I cannot answer the question properly, but I am sure that environmental issues and sustainability should investigate together with socio-economic and cultural attributes.

If we separate environmental sustainability, we would miss the engagement and the motivation of doing better. Also, the potential long-term synergies of social, economic and environmental benefits would not be considered, economic an sustainability would be a simply trade-off in people's mind.

In each and every of us, there is a place where there is no 'I' versus 'Other' division. Some call it Higher Self or Spiritual Self. But most of us approach environment from our Lower Self where there is 'I' versus 'Other' division. This approach is not holistic. It is limited, partial and biased toward 'I' or self-centered. As we grow spiritually, we gradually move from the lower self to the higher self, and then we would be able to embrace a holistic approach to environment. May I suggest you to refer to book chapter 'Spirituality, Sustainability and Happiness: A Quantum-Neuroscientific Perspective' in Spirituality and Sustainability: New Horizons and Exemplary Approaches (Springer International)? Here is the link: http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319342337

A holistic approach to environmental issues involves acknowledging the inter-connectedness of issues as they affect in the environment in any development process. Tackling or addressing such issues will demand integrated approaches in offering the solutions to the issues/problems being addressed. This approach leads to sustainable development as both natural, socio-economic and cultural dimensions are in our mind for whatever intervention we would wish to roll out. This kind of approach considers many issues, including the precautionary principle before any intervention is agreed up. Such approach, naturally leads us to asking so many questions and obtaining answers before we proceed with whatever we may wish to do.

Holistic approach to environmental management and sustainability sterns from an integrated way of approaching the diverse issues that confront the society. This where there is stakeholder consultation in every decision that is taken on issues that affect the environment. whenever the local people are considered in drawing up policy document and they are involved, consulted, their skills, values, knowledge and attitudes are considered, it makes them committed in making sure the integrity of the environment is maintained.

I do agree with Kofi Adu-Boahen. The local people must be involved at every step of the approach. Because without the inputs of the community, the environment and local people will suffer.

Thank you Dear friend Robort. The answer is stimulating.You are right environmental sustainability should investigate together with sociology-economic and cultural attributes.

Regards

I agree with those who stress the need to analyse ecological, social and economic dimensions together; only a holistic approach, using concepts of systems theory and resilience is an adequate scientific answer concerning the complexity of sustainable development. I would also agree with Kofi Adu-Boahen, that people should be taken on board as soon as possible (approaches of citizens' science). Sustainable Development is not a natural phenomenon that is waiting for being measured. Rather, we should interpret it as a longterm strategic direction (agreed at a high political level), which should steer policies and make complex societal manoeuvres possible. Comparable to the process of puberty for adolsecents, these manoeuvres will be non-linear, loaded with conflicting interests and uncertainties. Science should understand its role as guide, reducing complexity as far as possible and presenting facts as simple as possible (but not more: Einstein).

The need for a holistic approach -- as others have said in response to this question -- derives from the full interdependence of ecological systems. If all we do ripples outward forever on everything and everyone (which is a good working assumption in social and natural science), then carving out a small piece of this complex puzzle and treating it 'as if' it were separate and independent of the rest is insufficient. In economics, my work has led me to conclude that the assumptions of substitution and tradeoffs (seen as the core of this 'science') do not capture the essential feature of social relationships. A balance of substitution and complementarity offers a more adequate characterization of economic relations -- much like those in ecology -- and that balance is also affected by social planning horizons. The longer and broader our horizons (the more we emphasize our "higher selves", as Rohana Ullishewa put it above) -- i.e., the greater the range of our rational accounting of the effects of our actions before we set them in motion -- then the more weight do complementarity and reciprocity have in this balance. The shorter our horizons, the more this balance shifts in favor of substitution and conflict. The bottom-line point is that competitive social systems are creating and maintaining a dangerously myopic culture that economists cannot see (without a theory of planning horizons). The means to broaden social planning horizons -- and thus to reduce the level of strife in society -- is through cooperation and integrative social systems (that take all stakeholders' interests into account, for example). My work can be found here: https://fredericjennings.academia.edu/research#papers.

Good Dr. Rohana. The link given by you is interesting.Dr Saeed your inter- connected theory leading to sustainable development is excellent.

Regards

In simple and brief words: If you have a diseased plant or tree, you should study its environment, including soils, water, and its conditions and all other factors and elements that may cause stress. Improve their health by targeting any stressful agents and keeping them under surveillance. Sustainable development is only the monitoring of nature. Nature control is thus a comprehensive exercise. It involves time and patience. It is an ongoing learning process.

Dear Prof. Sheth,

Thank you for sharing this interesting and valuable question. In an extension of the excellent suggestion by Dr. Adu Boahen, the traditional management systems of local communities based on their positive cultural practices must be mainstreamed into environmental policies, strategies and initiatives. This would curb the often single-handed approach of using only conventional Science in mapping up conservation strategies for the environment and all its resources. A pluralistic and multidisciplinary approach to solving environmental challenges in a holistic fashion holds greater, richer and more beneficial results in environmental protection management. Please, kindly look at my articles on the use of traditional ecological knowledge systems in biodiversity conservation schemes and programs. Best regards

Just a small thought: Urie Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory of human development. As biodiversity and conservation concerns in groups/ communities of people arise at different holistic stages of the development of the individuals within them, the theory could help you closely situate and explore the variables (and their intersections) that are effected by such concerns at different developmental stages within that group. e.g. Answers to Why does this matter to this group here and why not to that one there? Can we cross pollinate for better outcomes? Bit way out, but there you go!

Following..