustainable_development_Stating_specific_and_general_sustainability_theory_and_sustainability_indices_using_ideal_present-absent_qualitative_comparative_conditions

Eco-Economic Development Under Social Constraints: How to Redirect it Towards Sustainability

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281277964_Eco-Economic_Development_Under_Social_Constraints_How_to_Redirect_it_Towards_Sustainability

Wish you all a nice day and thank you for commenting.

Article Beyond traditional sustainable development: Stating specific...

Article Eco-Economic Development Under Social Constraints: How to Re...

I agree with Mr. Misr and with Mr. Muñoz. What is needed is a balance between growth and sustainability

Thank you for your comment Nolberto, sustainability required balanced growth, sustainable development allows for descriminating growth.  The progress in science require the coming of new ideas/imagination to grow and test it; and think sustainabilityis the next testing ground for development thought.  I remember one my professors stressing the views of Karl Popper with respect to scientific progress in one of my classes, which I shared below:

Popper(1963) pointed out that the assurance that science will always advance lies in our never ending ignorance and he highlighted a few dangers to the growth of scientific knowledge/theories: a) the end of imagination; b) a blind emphasis on formalization and precision; and c) authoritarian views/behavior.(P293) in Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge by Karl Popper, 1963, Routhledge, London.

Only time will tell what happens, but there are signs, sustainability or sustainable develolpment?

Here I shared two simple ways to look at sustainability thinking and wish you and all our friends find them interesting:

Understanding Sustainability versus Sustained Development by Means of a WIN Development Model

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281244706_Understanding_Sustainability_versus_Sustained_Development_by_Means_of_a_WIN_Development_Model

Rationality, Responsibility, and Sustainability: When Can human Behavior Have a Chance To Be Sustainable?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281244787_Rationality_Responsibility_and_Sustainability_When_Can_human_Behavior_Have_a_Chance_To_Be_Sustainable

Wish you Nolberto and friends a wonderful day.

Article Understanding Sustainability versus Sustained Development by...

Article Rationality, Responsibility, and Sustainability: When Can hu...

This as a great question.  There is a underlying understanding that 'Growth Is Good', and nothing is allowed to shake that paradigm.  But that concept is flawed in a finite world.  When we try to remind ourselves that a steady state economy is the only long term alternative to a boom and bust economy, people get all scared.  Growth hides bad management, so leaders want to ensure a minimum of growth, without regard to what's coming down the pipe.  As long as it won't crash on their watch, they're happy to pass the buck.

I would argue that there is no such thing as Sustainable Economic Development - instead, there may be Economic Sustainable Development.  That would be the most economic (eg, best return for the investment) form of Sustainable Development, and this will change over time in every different community in different ways.  If we focus on the first, we just slow the rate that we crash.

I'd like to take the Titanic (read: our economic system) off the iceberg, rather than ramping up the engines still farther.  Yes, the power from the engines will have to be turned over to the pumps to keep Steerage from slipping below the waves, but that's still possible.  Globalization only guarantees that the undertow when the ship finally does sink will be sufficient to draw down all of the lifeboats.

Yes, we're scared, since it is clear that the stakes are so high, and we have 250 years of history that 'Growth Is Good'.  Why would that change now?

Dear Douglas thank you for your comments.  With the formal launching of green growth or eco-economic development the last RIO process clearly said that those concpets sustaible economic development, economic sustainable development, and economic sustainality did not work, greening the economy fully is better.  As there are social limits to green growth, then we may see a fast and chaotic transition towards sustainability in the future. And  everywhere you will here then sustainability development goals, sustainabiilty land use planning, .....hope it is not to late and we still can not avoid the glabal social blow out....

Have a nice day

Sustainability is in our future - there is no choice in that.  But there is no guarantee about what population and level of consumption we will be able to support at that time.  Hope...

I would also say that simplicity is in our future - the only choice we have there is how much of it is voluntary simplicity, and how much of it is mandatory simplicity.  The first is a student lifestyle, where one does without something by choice. The second is poverty, where one has no choice as to what is unavailable.  If we don't choose the first, the second will arrive by default.

Planning is the key Douglas and when you have a plan you can transition nicely especially if you have time....If you do not have a sustainability plan and you have time constraints and worse and worse levels of environmental and social degradation, then you may not even have time to develop a plan before a system collapse...That is the situation I see.... We are focusing

a) on trying to keep the sustainable development thinking that since 1987 has been tested and leading to worse levels of poverty and environmental than before 1987, and still we are going at it knowing it has failed so far....instead of proactively planning for a sustainability future....

b) we are focusing on keeping on minimizing emissions instead of planning a move to a renewable energy driven world knowing that the bigger the renewable energy technology gap at the time non-renewables go exhausted or really scare or unaccessible to most there will be economy black outs, globally and locally....

Have a nice day Douglas, I think the topic is running out of steam and the content I have been sharing is becoming repeatitive...

Have a nice day and let;'s move on

Sharing here my most recent publications as food for thoughts:

Adam Smith and Karl Marx Under the Sustainability Eye: Pointing Out and Comparing the Sustainability Gaps Behind these Two Great Simplification Failures

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299885202_Adam_Smith_and_Karl_Marx_Under_the_Sustainability_Eye_Pointing_Out_and_Comparing_the_Sustainability_Gaps_Behind_these_Two_Great_Simplification_Failures

Understanding the Death and Paradigm Shift of Adam Smith’s model: Was Going Green the Only Option? If not, Is This Option the Most Sustainable One?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299882613_Understanding_the_Death_and_Paradigm_Shift_of_Adam_Smith%27s_model_Was_Going_Green_the_Only_Option_If_not_Is_This_Option_the_Most_Sustainable_One

The Unintended Consequences of Paradigm Death and Shift: Was the Arrow Impossibility Theorem Left Behind?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299879934_The_Unintended_Consequences_of_Paradigm_Death_and_Shift_Was_the_Arrow_Impossibility_Theorem_Left_Behind

Paradigm Evolution and Sustainability Thinking: Using a Sustainability Inversegram to State Paradigm Death and Shift Expectations under Win-Win and No Win-Win Situations

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298353982_Paradigm_Evolution_and_Sustainability_Thinking_Using_a_Sustainability_Inversegram_to_State_Paradigm_Death_and_Shift_Expectations_under_Win-Win_and_No_Win-Win_Situations

Article Adam Smith and Karl Marx Under the Sustainability Eye: Point...

Article Understanding the Death and Paradigm Shift of Adam Smith’s m...

Article The Unintended Consequences of Paradigm Death and Shift: Was...

Data Paradigm Evolution and Sustainability Thinking: Using a Sust...

Dear friends, here sharing my most recent article which I trust you may find interesting in terms of food for thoughts:

If Going From Free Markets to Non-Free Markets is the Way to Go: Does This Means the End of Rational Decision Making Thinking or Is This Just a Temporary Block of a Perfect Paradigm Shift to Green Markets?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312092336_If_Going_From_Free_Markets_to_Non-Free_Markets_is_the_Way_to_Go_Does_This_Means_the_End_of_Rational_Decision_Making_Thinking_or_Is_This_Just_a_Temporary_Block_of_a_Perfect_Paradigm_Shift_to_Green_Mark

Article If Going From Free Markets to Non-Free Markets is the Way to...