Has “sustainability” run its course? Is it time for the Next Big Thing?
By Dave Newport
The transition from an exploitive business plan for the
planet to a sustainable one has gone through a few iterations—and we are
definitely not there yet—but we keep trying.
In the 1950s public health concerns on the heels of the Donora, PA et al air pollution incidents aroused enough angst to pass the
first federal laws protective of air quality. The 1960s were marked by Rachel
Carson-induced endangered species protections. The 1970s spawned “past
sins” Superfund legislation to begin cleaning up/preventing the Love Canals
of the world. In the 1980s we fixed the ozone hole. And in the 1990s,
“sustainability” began creeping into our lexicon.
Along the way we chased trends and words like Kyoto, Agenda
21, Corporate Social Responsibility, Triple Bottom Line, Eco Efficiency,
Socially Responsible Investing, Biomimicry, Industrial Ecology, Renewable
Portfolio Standards, Transition, Permaculture, Adaptation, etcetera… and lately:
Resilience.
The history lesson is meant to
remind us that it is normal to morph our approaches as we get smarter. So the
idea of moving past sustainability isn’t radical or anti-environment. On the
contrary, we have a need for “new and improved.”
So now what? Is it time for the
Next Big Thing? Has “sustainability” run
its course? Before we think about that, what has sustainability accomplished?
Well, on campuses at least, there
are more courses, majors, schools, colleges and certificates in sustainability
than ever; fairly rapid growth because many students want to learn about it. More
campuses are offering sustainability curricula. More students are signing up
for these classes. This is no small feat and a very hopeful sign.
Likewise, campus carbon emissions
are moderating
or even going down. Green buildings are
going up. Zero waste
efforts are also on the rise. Local
food programs/campus gardens are taking root. Renewable
energy is up. And we are getting better at measuring all these impacts (STARS!). Great environmental improvements.
Yet missing from the list of
sustainability’s accomplishments are two important categories: fiscal equity
and social justice.
In terms of finance,
sustainability programs are still woefully underinvested. More importantly,
campuses are still investing in exploitive enterprises. The recent fossil fuel divestment campaign makes this
point very clear. While Unity
College is leading the divestment effort, they are a lone voice so far.
Indeed, the Chronicle
last year reported socially responsible investing on campuses was decreasing
despite a growth in that industry and demonstrably more favorable returns on
investment.
As for social justice, only a little
progress targeting sustainability’s benefits towards those in the most need is
reported. And while I don’t have any data, I am going to bet that even the
rapid expansion of sustainability curriculum nationwide has disproportionately targeted
richer, white students. For instance, despite
a couple notable exceptions, there has been disappointing growth of
sustainability coursework in the HBCUs. There is a reason: sustainability’s
unifying theme and beneficial impacts don’t default to the breadth of society—only
the privileged classes.
Sustainability has yet to put Humpty Dumpty back together again...
I published The
Death of Campus Sustainability about a year ago. Re-reading it the other
day, one change from last year is that public concern has turned up a notch or
two on the heels of Hurricane Sandy and the warmest, driest, most flammable
year ever. Also, unlike previous conferences, last fall’s AASHE conference in LA saw record numbers of
social equity presentations; truly a heart warming sign that our colleagues get
that we need to be more effective in that arena. Otherwise, the ideas and facts
offered in the ‘Death’ blog are still pretty much intact.
Indeed, sustainability has yet to
put Humpty Dumpty back together again because, as you recall, “all the Kings
horses and all the King’s men…” So now the proponents of “resilience” are
increasingly making the case for a new approach that concedes that our eggs are
broken.
Writing
in the New York Times last fall, author Andrew Zolli presents “resilience”
as an alternative to the sustainability agenda. “Where sustainability aims to
put the world back into balance, resilience looks for ways to manage in an
imbalanced world,” he writes.
“For example,
“resilience thinking” is starting to shape how urban planners in big cities
think about updating antiquated infrastructure, much of which is robust in the
face of normal threats like equipment failures but — as was just demonstrated
in the New York region — fragile in the face of unanticipated shocks like flooding,
pandemics, terrorism or energy shortages,” Zolli continues.
Zolli’s piece goes on the offer
numerous approaches for dealing with the impacts of climate disruption in a
people-first holistic approach—everything from building flood dikes to
counseling services. He uses Hurricane Sandy as an example of the need to
prepare tangible on-the-ground responses that help “a vulnerable community
contend with the shocks that, especially at the margins of a society,
can be devastating. In lieu of master plans, these approaches offer diverse
tools and platforms that enable greater self-reliance, cooperation and
creativity before, during and after a crisis” [underlining added].
So far, so good...
So far, so good...
Nobody gets out of bed inspired by "damage control." We dream of Camelot.
Remembering the first rule of
campus sustainability—listen to the students—I recall Scott
Carlson’s coverage in the Chronicle of the emerging student demand for
skills-based training that complements their academic learning. As I reported in the ‘Death’ blog, Carlson
wrote of “hands-on people-oriented education experiences ranging from
beekeeping to shop to gardening to carpentry to cooking.”
“At the soul of
this renaissance of interest in life skills is a sense that today’s students
want to build self-reliance and self-determination capacity because the road
ahead looks steep—and they know it. Resilience and practical skills are
becoming critical attributes to live well and prosper going forward.
Integration of people-facing education with community-centered initiatives
underpin this trend—and are expositive of sustainability’s finest tradition:
the nexus of people-primacy, eco-resiliency, and local economic focus.”
Once again, the students have
signaled the Next Big Thing. It is not—as Zolli writes in the close of his article—an either/or
proposition. In the end, Zolli sees sustainability as a “holy war against
boogeymen [that] hasn’t worked and isn’t likely to anytime soon. In its place,
we need approaches that are both more pragmatic and more politically inclusive.”
Ah, disagree. Resilience is not the
successor of sustainability; it is a sustainability synergizer. It can make sustainability
work better.
How? First, resilience is
people-facing. Perfect. That is sustainability’s soft spot. Allying with people-focused efforts heals
sustainability’s historic hurt: a paucity of explicit social justice
mechanisms. Thus by folding in resilience techniques we make sustainability better.
By focusing our campuses on adapting to the new climate realities, we make our campuses
better. This means we work on adaptation plans that include disaster planning
not just low flow toilets. It means we talk to our leadership about investments
in durable assets like renewables that are immune from impending resource shortages—and
pay better anyway. It means integrating skills-based content into
sustainability curriculum such as learning to weatherize low-income homes in
local neighborhoods to build resilience-- and sustainability--in our communities.
Resilience is not the antidote to
sustainability; it’s an additive. Instead of Zolli’s existential,
damage-control approach to life on Earth, sustainability has the advantage of
casting an inspiring “I have a dream” vision. Human beings are dreamers—that’s
who we are. That’s why we discover things. Nobody gets out of bed inspired by
damage control; we dream of Camelot.
"Some men see things as they are and say why.
I dream things that never were and say why not."
So, one year later I am more
hopeful that campus sustainability can right its wrongs, learn from experience,
and integrate new strategies and tactics so as to dodge the capital punishment
foreseen in “The Death of Campus Sustainability.” We haven’t done that yet;
however, let’s not get sidetracked by a fake fight with resilience proponents. Instead,
let’s synergize their valuable lessons into our ongoing efforts.
Let’s resolve to make 2013 the
year of a more mature and resilient “sustainability-plus” approach.
Happy New Year.
-30-
