0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Sign in to save

The idea of weak sustainability is illegitimate

Environment Development and Sustainability 2016 49 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 30 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Katharina Biely, Dries Maes, Dries Maes, Steven Van Passel

Summary

This paper argues that "weak sustainability" — the idea that natural resources can be replaced by human-made capital — is logically inconsistent because it allows an already-unsustainable system to be called sustainable, using agriculture as a case study where higher crop yields came at the cost of dramatically increased fertilizer, water, and energy use.

Since the introduction of the sustainability challenge, scientists disagree over the interpretation of the term ''sustainability.'' Weak and strong sustainability are the two main interpretations of sustainability, which are opposing each other. Some researchers stated that the interpretation of the term depends on the context; others disagree pointing out that it always implies the meaning of continuation. The term ''sustainability'' can be used as attribute, which adds a certain characteristic to the noun. If something can be attributed as being sustainable, it can also be unsustainable. The sustainability challenge consists of shifting from the current unsustainable towards a sustainable system. This paper outlines that the weak sustainability term is illegitimate, as it leads to a contradiction with the acknowledged assumption that the current state is unsustainable. This contradiction is revealed through an analysis of the occurrence of decoupling in agriculture: Agricultural land use could be decoupled from agricultural production, but only with the trade-off of massive increases in fertilizer, pesticide, energy and water usage. This paper outlines an inherent inconsistency within the ongoing discussion about the interpretation of sustainability. Through identifying the invalidity of the weak sustainability interpretation the focus can be shifted form the discourse to the sustainability challenge itself.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper