Concepts are made by humans for their good, so logically they should be realistic. If they are never applied correctly, could it be that we are an unsustainable race?! :)

Excellent charts, Dr. Towe! They illustrate what I have observed in my work as a science writer.

Sustainability is little more than a public relationship ploy when used by most companies. But as a goal to work toward - a means to define a trajectory? - it does have the power to influence better decisions. But, as you said, only when  the will to do so is present and consistent.

The epphasis should be on all the 3 dimensions, otherwise it will be environmentalism! 

Daniel, whose dimensions should be emphasized? And for what? For social responsibility? OR for sustainability? You should clarify...some questions for an answer!

the dimensions of sustainability Julieta!

What is wrong about environmentalism Daniel?

If the trasher would be paying for his trash, he would be paying off to get a better socio-environmental benefits, so he might be sustainable in his local space. The trashee is making money out of this deal but his worsening his environment and his well-being, therefore he is not sustainable, given that sustainability is improving the socio-economic and environment together.

We just considered that they accepted it with a free-will. But actually what's going on in Africa (for example) has nothing to do with this! They use war, illiteracy and famine to corrupt a couple of people to do the dirty stuff for them without any public consensus!!!

This point came up when I was looking into international environmental agreements that the U.S. does not sign. The worldwide disgust over developed countries dumping their toxic waste in poor countries eventually resulted in the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes. But social outrage and governmental, corporate and individual actions don't necessarily have the same priorities, therefore, the effort to enforce any kind of universal standard it not likely to succeed.

Making a profit, reducing a cost and/or getting rid of a difficult problem all revolve around money. There is no common agreement that caring for the environment is an equally high priority. So one person (business owner) sees trash as a problem; another (poor country charging dumping fees) sees it as an opportunity; another (person in the community trash is dumped) sees it as a health hazard, and another (trash picker) see it as survival. How is concern for the environment and "sustainability" going to override all of that? It's a multifaceted issue requiring a multifaceted approach to counter the damage being done.

I agree that the likelihood of solving' the problem of "spoiling our own nest" through environmentalism is unlikely. But is IS one facet and needs to be encouraged. Buzz words like "carbon footprint" (the one I loath the most!), "sustainability," and the like have a role, too - developing awareness. How deep that awareness goes is up to those who choose to perpetuate and feed the idea that we CAN make a positive impact with our actions.

I'm probably going off on another tangent, but that's what came to mind when I read the exchange above....

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/02/is-the-us-really-such-a-bad-neighbor.html

Thank you Margo for your interesting comment and link! Actually, it is a multidimensional problem and an integrative multidisciplinary approach is needed to deal with it. The failure till now is that we are still dealing with it using one dimension, the economic one, this way we are only increasing the damage!

Even this issue has been addressed with a mono-dimensional approach based on self interests and colonial aspirations. Actually in the 70ies, the american national security council has published the 'National Security Study Memorandum 200' with a subject: 'Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests'

In this report, they described how the growth population in some so-called sectors of the world (the USA divide the world in different sectors) how how this could affect personal colonial interests. 

From this personal interest they began their campaign to limit population in some countries, without discussing the matter from other points of views e.g. ethical, moral, philosophical, religious, etc., and obviously without sharing the matter with any other world power.

Since that a cold war began between the catholic church and the US, and until this day, americans refused to discuss the multidimensional aspects of growth rates and the catholic church still insists on its position.

Maybe, if the matter was approaches more sustainably, integrating all the aspects related to it and sharing the info we might have saved human beings a lot of problems!????

So Kenneth I agree with you that we are the unsustainable, but not in numbers!!!! We are unsustainable in our egoism and greediness!!!! 

“Stable populations are an essential part of any sustainable future – reducing our personal footprint does not help if we keep increasing the number of feet”.

A fabulous observation.

So many things go out of balance when we get focused on our "stuff" and lose sight of interdependence, a sense of responsibility we have to and for others are affected by the consequences of our actions - other people, other living beings, the environment.

My dad recently said, "I know there is a problem, but what can I do?" referring to climate issues. The assumption that I can't "fix" it, therefore why bother to make an effort is a powerful motivator for inaction. How many people are saying THAT and washing their hands of responsibility? How much damage could we address if more people were focused on the opposite perspective - my little bit combined with the little bits of other will, collectively, make a huge impact.

I like the poster Kenneth!

All we control is our own behavior - thoughts, actions, speech.

All we can do is out best :-) That's why I'm a science writer, trying to do my best.

Margo, seems you're very optimistic by nature!!!

I wish all human beings control their behaviours!!!! :)

I HAVE to be optimistic or I'll have to start believing my only value is determined by my bra size and my willingness to be groped. That might seem simplistic to many, but consider what it means to be a woman in a country where sexual assault is rewarded in politics.

Oh wait, you're in Italy - you already know ;-)

Ya gotta laugh!

No one can serve two masters!

So power and money know no limits and no boundries. In italy or the US or any other place, politic is a struggle for power and money so human beings (without any sexism) become tools (The wood of revolutions!)

The full side of the glass is that extremes generate other extremes, so we always could find highly intellectuals and interesting people to share discussions with like urself and Kenneth! :) :)

Journalism is in a weird place right now. It was on a rapid decline in 2004 when I started and it hasn't hit bottom yet. There have always been hacks and blatantly self-serving writers, but the same resource (the internet/digital connectivity) that gives me access to wonderful research and experts is also enabling the proliferation of the hacks.

I was once criticized for being "too ethical" (in my first career in marketing) - I took that as a compliment considering it was a software company. And more recently I was blackballed by the online editor at AAAAS because I disagreed with changes to copy that made the science factually incorrect. That last one was hard to swallow - I was never given an explanation, nor would the editor discuss it with me, just "I'm killing this piece." All future pitches were rejected or ignored.

The rejected article ran in its original form in Earth Science Journal. I admit that I miss the opportunities AAAS, but thanks to the hacks, editors can get unqualified people for less money and they don't seem to care that the quality of the research/writing is suffering. But it's my reputation, not the editor who butchers the piece, that suffers the consequences. I'd rather be looking for good editors than risk my credibility as a science writer.

Sometimes I feel like practicing for rolling in my grave, but I'm too busy trying to make a living wage ;-)

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/passive_carbon_capture_can_clean_up_our_air_but_the_technology_lacks_/

Only one thing if lost could never be retaken, it's dignity.

It's not only journalism, we are becoming a weird globalised society, but editors change, and journals changes.

So keep fighting for your values and morals, that's how change begins and that's how we could reach a sustainable world!

This discussion made me pitch "define sustainability" to my column editor, and he likes the idea. So, my deadline for this piece is April 14.

Anyone interested in doing an email interview - on the record - answering questions about this topic?

Kenneth, I explored carbon sequestration a while back. I think it's a fabulous alternative that needs discussion, but can't get editors the least bit interested in it yet. Beyond frustrating! 

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/passive_carbon_capture_can_clean_up_our_air_but_the_technology_lacks_/

Oops - distracted mind strikes again!

So are you game for an interview, Kenneth?

Thank you!

Please drop me a note via hello [at] ExtraotdinaryLimits [dot] com when you have time. I'll respond with questions a little later this week. Speaking of distractions, I'm up to my eyeballs in wind farms and sea turtle health care to meet two Friday deadlines.

Thank you for the turtle information - I'm always interested in learning more!.

I'm afraid I didn't get anything yesterday or today, but I am having issues with my DSL/ISP. Others have told me they sent things, but nothing arrived and my spam folder is clean.

Please try again when you have a moment. I'm going to the library to check email in their ISP today to access email via my web portal. It's only a stop-gap, but I'll tackle Bell again today. And who says deregulation is flawed?!?!?

I apologize for the inconvenience.

TYPO - sorry about that!

hello [at] ExtraordinaryLimits [dot] com

Here's the end result of this conversation for me - thanks for sharing your perspectives!

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/04/sustainable-sustainability-transforming-advertisin.html

Sadly, I don't get to choose the art for my pieces - the editor does that. All I can do is suggest. However, that does seem to underscore the point...

Thanks Margo for sharing this piece! It is a good and fruitful way to end this conversation.