Comments on: ‘Sustainability’ Risks Losing Effectiveness as a Term

By: Garth Schmalenberg

Garth Schmalenberg — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:40:27 +0000

The use of a double negative by the Mr.Senge “we don’t want un-sustainability” is actually a proof that the word “sustainability” is a positive term and provokes a positive vision. However, if you don’t like it, there is a term that has been used in most religious prophecy, “Golden Age” which may evoke the vision of what we are really striving to attain. However, it’s more than just a change of environment. It also implies a change of heart and motive, a change in the way we view our environment and more importantly a change in the way we view ourselves in respect to others in the world. It’s all well and good to strive for technological solutions to our material problems such as energy consumption, waste and pollution. It’s a whole other issue on how to bring social justice in the form of equitable distribution of wealth, education, freedom from repression, advancement and equity to other parts of the world where sustainability means something quite different than it does in North America or Europe. For now, sustainability is probably the right term but the writer makes a good point that we could all begin to adopt a larger vision.

By: Cameron Stiff

Cameron Stiff — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:15:38 +0000

Hogwash. To say that ’sustainability’ is a negative term is absolutely ridiculous. To me, sustainability is the absolute foundational concept for building a society that lives within the means of our planet, and is perfect because it is so clear: you are either sustainable or unsustainable. It is the ultimate benchmark. I’ve read recently about using the term ‘resilience’ as a replacement for sustainability, but even there, in most cases it is employed as a basis for sustainability. I think this is a case of consumer culture demanding something ‘new’ instead of just getting on with the hard work of transitioning. One term which I do find has equal weight is the concept of restoration, and the restoration economy, as developed by Storm Cunningham. Our planet is depleted and our actions should be devised in response to that reality, towards the achievement of sustainability.

By: Peter Korchnak

Peter Korchnak — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:58:28 +0000

I disagree about sustainability being a negative term. Of course, if you define the objective as survival, you’ll see it in negative light. But if you define the objective constructively, as building a better world, it becomes a whole another story. Isn’t sustainability about satisfying our needs without compromising future generations’ capacity to do the same? Sounds positive to me.

Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the meaning of sustainability will be interpreted by different people differently.

By: Seamus Dubh

Seamus Dubh — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 03:43:28 +0000

The real issue is the use of the term sustainability and many others in the eco/green movement is the fact that they are improperly and over used.
In an era of vastly more knowledgeable people and easy access to references and information, any slight error can undermine the purpose of any effort put forth to the world.

By: CR12

CR12 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:05:04 +0000

good argument on the transitional meaning of the word “sustainability” personally I disagree and feel the word has been excepted to be associated with environment. i am a proactive supporter of the sustainable movement and would like to make you guys aware of wwwe.e3bank.com check them out to see how they can help you all with your sustainable goals.

By: Sandy

Sandy — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:50:39 +0000

I would agree that the word “sustainability” is big picture and hard for some to get their arms around. But corporate citizenship and corporate responsibility are too narrow. Our stakeholders told us repeatedly to call our corporate responsibility report a corporate sustainability report. Until someone comes up with something better (which Senge didn’t offer), I think sustainability is the way to go.

By: sustainelaine

sustainelaine — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:04:47 +0000

I disagree with Senge that “sustainability” is an inadequate word. To me it’s a big picture word that describes a time in the future when humans live in a way that we use natural resources no faster than nature can replenish them, and create wastes (like GHG) no faster than Nature can absorb them. It’s also about developed countries doing more with less so there will be enough resources for everyone in developing countries to have their basic needs met. Just because we raise the bar on corporate sustainability next year, next decade and next century doesn’t mean it isn’t a relevant term. I’ve yet to see a better term but I’m open to hearing about it.

By: Debbie

Debbie — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:41:08 +0000

There is general agreement that sustainability is not the best term, but I’ve yet to hear alternative terms suggested. What is a succinct term for the future vision that Senge suggests in this article?