Sustainability Equals Ethics



Ed Wilmont



The word Sustainability has had a tumultuous affair with a wide cross-section of our global population, particularly so in the U.S. If you are of a particular religious belief or political ideology, sustainability represents a red flag denying citizens and corporations certain rights or limiting freedom. If you are of a different persuasion, sustainability represents environmental and social protection for not only marginalized populations but for the greater population as a whole.

The reality has been clouded by misrepresentation and broader agendas. The reality: sustainability stands for ethical conduct at its core.

Unfortunately the word sustainability has garnered extensive definitions none of which truly represent the dictionary definition, which is clear and concise, the ability to be sustained, supported, upheld, or confirmed. But we also need to define a derivation of the word: sustainable. Pertaining to a system that maintains its own viability by using techniques that allow for continual reuse.

The environment or economy is nowhere to be found in either definition. The words sustainable and sustainability have been appropriated and assimilated (dare I say hijacked) by environmentalists and economists. Environmentalists focus on natural resources. Economists focus on economic resources. Both agree that in order for sustainable systems to exist the practice of continual reuse is critically important. By its very nature the idea of reuse is conservative, and yet reuse is extremely popular on progressive fronts.

Could sustainability actually be a rallying point to BRING people together rather than divide?

Let's consider what resources are available to cultures across the globe. Natural and economic resources have already been mentioned, but let's illuminate the broad spectrum of resources: civic, educational, cultural, social, and spiritual. Globally there are hundreds of thousands of organizations with missions to sustain and improve the quality, quantity and accessibility to one of these resources.

Universities all across the world offer degrees in resource management and sustainability. The Masdar Institute of Science and Technology in the United Arab Emirates strictly focuses on alternative energy. Globally, we know non-renewable resources are limited. The response has been clear and forthright.

Sustainability focuses on both renewable and non-renewable resources and how entities manage them; and ultimately how transparent operations are necessary for not only end users, but also shareholders. The very basis of transparency in sustainability circles relies on the concept of the triple bottom line of people, planet and profits. The welfare of the company must be engaged beyond just profits by also accepting responsibility for a bottom line of social equity and environmental stewardship.

In most environmental organizations there is an implied environmental ethic. The same can be said about socially based organizations embracing a social ethic. As mentioned earlier social and natural resources are just a tip of the iceberg. When entities focus on positive growth and embracing sustainability there is naturally an extension of ethics towards education, civics, culture and religion.

In the end, consider the vernacular of sustainable professionals.  What language do we use? How can we talk about these principles without alienating a large sector of the public? So here are a few suggestions for starting the conversation without falling into a heated debate.

Sustainability is:

Resource management and integration.

Regenerating ideas, values, and resources.

Quality of life development.

Sustaining a higher quality of life.

Conserving values, money and resources.

Responsible use of resources.

Accountability to ourselves, our children and our teachers.

Thinking through our choices and actions.

Creating prosperity.

Craftsmanship and quality control.

Life cycle management.

Optimal nourishment for the body, mind and soul.

Eliminating waste in every part of life.

Connecting and communicating with compassion.

Supporting and educating the next generation.

Restoring a solid foundation.

Positive reinforcement.

Creative use of our minds.

Volunteering and giving back.

Time management.

Healthy living.

Simple living.

Ethics.

And that's the point. Sustainability does not need to be complicated. It is an ethical way of living that requires only a desire to live simply without creating harm.

Ed Wilmot is an amazing guy in Greenville, SC. He is the creator and maintainer of Sustainable Greenville, an online network that includes a directory of sustainable businesses and links you to numerous resources, calendars, videos, blogs and more, all with an eye to “Celebrating Quality of Life, Environment and Health in the Upstate.”

Some added perspective, with a history lesson

Here is the globally accepted definition of sustainable development:

Following the 1983 World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland, a 1987 report named 'Our Common Future' was published, defining Sustainable Development as:

"Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs''

So what does this mean? Save the future for your grandchildren.

The report highlighted three fundamental components to sustainable development: environmental protection, economic growth and social equity. The concept of sustainable development focused attention on finding strategies to promote economic and social advancement in ways that avoid environmental degradation, over-exploitation or pollution, and sidelined less productive debates about whether to prioritize development or the environment.

The concept of sustainable development has come a long way since "Our Common Future" was published. Major corporations that once assigned "sustainability" to the PR department now take the concept seriously. "The triple bottom line" is no longer just about profit, the concept embraces "prosperity (profit), people (health, well-being and culture) and planet (environmental health).

[From the Internet] UN World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) "Brundtland Commission"

On December 1983, Gro Harlem Brundtland, the Prime Minister of Norway, was asked by the Secretary General of the United Nations to chair a special independent commission, the World Commission on Environment and Development known as the WCED. Its mission: to re-examine critical environmental and development problems around the world and formulate realistic proposals to address them.

"This commission believes that people can build a future that is more prosperous, more just, and more secure. Our report is not a prediction of ever increasing environmental decay, poverty and hardship in ever more decreasing resources. We see instead the possibility for a new era of economic growth, one that must be based on policies that sustain and expand the environmental resource base...We have the power to reconcile human affairs with the natural laws and to thrive in the process."

For three years they conducted public meetings in diverse regions throughout the world to get a broad perspective of environment and development issues. These hearings proved invaluable and resulted in more than 10,000 pages of testimony. The commission's work concluded in 1987 with the publication of "Our Common Future", (The Brundtland Report), which outlined a path for global sustainable development and served a key role in bringing sustainability into the public eye world-wide.

A conclusion from the WCED report stated: "Attempts to maintain social and ecological stability through old approaches to development and environmental protection will increase instability. Security must be sought through change...We are unanimous in our conviction that the security, well-being, and very survival of the planet depend on such changes, now."

Contributed by Susan Benson,

Public Information Officer, CAFLS

Editor’s note: Benson has been a decades-long advocate of sustainability. The history lesson she shares, of the earnest and thorough work of the WCED (three years in the making and reported 25 years ago) is a sobering reminder of the difficulty of bringing about global change – especially with the polarization of perspectives without a willingness to engage in respectful dialogue. Yet, as Wilmot pointed out, the potential is there for sustainability to be a rallying point to bring different factions together. Hopefully someday – for our grandchildren.