Sustainable resource management: reality or illusion? Introduction and summary.(Overview of 2002 annual publication of the Journal of Business Administration and Policy Analysis)

Publication: Journal of Business Administration and Policy Analysis

Publication Date: 01-JAN-02

Bookmark this article Print this article Link to this article Email this article Digg It! Add to del.icio.us RSS

COPYRIGHT 2002 Journal of Business Administration

Humanity's conceptualization of the global environment has changed radically in the four decades since the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring. In many respects, there has been a fundamental transformation within the sciences, social sciences and humanities with the emergence of such critical disciplines as ecology, environmental ethics and, more recently, ecological economics. Underlying this remarkable disciplinary change has been a dramatic paradigm shift--from humanity as dominant over, yet independent of, the natural environment, to humanity as one, albeit important, element of a complex interrelated array of ecological entities. This reformulation of humanity's place in the global ecosystem crystallized in 1987 with the publication of the Bruntland Report and the articulation of the concept of sustainable development.

Defined simply as "development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs," the concept of sustainable development has spurred a vast interpretative research literature which has focussed on its implications across a broad range of human activities and academic disciplines. Beguilingly simple in its phraseology, sustainable development has created an extraordinary intellectual challenge--first, to define it operationally and, second, to generate metrics to assess change both toward and away from it.

At the heart of sustainable development is the concept of systems theory--that all elements of a system are interrelated and that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. In simplest terms, sustainable development encompasses three subsystems. It is based on the analogy of a three-legged stool, requiring the simultaneous achievement of sustainability in three disparate spheres: economic, ecological and social. In the last category, sustainable development must address both intragenerational and intergenerational equity; i.e. issues of empowerment and distributional equity not only among the current inhabitants of the earth, but also across generations yet to be born. Several critical conceptual threads run throughout studies of sustainability:

(1) a distinction between qualitative and quantitative changes in the utilization of our technology and natural resource base (i.e. development versus growth). Central to operationalizing this distinction are technological advances which may permit us to raise our standard of living without increasing the throughput of resources--a process commonly referred to as "dematerialization;

(2) a focus on social justice, stability and empowerment with particular emphasis on reducing poverty and maintaining an adequate quality of life for all global inhabitants;

(3) borrowing from principles of business sector accounting, a direct or indirect articulation of the concept of natural capital--where maintenance of a constant natural capital stock (including the renewable resource base and the environment) yields an indefinite stream of output or "income." At its core is the proposition that the current generation must leave its descendents a stock of capital no less than is currently available. Implicit in this proposition is that we must, to the best of our ability, live off the "interest" on this capital stock and not draw it down. If part of this capital is consumed, it must be replaced by substitute capital. The ability to achieve this goal hinges on which of two alternative definitions is adopted: "weak" sustainability or "strong" sustainability.

Under the weak sustainability constant capital rule, we can consume some of our natural capital (in the form of environmental degradation, for example) as long as we offset this loss by increasing our stock of man-made capital. In contrast, under the strong sustainability constant capital rule, there is no perfect substitution among different forms of capital. Some elements of the natural capital stock (such as life-support services) cannot be replaced by man-made capital. To implement either of these concepts requires the ability to distinguish more accurately among the various forms of capital (natural, human, physical). Without more accurate measures of these forms of capital, we cannot make the right decisions;

(4) a concept known as the "precautionary principle" which states that one cannot wait for definitive scientific proof of a potential threat to the global ecosystem before acting, if that threat is both large and credible. The underlying theory is based on scientific principles, largely associated with the work of ecologists such as C.S. Holling, that ecosystems under stress do not necessarily adjust slowly and steadily, but may jump suddenly between alternative equilibrium states, some much less hospitable for human activity than others. The import of this theory is that by the time one recognizes or begins to feel the tangible effects of certain types of ecological threats, it may be too late to reverse their effects.

Much of the sustainable development literature is ultimately concerned with humanity's production, use and disposal of natural resources. The focus is bifaceted: achieving a rate of resource utilization which will not only guarantee the requirements of future generations, but also will ensure that this rate will not damage or destroy the ecological system in which human activity is embedded.

This volume focuses on the complex interrelationship of humankind and the natural resources it uses to survive and flourish, and whether humanity is managing these resources in a sustainable manner. The volume is divided into three parts: Part I provides two reconceptualizations of the fundamental issues facing humanity if it is to achieve sustainable development. Part II examines in greater detail sustainability in five critical resource domains: (1) energy, (2) human health, (3) fisheries, (4) agriculture and water, and (5) forestry. Finally, Part III presents a discussion of several institutional issues: some legal mechanisms for promoting sustainable development, selected models of resource ownership and control, a model of sustainable business and, finally, a brief historical perspective on how far our thinking about environmental issues has advanced in the past decades.

Central to much of the discussion which ensues in this volume are issues which are fundamentally economic in nature--what is the appropriate rate of resource extraction? What are appropriate prices for natural resources, and can they be implemented? And what model of resource ownership and business production and organization are truly functional from the perspective of sustainable development? In this regard, ecological economics has much to contribute. The foundations of this discipline rest on a simple philosophical premise: that the economic system is embedded in the ecological system, cannot function without it, and is ultimately subject to the same laws and constraints which apply to natural systems.

It is the conclusion of this volume that while progress has indeed been made, the issues underlying sustainable development are far more complex than has been generally realized. Indeed, it is possible to offer the tentative hypothesis that nothing short of a revolution in our economic systems will suffice to achieve sustainable development. Central to this is a realization that many of the reigning beliefs that guide our actions today must be critically re-examined, challenged and, if necessary, rejected and replaced. Each contribution to this volume engages in just such a challenge to the tenets of current conventional wisdom.

PART I: THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES

Few people have done more to advance the cause of sustainable development than David Suzuki, a zoologist and ecologist, who has written and broadcast extensively on the need to replace our prevailing, and what he views as our, destructive world view. In his contribution to this volume, Suzuki challenges our embrace of scientific reductionism, and principles of modern economics and management. He even challenges the dominant paradigm of sustainable development itself. To quote:

Some people say that the concept of sustainable development is like a stool that rests on three legs: the economy, environment, and society. I totally disagree with that. I think that what we rest on is a three-tiered foundation. The first foundation is defined by the fact that we are animals. And as animals we have an absolute need for clean air, clean water, clean soil that gives us our food, and clean energy that comes from the Sun. Biodiversity, the web of living things, cleanses, replenishes and creates the four sacred elements. Our basic needs: earth, air, fire and water, are defined by our animal nature. But we are also social animals and we must deal with social issues. A starving man who comes across an edible plant or animal is not going to first ask, "Is this on the endangered list?" He's going to kill it and eat it. So if we don't deal with hunger and poverty, then forget the environment. If you live in communities that have chronic high levels of unemployment, then they've got more urgent priorities than protecting the environment. If we live in communities in which there's no equity, justice or security, where there's constant threat of genocide, war or terror--the environment is not an issue. There are social needs that people have: strong communities with full, meaningful employment--that have equity, justice, and security and are free of war, genocide, or terror--that is what I define as the second level of the foundation of sustainable development. And finally, we are spiritual beings, and never was there a time when we needed spirit more than now. We've become carried away with how clever we are and need a huge dollop of humility. We need to know that we are deeply embedded in nature, that we arose out of...

Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.