Contest for a new word for the concept formerly known as Sustainability
I attend a lot of green meetings and events, and at every single one, after sheepishly uttering the word sustainability, someone says:
“I hate using the word sustainability, we need a new word.” or “Sustainability is just so overused, we need a new word.” or “I am going to say sustainability, but really we need a new word.”
However-rarely does anyone offer a new and better word. So here we go!
If you have a better word for sustainability please let me know and I will post the list of new words on my blog! Then we can all vote on the best new word for the “concept formerly known as sustainability.”
For the record- I don’t think we need a new word. I think we need to actually start behaving in alignment with existing definitions. And here are the ones that work for me:
“Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable–to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”- Brundtland Commission Report
“Sustainability consists of harmonizing the ecological, social, and economic aspects of human activity in such a way that economic growth is consistent with long-term ecological activity.”- Brian and Mary Nattrass, Consultants and Authors of The Natural Step for Business
In my work with businesses, I am using The Natural Step definition for sustainability:
In a sustainable society:
• Nature is not subject to systematically increasing concentrations of substances extracted from the earth’s crust. (Think of the rapidity with which we extract fossil fuel and the contribution to global warming.)
• Nature is not subject to systematically increasing concentrations of substances produced by society. (Think of synthetic substances, like dioxin or plastic, that our natural environmental systems have no way of processing.)
• Nature is not subject to systematically increasing degradation by physical means. (Think of clear cutting a forest, draining wetlands, blowing off a mountain top.)
• …and in that society people are not subject to conditions that systematically undermine their capacity to meet their needs. (Think of people displaced or living in war zones because of oil acquisition, people working in sweatshops, villages polluted with electronic waste.)
Can’t wait to hear what you guys come up with! If you are reading this on Facebook- please post your responses to my blog.
Tags: andrea dean, concept formerly known as sustainability, going green hawaii, green business hawaii, natural step hawaii, new word sustainability
June 26th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Wow– I have struggled to find a less abstract term—and will be engaged in this most important contest.
And if we don’t get great answers, we’re stuck with the “s” word
June 26th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
Uh, I’ll take green for $200 please…. sounds like semantics.
Lets get back to the task at hand.
June 26th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
Balance.
Life, in all its forms, progressions, and interactions, is, after all, the greatest and at the same time most delicate balancing act.
June 27th, 2009 at 2:14 am
The only thing that needs to be done with the term “sustainability” is to use it honestly. If you hear people using it to describe something that isn’t sustainable, correct them!
Both definitions above fail, badly.
1. Brundtland includes the phrase “meets the needs of the present”. The earth is already over carrying capacity, so the only way we meet the needs of the present 6.7 billion is with unsustainable practices. Therefore, any definition that requires meeting these needs is NOT sustainable.
2. The Natural Step definition includes the phrase “economic growth”. People using that term are from the old paradigm of endless growth, the philosophy of the cancer cell. There is absolutely NOTHING sustainable about economic growth. Anyone promoting growth as a goal (99% of economists and politicians) is in denial. It’s sad to hear that the otherwise-intelligent Natural Step people fell that way.
For what it’s worth, those definitions aren’t nearly as bad as the one on the “Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Task Force” (http://www.hawaii2050.org/) which has a 3-part definition, NONE of which relate to actual sustainability.
Use the word sustainable honestly, to mean what it actually means: “you can keep doing it.”
For more information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady_state_economy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limits_to_Growth
June 27th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
I’ve been giving a lot of thought to this word and concept of sustainability. These thoughts will probably step on some toes, so I’ll try to tread gently… Nothing lasts forever, and science has shown that at two other times in the history of our planet, carbon-based life forms have been completely eradicated. Not because of pollution, or ozone depletion or any other man-made set of conditions; something old had to die so something new could be born.
My personal discomfort with the word sustainability has to do with the hubris of humans, and the arrogance that we can make something last forever. We desire sustainability because we are ego-based creatures who think we are the highest expression of life and therefore masters of our universe. We are attached to the illusion that our carbon-based lives will live on forever, and so we make systems that support this delusion. One of those systems is the belief that if the right humans can enact the right actions, carbon life on this planet will last forever.
We silly humans think we are the ultimate expression of genetics and environment. But we’re not. The theory of evolution tells us that we and our world are engaged in a natural process where organisms change into more complex forms. Humans are still evolving, and for this to happen, our environment has to support these changes. If we insist on believing that this is as good as it gets, and we are the highest expression of consciousness that will ever be, then we will have to stick with our belief in sustainability.
However, if we’re willing to entertain the possibilty that all life on this planet, including humans, is still evolving into something different, then we can also believe, like Kali, that for one form of life to continue, another has to be annihilated.
Humans don’t get to rule the earth forever. The Mayans couldn’t even see forever-they just saw to 2012- so why do we Moderns insist that we can make life on earth last indefinitely?
I’ve reached the conclusion that the concept of sustainability is a man-made construct and not a natural occurance in the natural world. Humans want things to go on forever without change, so we latch onto what we think will accomodate that view, but our Mother knows otherwise. She knows that everything changes but change itself, and She accepts that eradication is part of evolution.
June 27th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Dawn Barnett from Facebook:
How about ‘Sustain AINA Able’, This worked well on Molokai.
June 27th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Good thoughts all! Just the kind of discussion I was hoping to spark.
June 27th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Ok.. “Regenitivity”
June 28th, 2009 at 3:48 am
regenerative is my favorite term, as it implies modeling human systems on the principles of natural systems. Regenerative consciousness includes the notions of cyclic opportunity, the triple bottom line, Communitarianism, Rousseau’s social contract, multilateralism, reciprocity, yin/yang duality, the theory of multiple intelligences, the yoga of life, and the multi-stakeholder approach to business purported by the B Corporation. Years ago (nearly 20), I wrote a book calling us to be referred to as the We Generation because of our heightened social conscience. Perhaps we should now be known as the ReGeneration…
June 29th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I think for many of us the term “sustainability” can feel rather stale. Like Sarah Brooks said, nobody gets excited about “sustainable” marriage…it’s rather boring. Since “sustainability” is an all-encompassing term, there are been quite a bit of misrepresentation over the past 20 years, since the popularization of terminology after the UN’s Bruntdland Commission Report. I feel everybody has a perspective on what might be sustainable and every community should discuss and identify what that might be based on a local context.
To really move forward, we need to expose and understand our current system. It’s like fish gaining awareness of water that surrounds him.
To do that it’s important to understand society’s unsustainable practices based on currently accepted science. For Kanaka Maoli, and many indigenous cultures the sustainable practices was integrated into daily life…if you assess the ahupua’a resource management through the The Natural Step sustainability lens, the Kanaka Maoli minimized the violation of system conditions mentioned through the socio-ecological sustainability principles developed by the international community and the natural step, but it’s only one framework and there are many frameworks to move us through the transition.
I personally love the word resilience. The Hawaii County Resource Center, a program of Department of Research and Development, fully embrace the term resilience (it’s in our vision statement). We practice and apply the concept through our partnership with Fire and Civil Defense in disaster preparedness, partnership with Planning Department in Community Development Plans, Healing Our Island – Community Fund, and Ho’owaiwai – Family Asset Building. Without honest collaboration, it’s really challenging to bring innovative, creative and resourceful solutions that will improve and empower our communities.
Words such as, resilience, green, close loop, whole systems thinking, holistic, restorative, regenerative, one planet living, etc., at least in my opinion is all terms that try to improve our economic, social and environmental well-being…and it’s all about healthier people and place. Like Michael, personally I think we should be having discussion already on what regenerative society would look like….
June 30th, 2009 at 2:16 am
Here’s a new word for ya’ll…. how about ‘Survival’. It’s an old concept that shouldn’t need explaining. It kinds of sums it up in a funny kind of way.
July 1st, 2009 at 4:54 am
I was reading through all these posts and kept thinking “survivability” and low and behold, I’m not alone! Survivability is not an official word, but I think that is the bottom line — it’s all about allowing us and our offspring to survive on this island, on the land, and on this planet.
Regardless of what elements we deplete or pollute or demolish, we still need to learn how to survive for as long as possible with what we have (left).