103Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

Peter Marcuse is Professor of Urban Plan-ning at Columbia University in the City ofNew York He is a lawyer with a PhD inPlanning from the University of Californiaat Berkeley He has been President of theLos Angeles City Planning Commissionand is now Chair of the Housing Commit-tee of Community Board 9 in ManhattanHe has written widely on planning andhousing issues most recently on experi-ences in Eastern Europe Australia andSouth Africa He is currently at work on abook on ldquoThe New Spatial Order of Citiesrdquodealing with the impact of globalization oninternal urban structures and a book onthe history of working-class housing inNew York City

Address Division of Urban PlanningSchool of Architecture and PlanningAvery Hall Columbia University New York10027 New York fax (1) 212 864 0410 e-mail pm35 columbiaedu

Sustainability is notenough

Peter Marcuse

SUMMARY This paper critically reviews the conceptof sustainability especially as it has come to be ap-plied outside of environmental goals It suggestsldquosustainabilityrdquo should not be considered as a goal fora housing or urban programme ndash many bad programmesare sustainable ndash but as a constraint whose absencemay limit the usefulness of a good programme It alsodiscusses how the promotion of ldquosustainabilityrdquo maysimply encourage the sustaining of the unjust statusquo and how the attempt to suggest that everyone hascommon interests in ldquosustainable urban developmentrdquomasks very real conflicts of interest

ldquoTo think that their present circumstances and theirpresent societal arrangements might be sustainedndash that is an unsustainable thought for the majorityof the worldrsquos peoplerdquo (1)

PROGRAMMES AND POLICIES can be sustainableand socially just but unfortunately they can also besustainable and unjust On the other hand unsus-tainable programmes may be very just but fortunatelysome very unjust programmes are also unsustainableExamples are easy social security for the aged hasproven to be both socially desirable and very sustain-able but free reign and legal protection for real estatespeculation are in the opinion of most urbanists verydetrimental to a socially desirable environment al-though they seem to be quite sustainable at presentOn the other hand publicly financed owned and op-erated public housing is seen by many as very desir-able but also appears unsustainable on any large scalein most countries also forcible evictions without dueprocess of law seems a more and more unsustainablepractice in most countries Sustainability and socialjustice do not necessarily go hand in hand Sustain-able at least in its literal meaning ldquocapable of beingupheld or defendedrdquo(2) requires careful examination ifwe are to use it meaningfully in the arena of housingand urban development policy

In this paper I want to make several points

1 The formulation is a reworking of an apho-rism of the Berlin Institute for Critical Theorywhich building on Walter Benjaminrsquos ldquotheconcept of progress should be grounded inthe idea of catastropherdquo adds ldquothat thingslsquojust keep on goingrsquo is the catastropherdquo InkritConference Announcement July 9 1998

2 Oxford English Dictionary (1971) CompactEdition page 3191 The etymology derives theword from tenire ldquoto holdrdquo thus capable ofbeing held on to

104 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

sustainability is not a goal for a programme ndash manybad programmes are sustainable ndash but a constraintits absence may limit the usefulness of a good pro-gramme

while sustainability may be a useful formulation ofgoals on environmental issues it is a treacherousone for urban policy because it suggests the possi-bi lity of a conflict-free consensus on policieswhereas in fact vital interests do conflict it willtake more than simply better knowledge and aclearer understanding to produce change

even in the environmental arena sustainability can-not be the sole criterion by which programmes arejudged except in the not useful very long term be-cause environmental policies must also take intoaccount considerations of for example social jus-tice

if sustainability means the ability not only to for-mulate and operate a desirable urban programmebut also to see it continue without detracting fromother also desirable goals then the concept mayusefully emphasize the importance of long-termpracticality to the consideration of such pro-grammes

Sustainability is both an honourable goal for care-fully defined purposes and a camouflaged trap for thewell-intentioned unwary As a concept and a slogan ithas an honourable pedigree (3) in the environmentalmovement which has by and large succeeded in itsfight to have the standard of sustainability generallyaccepted by all sides at least in principle althoughin practice severe conflicts of interest still beset ef-forts to establish specific standards Few these dayswould contest that sustainability is something desir-able in environmental terms and that represents asubstantial victory for the environmental cause

But the situation is quite dif ferent when it comes toother causes where I will contend sustainability isnot an appropriate goal at best it is one criterion amongothers not a goal Its acceptance would not constitutean achievement in the cause of better housing or bet-ter cities The acceptance of sustainability at least inprinciple in the environmental arena by virtually allactors(4) has led to the desire to use such a universallyacceptable goal as a slogan also in campaigns that havenothing to do with the environment but where the lureof universal acceptance is a powerful attraction Yetin these other areas ndash and I focus on housing and ur-ban development as examples ndash ldquosustainabilityrdquo is atrap It suggests all humanity has a similar interest in

3 For a brief history of its current usage seeVoula Mega one of the leading researchersin the area in ldquoFragments of an urban dis-courserdquo in Utopias and Realities of UrbanSustainable Development Conference Pro-ceedings Turin Barolo September 1996pages 66-67 David Satterthwaite of the In-ternational Institute for Environment and De-velopment has pointed out to me BarbaraWardrsquos use of the phrase in very much theBrundtland Commissionrsquos sense (see below)in the early 1970s and its somewhat unthink-ing adoption as a catchword by many inter-national development agencies to mean sim-ply funded projects that could survive with-out falling apart in the medium to long termLetter dated July 6 1998

4 David Satterthwaite comments on this phe-nomenon and points to its potential as anescape from recognizing direct responsibili-ties in an excellent article I saw subsequentto writing this paper Satterthwaite D (1997)ldquoSustainable cities or cities that contribute tosustainable developmentrdquo in Urban StudiesVol34 No10 pages 1667-1691

104 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

sustainability is not a goal for a programme ndash manybad programmes are sustainable ndash but a constraintits absence may limit the usefulness of a good pro-gramme

while sustainability may be a useful formulation ofgoals on environmental issues it is a treacherousone for urban policy because it suggests the possi-bi lity of a conflict-free consensus on policieswhereas in fact vital interests do conflict it willtake more than simply better knowledge and aclearer understanding to produce change

even in the environmental arena sustainability can-not be the sole criterion by which programmes arejudged except in the not useful very long term be-cause environmental policies must also take intoaccount considerations of for example social jus-tice

if sustainability means the ability not only to for-mulate and operate a desirable urban programmebut also to see it continue without detracting fromother also desirable goals then the concept mayusefully emphasize the importance of long-termpracticality to the consideration of such pro-grammes

Sustainability is both an honourable goal for care-fully defined purposes and a camouflaged trap for thewell-intentioned unwary As a concept and a slogan ithas an honourable pedigree (3) in the environmentalmovement which has by and large succeeded in itsfight to have the standard of sustainability generallyaccepted by all sides at least in principle althoughin practice severe conflicts of interest still beset ef-forts to establish specific standards Few these dayswould contest that sustainability is something desir-able in environmental terms and that represents asubstantial victory for the environmental cause

But the situation is quite dif ferent when it comes toother causes where I will contend sustainability isnot an appropriate goal at best it is one criterion amongothers not a goal Its acceptance would not constitutean achievement in the cause of better housing or bet-ter cities The acceptance of sustainability at least inprinciple in the environmental arena by virtually allactors(4) has led to the desire to use such a universallyacceptable goal as a slogan also in campaigns that havenothing to do with the environment but where the lureof universal acceptance is a powerful attraction Yetin these other areas ndash and I focus on housing and ur-ban development as examples ndash ldquosustainabilityrdquo is atrap It suggests all humanity has a similar interest in

3 For a brief history of its current usage seeVoula Mega one of the leading researchersin the area in ldquoFragments of an urban dis-courserdquo in Utopias and Realities of UrbanSustainable Development Conference Pro-ceedings Turin Barolo September 1996pages 66-67 David Satterthwaite of the In-ternational Institute for Environment and De-velopment has pointed out to me BarbaraWardrsquos use of the phrase in very much theBrundtland Commissionrsquos sense (see below)in the early 1970s and its somewhat unthink-ing adoption as a catchword by many inter-national development agencies to mean sim-ply funded projects that could survive with-out falling apart in the medium to long termLetter dated July 6 1998

4 David Satterthwaite comments on this phe-nomenon and points to its potential as anescape from recognizing direct responsibili-ties in an excellent article I saw subsequentto writing this paper Satterthwaite D (1997)ldquoSustainable cities or cities that contribute tosustainable developmentrdquo in Urban StudiesVol34 No10 pages 1667-1691

105Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

ldquosustainable housingrdquo or ldquosustainable urban develop-mentrdquo that if we all simply recognized our commoninterests everything would be fine we could end pov-erty exploitation segregation inadequate housingcongestion ugliness abandonment and homelessnessYet in these areas the idea of universal acceptance ofmeaningful goals is a chimera Housing and urbandevelopment are conflict-laden arenas what benefitsone hurts another A landlordrsquos profits are at a ten-antrsquos expense high-rise construction casts shadowson neighbouring land uses accessibility for one is pol-lution for another security for some is taken to meanexclusion of others profit for business owners maymean layoffs for that businessrsquos workers Even ideo-logically the parallel with environmental issues is de-ceptive It is hard to argue that a little short-term pol-lution contributes to a better long-term environmentbut the argument is heard constantly that a few lay-of fs now will lead to increased competitiveness andfewer layoffs later

I suggest then that ldquosustainabilityrdquo as a goal forhousing or urban development just doesnrsquot work(5) Inthe first place sustainability is not a goal it is a con-straint on the achievement of other goals(6) Look atthe early(7) and still a standard definition that of theWorld Commission on Environment and Development(the Brundtland Commission) in 1987

ldquoSustainable development is development that meetsthe needs of the present without compromising theability of future generations to meet their ownneedsrdquo (8)

Clearly here the goal is ldquomeeting the needsrdquo andthe remainder ldquomaking it sustainablerdquo is obviously aconstraint on the appropriate means to be used(9) Otherformulat ions def ining sustainable developmentthrough a ldquorule of constant capitalrdquo in which the goalis to pass on to the future the same stock of ldquocapitalrdquoas we have today seem to drop the broad goal entirelyand simply require that the human and natural capi-tal (a perversion of the term) of one generation bepassed on unimpaired to the next Others focus onthe ldquocarrying-capacity of supporting ecosystemsrdquo(10) amuch more questionable concept from the outset(11)

No one who is interested in justice wants to sustainthings as they are now Sustainability plays very dif-ferently in the environmental sphere where the wholepoint is simply that conditions as they are cannot besustained and the only question is how rapidly toameliorate them If the environmental status quo weresustainable environmentalists would be without acause(12) That perception is hardly prevalent in urbanaffairs or housing ndash we would hardly be satisfied if

5 I have in mind formulations such as thegoal is the ldquodevelopment of a housing sys-tem that is sustainable for people and theplanetrdquo Bhatti M Brooke J and M Gison(editors) (1994) ldquoHousing and the environ-ment a new agendardquo Chartered Institute ofHousing Coventry quoted in review in Hous-ing Studies Vol12 No4 page 579

6 After this was written I came across a dis-cussion which raised some similar issues asraised here ldquohellipthe primary environmentalconcerns of the more disadvantaged urbandwellers are not issues of sustainability nar-rowly defined Should a broader definition ofsustainability be adopted or should the pre-eminence of sustainability concerns be re-jected hellip Should the definition be reworkedor hellipsustainabilityhellip be only one objective orconstraint among manyrdquo McGranahan GSongsore J and M Kjel len (1996)ldquoSustainability poverty and urban environ-mental transitionsrdquo in Pugh Cedric (editor)Sustainability the Environment and Urbani-zation Earthscan London page 103 With-out resolving the question as a theoretical onethe paper goes on to point out the differenti-ated views on the issue by class

7 The earliest formal usage I have found is inUNESCOrsquos Man and the Biosphere Pro-gramme in the early 1970s followed by ex-plicit focus on the term in the World Conser-vation Strategy of the International Union forthe Conservation of Nature although it wasstrictly limited to environmental aspects SeeLawrence Roderick J (1996) ldquoUrban envi-ronment health and the economy cues forconceptual clarification and more effectivepolicy implementationrdquo in Price C and ATsouros (editors) Our Cities Our FuturePolices and Action Plans for Health and Sus-tainable Development WHO Healthy CitiesProject Office Copenhagen

8 WCED (1987) Our Common Future theBrundtland Report Oxford University Presspage 43 This and the following discussiondraws on European Foundation for the Im-provement of Living and Working Conditions(1998) Redefining Concepts Challenges andPractices of Urban Sustainability The Foun-dation Dublin For an alternative formulationsee the suggestion at the conclusion of thispaper

9 The same is true of William Reesrsquo defini-tion ldquohellippositive socio-economic change thatdoes not undermine the ecological and so-cial systems upon which communities and so-cieties are dependentrdquo in Rees William(1988) ldquoA role for environmental impact as-

106 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

only present conditions could be sustained In termsof our focus here ldquosustainabilityrdquo taken as a goal initself only benefits those who already have everythingthat they want Indeed even focusing on environmen-tal concerns the problem for most of the worldrsquos pooris not that their conditions cannot be sustained butthat they should not be sustained

Sustainability as a goal in itself if we are to take thetermrsquos ordinary meaning is the preservation of the sta-tus quo It would taken literally(13) involve making onlythose changes that are required to maintain that sta-tus Presumably that is what the World EconomicForum held in Davos Switzerland in 1995 had inmind when it chose as its theme ldquosustaining globaliza-tionrdquo(14) One might argue that the status quo is notsustainable socially because an unjust society will notendure That is more a hope than a demonstrated factIndeed the argument that the trouble with presenturban conditions is that they are not sustainable opensthe door to a fearsome debate of six decades ago inwhich the durability of some form of fascism was de-bated and indeed widely conceded on all sides Unjustregimes have not always historically been the mostshort-lived ones Teleological views of history are outof fashion and the ldquoend of historyrdquo argument is ratherthat the present is so sustainable that basic change isno longer conceivable even if it were desirable

Alternatively one might argue and with more evi-dence that the status quo is not sustainable in strictlyenvironmental terms indeed that is the origin of theldquosustainabilityrdquo slogan(15) But changes within thepresent system may be targeted at problems of envi-ronmental degradation global warming etc whileleaving other key undesirable aspects such as socialinjustice intact(16) Presumably good planning callsfo r soc ial just ice as well as env i ronmentalsustainability not just the one or the other

The more logically defensible use of the concept ofsustainability might be to consider it as a constraintany measure desirable on other grounds to meet sub-stantive goals must also be capable of being main-tained and must contribute to the desired goal in thelong run(17) Here again we run into problems if we arenot careful to distinguish a constraint from a goal Ifthe sustainability of a measure is taken as a goal theterm can become either tautological or perverse If adesired measure is socially just the argument couldgo then and only then is it sustainable(18) (Any otherargument would allow the conclusion that an unjustmeasure would be sustainable and if that were sowould we want it or would we not reject the criterion ofsustainability as validating it) So if justice is thestandard by which sustainability is measured whyadd the criterion of sustainability in judging the meas-

sessment in achieving sustainable develop-mentrdquo Environmental Impact AssessmentReview Vol8 page 279

10 The World Conservation Union UNEP andWWF see contributions to Price Charles andAgis Tsouros (editors) (1996) Our Cities OurFuture Policies and Action Plans for Healthand Sustainable Development WHO Copen-hagen 1996

11 See Marcuse Peter (1974) ldquoConserva-tion for whomrdquo in Smith James Noel (editor)(1974) Environmental Quality and Social Jus-tice in Urban America The ConservationFoundation Washington DC pages 17-36 re-printed in California Today Vol2 No6 June

12 This does not apply of course to the en-vironmental justice movement whose issueis the discriminatory impact of environmentaldegradation The distribution of the costs andbenefits of achieving a sustainable environ-ment remain an issue even were the goal ofsustainability to be achieved but it then be-comes an issue of justice not of sustainability

13 On the other hand its meaning can bemade elastic and it can be redefined to en-compass many other goals but then the use-fulness of the term evaporates ldquoA sustain-able city is one which succeeds in balancingeconomic environmental and socio-culturalprogress through processes of active citizenparticipationrdquo quoted in Mega Voula and JornPedersen (1997) Urban Sustainability Indi-cators European Foundation for the Improve-ment of Living and Working Conditions Dub-lin page 2 A good formulation of a goal forcity development but use of the word ldquosus-tainablerdquo does not contribute much to itsmeaning Or take the even more far-reachinguse in AHURIrsquos 1997 catalogue of publica-tions ldquoSustainable issueshellip are taken as ageneral umbrella term incorporating researchinto processes of urbanization globalizationand economic restructuring their urban andregional impacts urban metabolism as aframework for analyzing quality of life andevaluating the performance of cities and theirregions strategic frameworks for regionaleconomic development social polarization incities and regions and issues of urban andregional governancerdquo page 25 Or ldquoThe ob-jective of [sustainable] development would behuman welfare in balance with nature basedon the values of democracy equality beforethe law and social justice for present and fu-ture generations in the absence of ethniceconomic social political or gender discrimi-nation or that based on creedrdquo quoted in Car-rion Diego (1997) ldquoRe-thinking housing pro-

107Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

ure at all Why not simply ask i f i t is justSustainability becomes tautological here Presumablyone does not want the perverse result that whatevercan be kept up in the long run is good the more effec-tive the dictatorship then for instance the better itwould be

If however sustainability is a constraint rather thana goal then it can be used as a criterion to evaluatemeasures that achieve otherwise defined desirablegoals a desirable measure that is not sustainable isnot as good as an equally desirable measure that is(19)

This goes beyond the Brundtland Commission defini-tion which simply requires no harm in the long run Itmeans that ldquosustainabilityrdquo is used to ask in effectwhat will be the long-term consequences of a givenaction or proposal ldquoSustainabilityrdquo is not an independ-ent goal the contribution to which is to be weighedalong with justice etc in evaluating a policy a badpolicy that is sustainable is not better than a bad policythat is unsustainable(20) Sustainability is a limitationto be viewed in the context of an evaluation of the de-sirability on substantive criteria of other measures(21)

Balancing is required a very good programme that isnot sustainable may be more desirable than a minorone that is It may be more desirable to build 1000houses for low-income people this year even if the pacecannot be sustained rather than ten a year for theindefinite future(22)

Perhaps ldquosustainablerdquo should only mean sustainablephysically environmentally in the long run That is apossible interpretation(23) a modest one indeed butperhaps a sustainable one It would mean that ourcall for a sustainable living environment simply meansfocusing on the constraint of env i ronmentalsustainability But even that limited use of ldquosustain-ablerdquo as ldquo environmentally sustainablerdquo raises ques-tions For certainly many desirable measures havean immediate adverse effect on the environment build-ing housing for low-income families on open land in apossible conservation area might be a classic exam-ple(24) Or the reverse situation a short-term or lim-ited measure protecting the environment may contrib-ute to larger longer-term damage saving electricity ina sprawling suburban development for instance(25) In-deed

ldquoThere seems to be no place for cities in ecologicaldesign If we look at each landscape separately weare unable to ecologically justify plans for denseurban development From a regional perspectivehowever aggregation of urban and residential landuses may in fact be preferablerdquo (26)

Two quite separate problems arise here one social

duction time for responsible co-responsibil-ityrdquo in Habitat International Coalition (1997)Building the City with the People The Coali-tion San Rafael Mexico page 27 But a muchbetter formulation is found on page 32 whichspeaks of humanizing the city To quote PeterHall ldquoThe late Aaron Wildavsky once wrote apaper with the title lsquoIf planning is everythingmaybe itrsquos nothingrsquo His argument could applyto sustainability as well it could come to meananything you think is OK and ought to bedonerdquo in ldquoUtopias and realities of urban sus-tainable developmentrdquo conference proceed-ings Turin Barolo September 1996 For oneof the efforts to broaden the meaning of theterm yet give it a strongly critical meaningsee Hamm Bernd (1992) rdquoIntroductionrdquo inSustainable Development and the Future ofCities Trier Centre for European Studiespage 9 onward

14 Or to go one step further listen to thepresident and chief executive of the empow-erment zone Deborah C Wright who saidthat some of the concerns about the evolvingeconomy of 125th Street are perhaps justifiedin the eyes of the community But ldquothe factisrdquo she said ldquocapitalism has no plan ex-cept to go where money can be made hellipItrsquosscary frankly because as you know one ofthe basic tenets of capitalism is that you canrsquotcontrol it Nor do I think we want to We wantto prepare people to compete in a marketbased economy because that is the only thingthus far that has been shown to be sustain-ablerdquo Or ldquoIf a neighbourhood is to retain sta-bility it is necessary that properties shall con-tinue to be occupied by the same social andracial classes A change in social or racialoccupancy generally contributes to instabil-ity and a decline in valuesrdquo quoted in UnitedStates Federal Housing Administration(1938) Underwriting Manual Underwritingand Valuation Procedure Under Title II of theNational Housing Act US Government Print-ing Office Section 937 Washington DCquoted in McKenzie Evan (1994) PrivatopiaHomeowners Associations and the Rise ofResidential Private Government Yale Univer-sity Press New Haven page 57

15 Actually the term has mixed provenanceOn the one hand it is related to the ldquoland ethicrdquoof Aldo Leopold which is frequently cited intreatises on sustainability See for exampleJournal of the American Planning Associa-tion Autumn 1997 page 513 On the otherhand it has been expanded frequently into ablanket slogan serving many purposes as weargue at the end of this paper

108 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

and political the other scientificSocially the costs of moving towards environmental

sustainability (like the costs of environmental degra-dation)(27) will not be borne equally by everyone In con-ventional economic terms different people have dif-ferent discount rates for the same cost or benefit Meet-ing higher environmental standards increases costsSome will profit from supplying the wherewithal to meetthose standards others not being able to pay for themwill have to do without The effects of income inequal-ity are likely to be aggravated by such raising of stand-ards We encounter the problem internationally in con-nection with issues such as atomic power plants indeveloping countries without other available sourcesof energy or in the rainforest disputes in South AmericaThey are paralleled by issues raised in the environ-mental justice movement in the United States Betterenvironments for some will be at the expense of worseenvironments for others as waste disposal sites airpollution and water contamination are moved aroundEven when there is a solution that improves condi-tions for some without hurting others the benefits willbe unevenly distributed costs and benefits to dif fer-ent groups and individuals cannot be simply nettedout in quantitative terms(28) The balancing act is oftendif ficult indeed What is clear is that the simple crite-rion of sustainability does not get us far(29)

Indeed the very definition of ldquobetter environmentrdquovaries in practice by class and poverty level AsMcGranahan Songsore and Kjellen point out(30) theissues tend to vary by scale and class In the UnitedStates (and perhaps not only in the United States -certainly historically in South Africa also I suspectincreasingly in England and to varying degrees else-where) race plays a central role the differential loca-tion of toxic waste sites by racial composition of sur-roundings is a classic example For the poor the is-sues tend to be immediate and very local water sup-ply and waste disposal are immediate environmentalproblems The affluent can escape these problems bychoice of neighbourhood or private market provisiontheir problems tend to be on a larger scale automo-bile pollution at a city level perhaps global warmingat a national or worldwide level The agenda even foran environmentally limited definition of sustainabilitywill be very dif ferent for dif ferent groups

Scientifically our knowledge is limited and the fur-ther into the future we wish to project it the more theuncertainties grow Malthus who might uncharitablybe called the grandfather (and the Club of Rome itsfather) of the environmental sustainability movementcalculated with the best of the scientific knowledge ofhis day that food production would not sustain a worldpopulation much beyond its size at the time he wrote

16 The World Business Council certainlysees ldquoeco-efficiencyrdquo as a profitable marketconsistent and indeed market driven aspectof international business See De SimoneLivio D and Frank Popoff with the World Busi-ness Council for Sustainable Development(1998) Eco-efficiency the Business Link toSustainable Development MIT Press effec-tively reviewed by Gina Neff ldquoGreenwashrdquoThe Nation November 1997 page 50 DeSimone is CEO of 3M and Popoff Chairmanof the Board of Dow Chemical JoshuaKarliner in The Corporate Planet Ecology andPolitics in the Age of Globalization Sierra Club(1998) points out as cited by Neff that Chev-ron spent US$ 5000 on a butterfly protectionprogramme at its El Segundo refinery butspent more than US$ 200000 producing anad boasting about it - and el Segundo is oneof the largest single sources of pollution inthe greater Los Angeles area

17 What ldquolong runrdquo means is of course al-ways a matter for debate In 1992 the UnitedNations Conference on Environment and De-velopment (UNCED) concluded that timeframes should be extended from a few yearsto a few generations Cited in Lawrence page46 (see reference 7) But any specific defini-tion is necessarily arbitrary

18 ldquohellipecological stewardship social equityand economic prosperity are the essentialingredients for sustainable human progressrdquosummarizes a review of four leading workson sustainable communities The statementis more of a postulate than a conclusionLukerman Barbara L and Rolf Nordstrom(1997) ldquoSustainable communitiesrdquo in Journalof the American Planning Association Vol63Autumn page 513

19 An interesting logical question is a meas-ure that is not sustainable ipso facto undesir-able One argument against the worship ofthe capitalist system as ldquothe end of historyrdquois that capitalism is not sustainable in itspresent form and that there necessarily willbe other forms of economic organization re-placing it because it cannot continue as it istoday Is that a logical criticism of contempo-rary capitalism I think not It only becomessuch if the further argument is made that thenegatives of its end will outweigh the posi-tives of its growth It is then not the fact ofunsustainability that matters but the conse-quences that flow from it a quite differentmatter A single personrsquos life is not ldquosustain-ablerdquo indefinitely but that is no reason not tovalue it

109Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

Since then it has increased more than five-fold andis better nourished and lives longer We know we needto deal with the problem of global warming and weknow that relying on technological fixes is dangerousThose two propositions should lead us to scale downcertain activities linked to growth and to seek substi-tutes for others they mandate adoption of a limitedset of specific policies to achieve specific goals by spe-cific actors in a specific timetable But apart from thosespecific policies a great deal is uncertain Valid long-range concerns do not help very much in reaching aconclusion on even medium-range questions

In any event environmental long-term considerationsare not the only ones that need to be taken into ac-count when making decisions(31) Other goals weigh inand other constraints need to be brought into the bal-ance Matters of social justice of economic develop-ment of international relations of democracy of demo-cratic control over technological change and globali-zation also have both short and long-term implicationsFor a given policy to be desirable it must meet theconstraints of sustainability in each of these dimen-sions failure in any one is in theory sufficient causefor rejection Environmental sustainability seems atfirst blush to be the most ldquoobjectiverdquo the most ines-capable of all these constraints if humankind diesof f the game is over But may that not ultimately besaid also if freedom or democracy or tolerance disap-peared Since none of these events would be one-shotcatastrophes is the danger of environmental degra-dation greater today than that of war fascism pov-erty hunger disease or impoverishment for large num-bers of people

The problem of balancing differing goals and con-straints is a well-recognized one There is for instancean important debate on the relationship betweengrowth and development(32) a difficult issue and oneviewed very differently in the developed as against thedeveloping world The discussion of sustainability hasmade a significant contribution to advancing the un-derstanding of policy alternatives and their implica-tions but it is not quite clear why using the conceptldquosustainablerdquo in only half of the balancing equationclarifies the debate

If we want to talk about sustainability as a constraintaffecting all goals we not only have to face the balanc-ing problem but we have also to recognize the practi-cal fact that sustainability in most usages is heavilyfocused on ecological concerns That is not surpris-ing considering that ldquosustainabilityrdquo had its origins inthe environmental movement But why given limitedresources and limited power to bring about changeare efforts in the real world thus focused what are thepolitics of the environmental sustainability movement

20 The point is the same as with the frequentdebates about whether a given proposal isldquopracticalrdquo or not if practicality becomes a goalrather than a constraint the result is sheeropportunism

21 In the interesting evaluation of projectsundertaken by the European Foundation forthe Improvement of Living and Working Con-ditions (Towards an Economic Evaluation ofUrban Innovative Projects Dublin November1996) the usefulness of such an approach canbe seen Issues such as ldquolevel of crimerdquo arelisted as a measure of social sustainabilitybut no distinction is made between long andshort-term impacts so that unsustainablemeasures might well be given a higher ratingthan sustainable ones eg police crackdownsor long prison sentences vs job generation orrehabilitation

22 That precise calculation is made when itis decided to finance housing constructionthrough borrowing rather than all at once upfront more gets built now even if the certaintyof as many being built next year is reducedby the on-going burden of repayment for pastconstruction The opposite calculation wasmade by the Austrian Social Democrats in the1920s in deciding to pay for new social hous-ing projects all at once hoping thereby tomake it easier to fund new construction in fol-lowing years See Marcuse Peter (1986) ldquoAuseful instalment of socialist work housingin red Vienna in the 1920srdquo in Bratt RachelHartman Chester and Ann Meyerson (edi-tors) (1986) Critical Perspectives on Hous-ing Temple University Press Philadelphia

23 Not only possible but frequent The Sus-tainable Cities Programme of UNCHSUNEPfor instance states flatly ldquoThe SCP activitiesare primarily focused upon promoting moreefficient and equitable use of natural re-sources and control of environmental haz-ards in citieshelliprdquo in Sustainable City News(1998) Vol1 No4 June page 1

24 I am aware that a conflict between the twoprinciples of low-cost housing and environ-mental protection can generally be avoidedand is often used as a cloak to oppose hous-ing for poor people (see Mary Brooksrsquo workfor instance) nevertheless the possibility ofa conflict is real

25 ldquoThe Llujiazui International ConsultativeProcess also perpetuated the contradictoryapproach to lsquosustainable developmentrsquo plan-ning where a designerrsquos concerns rest withreducing energy consumption within a smallspatial area while ultimately supporting

110 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

I would suggest that it is not for reasons of logic notbecause the dif ficult issues of balance have been facedand brought to that conclusion but because of muchmore pragmatic concerns that the environmentalmovement is a multi-class if not indeed upper andmiddle-class movement in its leadership financingand political weight While the environmental justicemovement is making a substantial contribution bothto social justice and to environmental protection theenvironmental movement as a whole often proclaimsitself to be above party above controversy seeking so-lutions from which everyone will benefit to which noone can object Thus we get the report of a two-dayworkshop of the Sustainable Cities Programme stat-ing

ldquoOne of the most important conclusions of the meet-ing was that implementation of concrete actions isoften hampered by a variety of obstacles and themeeting therefore recommended and agreed that theforthcoming annual meeting of the SCP be centeredaround this key themerdquo (33)

How nice it would be if the next meeting figured outhow to get over this variety of obstacles so that wecould go on to other things Perhaps it will build onthe ldquotool development activitiesrdquo of the SCP and utilizeits process

The SCP process consists of a logically sequencedand interactive set of key activities whose systematicimplementation and infusion into the existing institu-tions would bring about profound changes in man-agement approaches and improvements in informa-tion decision-making and implementation The proc-ess forms the basis of the Source Book series(34)

Maybe the next workshop will find a programme wecan all rally round and we could escape the unpleas-ant business of facing conflicting interests having todeal with the unequal distribution of power the ne-cessities of redistribution the defeats that accompanythe victories No wonder ldquosustainabilityrdquo is an attrac-tive slogan with such a hope But if the goal is redis-tribution of wealth or opportunity or sharing poweror reducing oppression sustainability does not get usfar

To the extent that sustainability requires the reviewof policies designed today to meet the needs of todayin such a way that they do not make things worse inthe future it is an important if for planners not verynew concept It might then be reformulated to buildon the words of the Brundtland Commission

ldquoSustainable development is development that meetsspecific needs of the present and can be maintained

broader processes such as the plunderingof Chinarsquos natural resources by financial in-stitutions which use these urban spaces asbases for their lsquocommand and controlrsquo activi-tiesrdquo Quoted in Olds Kris (1997) ldquoGlobaliz-ing Shanghai the lsquoglobal intelligence corpsrsquoand the Building of Pudongrdquo in Cities Vol14No2 pages 109-123

26 From a review by Kristin Kaul of van derRyn Sim and Stuart Cowan (1995) Ecologi-cal Design Island Press Washington DC

27 The literature by now is extensive Seethe citations in a recent excellent reviewCollin Robin Morris and Robert Collin (1994)ldquoWhere d id al l the blue skies goSustainability and equity the new paradigmrdquoin Journal of Environmental Law and Litiga-tion Vol9 pages 399-460

28 Many have made the same point For arecent comment in our specific context seeAlbrechts Louis (1997) ldquoGenesis of a West-ern European spatial policyrdquo in Journal ofPlanning Education and Research Vol17

29 David Harvey has put forward this argu-ment very eloquently in Harvey David (1996)Justice Nature and the Geography of Differ-ence Blackwell London also more recentlyand concisely in Harvey David (1998) ldquoMarx-ism metaphors and ecological politicsrdquo inMonthly Review April pages 17-31 in whichhe points out that a wing of capitalism is quitecontent to judge sustainability in terms of thecontinuity of capital accumulation and callsfor a ldquomore nuanced view of the interplaybetween environmental transformations andsocialityrdquo (page 30)

30 McGranahan G Songsore J and MKjellen (1996) ldquoSustainability poverty andurban environmental transitionsrdquo in PughCedric (1996) Sustainability the Environmentand Urbanization Earthscan London pages103-133

31 As many definitions do not See for in-stance the formulation of the Commission ofEuropean Communities ldquosustainable isintended to reflect a policy and strategy forcontinued economic and social developmentwithout detriment to the environmentrdquo Citedin Lawrence page 64 (see reference 7)

32 See for instance the pieces collected inHamm Bernd et al (editors) (1992) Sustain-able Development and the Future of CitiesTrier Centre for European Studies Universityof Trier

106 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

only present conditions could be sustained In termsof our focus here ldquosustainabilityrdquo taken as a goal initself only benefits those who already have everythingthat they want Indeed even focusing on environmen-tal concerns the problem for most of the worldrsquos pooris not that their conditions cannot be sustained butthat they should not be sustained

Sustainability as a goal in itself if we are to take thetermrsquos ordinary meaning is the preservation of the sta-tus quo It would taken literally(13) involve making onlythose changes that are required to maintain that sta-tus Presumably that is what the World EconomicForum held in Davos Switzerland in 1995 had inmind when it chose as its theme ldquosustaining globaliza-tionrdquo(14) One might argue that the status quo is notsustainable socially because an unjust society will notendure That is more a hope than a demonstrated factIndeed the argument that the trouble with presenturban conditions is that they are not sustainable opensthe door to a fearsome debate of six decades ago inwhich the durability of some form of fascism was de-bated and indeed widely conceded on all sides Unjustregimes have not always historically been the mostshort-lived ones Teleological views of history are outof fashion and the ldquoend of historyrdquo argument is ratherthat the present is so sustainable that basic change isno longer conceivable even if it were desirable

Alternatively one might argue and with more evi-dence that the status quo is not sustainable in strictlyenvironmental terms indeed that is the origin of theldquosustainabilityrdquo slogan(15) But changes within thepresent system may be targeted at problems of envi-ronmental degradation global warming etc whileleaving other key undesirable aspects such as socialinjustice intact(16) Presumably good planning callsfo r soc ial just ice as well as env i ronmentalsustainability not just the one or the other

The more logically defensible use of the concept ofsustainability might be to consider it as a constraintany measure desirable on other grounds to meet sub-stantive goals must also be capable of being main-tained and must contribute to the desired goal in thelong run(17) Here again we run into problems if we arenot careful to distinguish a constraint from a goal Ifthe sustainability of a measure is taken as a goal theterm can become either tautological or perverse If adesired measure is socially just the argument couldgo then and only then is it sustainable(18) (Any otherargument would allow the conclusion that an unjustmeasure would be sustainable and if that were sowould we want it or would we not reject the criterion ofsustainability as validating it) So if justice is thestandard by which sustainability is measured whyadd the criterion of sustainability in judging the meas-

sessment in achieving sustainable develop-mentrdquo Environmental Impact AssessmentReview Vol8 page 279

10 The World Conservation Union UNEP andWWF see contributions to Price Charles andAgis Tsouros (editors) (1996) Our Cities OurFuture Policies and Action Plans for Healthand Sustainable Development WHO Copen-hagen 1996

11 See Marcuse Peter (1974) ldquoConserva-tion for whomrdquo in Smith James Noel (editor)(1974) Environmental Quality and Social Jus-tice in Urban America The ConservationFoundation Washington DC pages 17-36 re-printed in California Today Vol2 No6 June

12 This does not apply of course to the en-vironmental justice movement whose issueis the discriminatory impact of environmentaldegradation The distribution of the costs andbenefits of achieving a sustainable environ-ment remain an issue even were the goal ofsustainability to be achieved but it then be-comes an issue of justice not of sustainability

13 On the other hand its meaning can bemade elastic and it can be redefined to en-compass many other goals but then the use-fulness of the term evaporates ldquoA sustain-able city is one which succeeds in balancingeconomic environmental and socio-culturalprogress through processes of active citizenparticipationrdquo quoted in Mega Voula and JornPedersen (1997) Urban Sustainability Indi-cators European Foundation for the Improve-ment of Living and Working Conditions Dub-lin page 2 A good formulation of a goal forcity development but use of the word ldquosus-tainablerdquo does not contribute much to itsmeaning Or take the even more far-reachinguse in AHURIrsquos 1997 catalogue of publica-tions ldquoSustainable issueshellip are taken as ageneral umbrella term incorporating researchinto processes of urbanization globalizationand economic restructuring their urban andregional impacts urban metabolism as aframework for analyzing quality of life andevaluating the performance of cities and theirregions strategic frameworks for regionaleconomic development social polarization incities and regions and issues of urban andregional governancerdquo page 25 Or ldquoThe ob-jective of [sustainable] development would behuman welfare in balance with nature basedon the values of democracy equality beforethe law and social justice for present and fu-ture generations in the absence of ethniceconomic social political or gender discrimi-nation or that based on creedrdquo quoted in Car-rion Diego (1997) ldquoRe-thinking housing pro-

107Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

ure at all Why not simply ask i f i t is justSustainability becomes tautological here Presumablyone does not want the perverse result that whatevercan be kept up in the long run is good the more effec-tive the dictatorship then for instance the better itwould be

If however sustainability is a constraint rather thana goal then it can be used as a criterion to evaluatemeasures that achieve otherwise defined desirablegoals a desirable measure that is not sustainable isnot as good as an equally desirable measure that is(19)

This goes beyond the Brundtland Commission defini-tion which simply requires no harm in the long run Itmeans that ldquosustainabilityrdquo is used to ask in effectwhat will be the long-term consequences of a givenaction or proposal ldquoSustainabilityrdquo is not an independ-ent goal the contribution to which is to be weighedalong with justice etc in evaluating a policy a badpolicy that is sustainable is not better than a bad policythat is unsustainable(20) Sustainability is a limitationto be viewed in the context of an evaluation of the de-sirability on substantive criteria of other measures(21)

Balancing is required a very good programme that isnot sustainable may be more desirable than a minorone that is It may be more desirable to build 1000houses for low-income people this year even if the pacecannot be sustained rather than ten a year for theindefinite future(22)

Perhaps ldquosustainablerdquo should only mean sustainablephysically environmentally in the long run That is apossible interpretation(23) a modest one indeed butperhaps a sustainable one It would mean that ourcall for a sustainable living environment simply meansfocusing on the constraint of env i ronmentalsustainability But even that limited use of ldquosustain-ablerdquo as ldquo environmentally sustainablerdquo raises ques-tions For certainly many desirable measures havean immediate adverse effect on the environment build-ing housing for low-income families on open land in apossible conservation area might be a classic exam-ple(24) Or the reverse situation a short-term or lim-ited measure protecting the environment may contrib-ute to larger longer-term damage saving electricity ina sprawling suburban development for instance(25) In-deed

ldquoThere seems to be no place for cities in ecologicaldesign If we look at each landscape separately weare unable to ecologically justify plans for denseurban development From a regional perspectivehowever aggregation of urban and residential landuses may in fact be preferablerdquo (26)

Two quite separate problems arise here one social

duction time for responsible co-responsibil-ityrdquo in Habitat International Coalition (1997)Building the City with the People The Coali-tion San Rafael Mexico page 27 But a muchbetter formulation is found on page 32 whichspeaks of humanizing the city To quote PeterHall ldquoThe late Aaron Wildavsky once wrote apaper with the title lsquoIf planning is everythingmaybe itrsquos nothingrsquo His argument could applyto sustainability as well it could come to meananything you think is OK and ought to bedonerdquo in ldquoUtopias and realities of urban sus-tainable developmentrdquo conference proceed-ings Turin Barolo September 1996 For oneof the efforts to broaden the meaning of theterm yet give it a strongly critical meaningsee Hamm Bernd (1992) rdquoIntroductionrdquo inSustainable Development and the Future ofCities Trier Centre for European Studiespage 9 onward

14 Or to go one step further listen to thepresident and chief executive of the empow-erment zone Deborah C Wright who saidthat some of the concerns about the evolvingeconomy of 125th Street are perhaps justifiedin the eyes of the community But ldquothe factisrdquo she said ldquocapitalism has no plan ex-cept to go where money can be made hellipItrsquosscary frankly because as you know one ofthe basic tenets of capitalism is that you canrsquotcontrol it Nor do I think we want to We wantto prepare people to compete in a marketbased economy because that is the only thingthus far that has been shown to be sustain-ablerdquo Or ldquoIf a neighbourhood is to retain sta-bility it is necessary that properties shall con-tinue to be occupied by the same social andracial classes A change in social or racialoccupancy generally contributes to instabil-ity and a decline in valuesrdquo quoted in UnitedStates Federal Housing Administration(1938) Underwriting Manual Underwritingand Valuation Procedure Under Title II of theNational Housing Act US Government Print-ing Office Section 937 Washington DCquoted in McKenzie Evan (1994) PrivatopiaHomeowners Associations and the Rise ofResidential Private Government Yale Univer-sity Press New Haven page 57

15 Actually the term has mixed provenanceOn the one hand it is related to the ldquoland ethicrdquoof Aldo Leopold which is frequently cited intreatises on sustainability See for exampleJournal of the American Planning Associa-tion Autumn 1997 page 513 On the otherhand it has been expanded frequently into ablanket slogan serving many purposes as weargue at the end of this paper

108 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

and political the other scientificSocially the costs of moving towards environmental

sustainability (like the costs of environmental degra-dation)(27) will not be borne equally by everyone In con-ventional economic terms different people have dif-ferent discount rates for the same cost or benefit Meet-ing higher environmental standards increases costsSome will profit from supplying the wherewithal to meetthose standards others not being able to pay for themwill have to do without The effects of income inequal-ity are likely to be aggravated by such raising of stand-ards We encounter the problem internationally in con-nection with issues such as atomic power plants indeveloping countries without other available sourcesof energy or in the rainforest disputes in South AmericaThey are paralleled by issues raised in the environ-mental justice movement in the United States Betterenvironments for some will be at the expense of worseenvironments for others as waste disposal sites airpollution and water contamination are moved aroundEven when there is a solution that improves condi-tions for some without hurting others the benefits willbe unevenly distributed costs and benefits to dif fer-ent groups and individuals cannot be simply nettedout in quantitative terms(28) The balancing act is oftendif ficult indeed What is clear is that the simple crite-rion of sustainability does not get us far(29)

Indeed the very definition of ldquobetter environmentrdquovaries in practice by class and poverty level AsMcGranahan Songsore and Kjellen point out(30) theissues tend to vary by scale and class In the UnitedStates (and perhaps not only in the United States -certainly historically in South Africa also I suspectincreasingly in England and to varying degrees else-where) race plays a central role the differential loca-tion of toxic waste sites by racial composition of sur-roundings is a classic example For the poor the is-sues tend to be immediate and very local water sup-ply and waste disposal are immediate environmentalproblems The affluent can escape these problems bychoice of neighbourhood or private market provisiontheir problems tend to be on a larger scale automo-bile pollution at a city level perhaps global warmingat a national or worldwide level The agenda even foran environmentally limited definition of sustainabilitywill be very dif ferent for dif ferent groups

Scientifically our knowledge is limited and the fur-ther into the future we wish to project it the more theuncertainties grow Malthus who might uncharitablybe called the grandfather (and the Club of Rome itsfather) of the environmental sustainability movementcalculated with the best of the scientific knowledge ofhis day that food production would not sustain a worldpopulation much beyond its size at the time he wrote

16 The World Business Council certainlysees ldquoeco-efficiencyrdquo as a profitable marketconsistent and indeed market driven aspectof international business See De SimoneLivio D and Frank Popoff with the World Busi-ness Council for Sustainable Development(1998) Eco-efficiency the Business Link toSustainable Development MIT Press effec-tively reviewed by Gina Neff ldquoGreenwashrdquoThe Nation November 1997 page 50 DeSimone is CEO of 3M and Popoff Chairmanof the Board of Dow Chemical JoshuaKarliner in The Corporate Planet Ecology andPolitics in the Age of Globalization Sierra Club(1998) points out as cited by Neff that Chev-ron spent US$ 5000 on a butterfly protectionprogramme at its El Segundo refinery butspent more than US$ 200000 producing anad boasting about it - and el Segundo is oneof the largest single sources of pollution inthe greater Los Angeles area

17 What ldquolong runrdquo means is of course al-ways a matter for debate In 1992 the UnitedNations Conference on Environment and De-velopment (UNCED) concluded that timeframes should be extended from a few yearsto a few generations Cited in Lawrence page46 (see reference 7) But any specific defini-tion is necessarily arbitrary

18 ldquohellipecological stewardship social equityand economic prosperity are the essentialingredients for sustainable human progressrdquosummarizes a review of four leading workson sustainable communities The statementis more of a postulate than a conclusionLukerman Barbara L and Rolf Nordstrom(1997) ldquoSustainable communitiesrdquo in Journalof the American Planning Association Vol63Autumn page 513

19 An interesting logical question is a meas-ure that is not sustainable ipso facto undesir-able One argument against the worship ofthe capitalist system as ldquothe end of historyrdquois that capitalism is not sustainable in itspresent form and that there necessarily willbe other forms of economic organization re-placing it because it cannot continue as it istoday Is that a logical criticism of contempo-rary capitalism I think not It only becomessuch if the further argument is made that thenegatives of its end will outweigh the posi-tives of its growth It is then not the fact ofunsustainability that matters but the conse-quences that flow from it a quite differentmatter A single personrsquos life is not ldquosustain-ablerdquo indefinitely but that is no reason not tovalue it

109Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

Since then it has increased more than five-fold andis better nourished and lives longer We know we needto deal with the problem of global warming and weknow that relying on technological fixes is dangerousThose two propositions should lead us to scale downcertain activities linked to growth and to seek substi-tutes for others they mandate adoption of a limitedset of specific policies to achieve specific goals by spe-cific actors in a specific timetable But apart from thosespecific policies a great deal is uncertain Valid long-range concerns do not help very much in reaching aconclusion on even medium-range questions

In any event environmental long-term considerationsare not the only ones that need to be taken into ac-count when making decisions(31) Other goals weigh inand other constraints need to be brought into the bal-ance Matters of social justice of economic develop-ment of international relations of democracy of demo-cratic control over technological change and globali-zation also have both short and long-term implicationsFor a given policy to be desirable it must meet theconstraints of sustainability in each of these dimen-sions failure in any one is in theory sufficient causefor rejection Environmental sustainability seems atfirst blush to be the most ldquoobjectiverdquo the most ines-capable of all these constraints if humankind diesof f the game is over But may that not ultimately besaid also if freedom or democracy or tolerance disap-peared Since none of these events would be one-shotcatastrophes is the danger of environmental degra-dation greater today than that of war fascism pov-erty hunger disease or impoverishment for large num-bers of people

The problem of balancing differing goals and con-straints is a well-recognized one There is for instancean important debate on the relationship betweengrowth and development(32) a difficult issue and oneviewed very differently in the developed as against thedeveloping world The discussion of sustainability hasmade a significant contribution to advancing the un-derstanding of policy alternatives and their implica-tions but it is not quite clear why using the conceptldquosustainablerdquo in only half of the balancing equationclarifies the debate

If we want to talk about sustainability as a constraintaffecting all goals we not only have to face the balanc-ing problem but we have also to recognize the practi-cal fact that sustainability in most usages is heavilyfocused on ecological concerns That is not surpris-ing considering that ldquosustainabilityrdquo had its origins inthe environmental movement But why given limitedresources and limited power to bring about changeare efforts in the real world thus focused what are thepolitics of the environmental sustainability movement

20 The point is the same as with the frequentdebates about whether a given proposal isldquopracticalrdquo or not if practicality becomes a goalrather than a constraint the result is sheeropportunism

21 In the interesting evaluation of projectsundertaken by the European Foundation forthe Improvement of Living and Working Con-ditions (Towards an Economic Evaluation ofUrban Innovative Projects Dublin November1996) the usefulness of such an approach canbe seen Issues such as ldquolevel of crimerdquo arelisted as a measure of social sustainabilitybut no distinction is made between long andshort-term impacts so that unsustainablemeasures might well be given a higher ratingthan sustainable ones eg police crackdownsor long prison sentences vs job generation orrehabilitation

22 That precise calculation is made when itis decided to finance housing constructionthrough borrowing rather than all at once upfront more gets built now even if the certaintyof as many being built next year is reducedby the on-going burden of repayment for pastconstruction The opposite calculation wasmade by the Austrian Social Democrats in the1920s in deciding to pay for new social hous-ing projects all at once hoping thereby tomake it easier to fund new construction in fol-lowing years See Marcuse Peter (1986) ldquoAuseful instalment of socialist work housingin red Vienna in the 1920srdquo in Bratt RachelHartman Chester and Ann Meyerson (edi-tors) (1986) Critical Perspectives on Hous-ing Temple University Press Philadelphia

23 Not only possible but frequent The Sus-tainable Cities Programme of UNCHSUNEPfor instance states flatly ldquoThe SCP activitiesare primarily focused upon promoting moreefficient and equitable use of natural re-sources and control of environmental haz-ards in citieshelliprdquo in Sustainable City News(1998) Vol1 No4 June page 1

24 I am aware that a conflict between the twoprinciples of low-cost housing and environ-mental protection can generally be avoidedand is often used as a cloak to oppose hous-ing for poor people (see Mary Brooksrsquo workfor instance) nevertheless the possibility ofa conflict is real

25 ldquoThe Llujiazui International ConsultativeProcess also perpetuated the contradictoryapproach to lsquosustainable developmentrsquo plan-ning where a designerrsquos concerns rest withreducing energy consumption within a smallspatial area while ultimately supporting

110 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

I would suggest that it is not for reasons of logic notbecause the dif ficult issues of balance have been facedand brought to that conclusion but because of muchmore pragmatic concerns that the environmentalmovement is a multi-class if not indeed upper andmiddle-class movement in its leadership financingand political weight While the environmental justicemovement is making a substantial contribution bothto social justice and to environmental protection theenvironmental movement as a whole often proclaimsitself to be above party above controversy seeking so-lutions from which everyone will benefit to which noone can object Thus we get the report of a two-dayworkshop of the Sustainable Cities Programme stat-ing

ldquoOne of the most important conclusions of the meet-ing was that implementation of concrete actions isoften hampered by a variety of obstacles and themeeting therefore recommended and agreed that theforthcoming annual meeting of the SCP be centeredaround this key themerdquo (33)

How nice it would be if the next meeting figured outhow to get over this variety of obstacles so that wecould go on to other things Perhaps it will build onthe ldquotool development activitiesrdquo of the SCP and utilizeits process

The SCP process consists of a logically sequencedand interactive set of key activities whose systematicimplementation and infusion into the existing institu-tions would bring about profound changes in man-agement approaches and improvements in informa-tion decision-making and implementation The proc-ess forms the basis of the Source Book series(34)

Maybe the next workshop will find a programme wecan all rally round and we could escape the unpleas-ant business of facing conflicting interests having todeal with the unequal distribution of power the ne-cessities of redistribution the defeats that accompanythe victories No wonder ldquosustainabilityrdquo is an attrac-tive slogan with such a hope But if the goal is redis-tribution of wealth or opportunity or sharing poweror reducing oppression sustainability does not get usfar

To the extent that sustainability requires the reviewof policies designed today to meet the needs of todayin such a way that they do not make things worse inthe future it is an important if for planners not verynew concept It might then be reformulated to buildon the words of the Brundtland Commission

ldquoSustainable development is development that meetsspecific needs of the present and can be maintained

broader processes such as the plunderingof Chinarsquos natural resources by financial in-stitutions which use these urban spaces asbases for their lsquocommand and controlrsquo activi-tiesrdquo Quoted in Olds Kris (1997) ldquoGlobaliz-ing Shanghai the lsquoglobal intelligence corpsrsquoand the Building of Pudongrdquo in Cities Vol14No2 pages 109-123

26 From a review by Kristin Kaul of van derRyn Sim and Stuart Cowan (1995) Ecologi-cal Design Island Press Washington DC

27 The literature by now is extensive Seethe citations in a recent excellent reviewCollin Robin Morris and Robert Collin (1994)ldquoWhere d id al l the blue skies goSustainability and equity the new paradigmrdquoin Journal of Environmental Law and Litiga-tion Vol9 pages 399-460

28 Many have made the same point For arecent comment in our specific context seeAlbrechts Louis (1997) ldquoGenesis of a West-ern European spatial policyrdquo in Journal ofPlanning Education and Research Vol17

29 David Harvey has put forward this argu-ment very eloquently in Harvey David (1996)Justice Nature and the Geography of Differ-ence Blackwell London also more recentlyand concisely in Harvey David (1998) ldquoMarx-ism metaphors and ecological politicsrdquo inMonthly Review April pages 17-31 in whichhe points out that a wing of capitalism is quitecontent to judge sustainability in terms of thecontinuity of capital accumulation and callsfor a ldquomore nuanced view of the interplaybetween environmental transformations andsocialityrdquo (page 30)

30 McGranahan G Songsore J and MKjellen (1996) ldquoSustainability poverty andurban environmental transitionsrdquo in PughCedric (1996) Sustainability the Environmentand Urbanization Earthscan London pages103-133

31 As many definitions do not See for in-stance the formulation of the Commission ofEuropean Communities ldquosustainable isintended to reflect a policy and strategy forcontinued economic and social developmentwithout detriment to the environmentrdquo Citedin Lawrence page 64 (see reference 7)

32 See for instance the pieces collected inHamm Bernd et al (editors) (1992) Sustain-able Development and the Future of CitiesTrier Centre for European Studies Universityof Trier

107Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

ure at all Why not simply ask i f i t is justSustainability becomes tautological here Presumablyone does not want the perverse result that whatevercan be kept up in the long run is good the more effec-tive the dictatorship then for instance the better itwould be

If however sustainability is a constraint rather thana goal then it can be used as a criterion to evaluatemeasures that achieve otherwise defined desirablegoals a desirable measure that is not sustainable isnot as good as an equally desirable measure that is(19)

This goes beyond the Brundtland Commission defini-tion which simply requires no harm in the long run Itmeans that ldquosustainabilityrdquo is used to ask in effectwhat will be the long-term consequences of a givenaction or proposal ldquoSustainabilityrdquo is not an independ-ent goal the contribution to which is to be weighedalong with justice etc in evaluating a policy a badpolicy that is sustainable is not better than a bad policythat is unsustainable(20) Sustainability is a limitationto be viewed in the context of an evaluation of the de-sirability on substantive criteria of other measures(21)

Balancing is required a very good programme that isnot sustainable may be more desirable than a minorone that is It may be more desirable to build 1000houses for low-income people this year even if the pacecannot be sustained rather than ten a year for theindefinite future(22)

Perhaps ldquosustainablerdquo should only mean sustainablephysically environmentally in the long run That is apossible interpretation(23) a modest one indeed butperhaps a sustainable one It would mean that ourcall for a sustainable living environment simply meansfocusing on the constraint of env i ronmentalsustainability But even that limited use of ldquosustain-ablerdquo as ldquo environmentally sustainablerdquo raises ques-tions For certainly many desirable measures havean immediate adverse effect on the environment build-ing housing for low-income families on open land in apossible conservation area might be a classic exam-ple(24) Or the reverse situation a short-term or lim-ited measure protecting the environment may contrib-ute to larger longer-term damage saving electricity ina sprawling suburban development for instance(25) In-deed

ldquoThere seems to be no place for cities in ecologicaldesign If we look at each landscape separately weare unable to ecologically justify plans for denseurban development From a regional perspectivehowever aggregation of urban and residential landuses may in fact be preferablerdquo (26)

Two quite separate problems arise here one social

duction time for responsible co-responsibil-ityrdquo in Habitat International Coalition (1997)Building the City with the People The Coali-tion San Rafael Mexico page 27 But a muchbetter formulation is found on page 32 whichspeaks of humanizing the city To quote PeterHall ldquoThe late Aaron Wildavsky once wrote apaper with the title lsquoIf planning is everythingmaybe itrsquos nothingrsquo His argument could applyto sustainability as well it could come to meananything you think is OK and ought to bedonerdquo in ldquoUtopias and realities of urban sus-tainable developmentrdquo conference proceed-ings Turin Barolo September 1996 For oneof the efforts to broaden the meaning of theterm yet give it a strongly critical meaningsee Hamm Bernd (1992) rdquoIntroductionrdquo inSustainable Development and the Future ofCities Trier Centre for European Studiespage 9 onward

14 Or to go one step further listen to thepresident and chief executive of the empow-erment zone Deborah C Wright who saidthat some of the concerns about the evolvingeconomy of 125th Street are perhaps justifiedin the eyes of the community But ldquothe factisrdquo she said ldquocapitalism has no plan ex-cept to go where money can be made hellipItrsquosscary frankly because as you know one ofthe basic tenets of capitalism is that you canrsquotcontrol it Nor do I think we want to We wantto prepare people to compete in a marketbased economy because that is the only thingthus far that has been shown to be sustain-ablerdquo Or ldquoIf a neighbourhood is to retain sta-bility it is necessary that properties shall con-tinue to be occupied by the same social andracial classes A change in social or racialoccupancy generally contributes to instabil-ity and a decline in valuesrdquo quoted in UnitedStates Federal Housing Administration(1938) Underwriting Manual Underwritingand Valuation Procedure Under Title II of theNational Housing Act US Government Print-ing Office Section 937 Washington DCquoted in McKenzie Evan (1994) PrivatopiaHomeowners Associations and the Rise ofResidential Private Government Yale Univer-sity Press New Haven page 57

15 Actually the term has mixed provenanceOn the one hand it is related to the ldquoland ethicrdquoof Aldo Leopold which is frequently cited intreatises on sustainability See for exampleJournal of the American Planning Associa-tion Autumn 1997 page 513 On the otherhand it has been expanded frequently into ablanket slogan serving many purposes as weargue at the end of this paper

108 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

and political the other scientificSocially the costs of moving towards environmental

sustainability (like the costs of environmental degra-dation)(27) will not be borne equally by everyone In con-ventional economic terms different people have dif-ferent discount rates for the same cost or benefit Meet-ing higher environmental standards increases costsSome will profit from supplying the wherewithal to meetthose standards others not being able to pay for themwill have to do without The effects of income inequal-ity are likely to be aggravated by such raising of stand-ards We encounter the problem internationally in con-nection with issues such as atomic power plants indeveloping countries without other available sourcesof energy or in the rainforest disputes in South AmericaThey are paralleled by issues raised in the environ-mental justice movement in the United States Betterenvironments for some will be at the expense of worseenvironments for others as waste disposal sites airpollution and water contamination are moved aroundEven when there is a solution that improves condi-tions for some without hurting others the benefits willbe unevenly distributed costs and benefits to dif fer-ent groups and individuals cannot be simply nettedout in quantitative terms(28) The balancing act is oftendif ficult indeed What is clear is that the simple crite-rion of sustainability does not get us far(29)

Indeed the very definition of ldquobetter environmentrdquovaries in practice by class and poverty level AsMcGranahan Songsore and Kjellen point out(30) theissues tend to vary by scale and class In the UnitedStates (and perhaps not only in the United States -certainly historically in South Africa also I suspectincreasingly in England and to varying degrees else-where) race plays a central role the differential loca-tion of toxic waste sites by racial composition of sur-roundings is a classic example For the poor the is-sues tend to be immediate and very local water sup-ply and waste disposal are immediate environmentalproblems The affluent can escape these problems bychoice of neighbourhood or private market provisiontheir problems tend to be on a larger scale automo-bile pollution at a city level perhaps global warmingat a national or worldwide level The agenda even foran environmentally limited definition of sustainabilitywill be very dif ferent for dif ferent groups

Scientifically our knowledge is limited and the fur-ther into the future we wish to project it the more theuncertainties grow Malthus who might uncharitablybe called the grandfather (and the Club of Rome itsfather) of the environmental sustainability movementcalculated with the best of the scientific knowledge ofhis day that food production would not sustain a worldpopulation much beyond its size at the time he wrote

16 The World Business Council certainlysees ldquoeco-efficiencyrdquo as a profitable marketconsistent and indeed market driven aspectof international business See De SimoneLivio D and Frank Popoff with the World Busi-ness Council for Sustainable Development(1998) Eco-efficiency the Business Link toSustainable Development MIT Press effec-tively reviewed by Gina Neff ldquoGreenwashrdquoThe Nation November 1997 page 50 DeSimone is CEO of 3M and Popoff Chairmanof the Board of Dow Chemical JoshuaKarliner in The Corporate Planet Ecology andPolitics in the Age of Globalization Sierra Club(1998) points out as cited by Neff that Chev-ron spent US$ 5000 on a butterfly protectionprogramme at its El Segundo refinery butspent more than US$ 200000 producing anad boasting about it - and el Segundo is oneof the largest single sources of pollution inthe greater Los Angeles area

17 What ldquolong runrdquo means is of course al-ways a matter for debate In 1992 the UnitedNations Conference on Environment and De-velopment (UNCED) concluded that timeframes should be extended from a few yearsto a few generations Cited in Lawrence page46 (see reference 7) But any specific defini-tion is necessarily arbitrary

18 ldquohellipecological stewardship social equityand economic prosperity are the essentialingredients for sustainable human progressrdquosummarizes a review of four leading workson sustainable communities The statementis more of a postulate than a conclusionLukerman Barbara L and Rolf Nordstrom(1997) ldquoSustainable communitiesrdquo in Journalof the American Planning Association Vol63Autumn page 513

19 An interesting logical question is a meas-ure that is not sustainable ipso facto undesir-able One argument against the worship ofthe capitalist system as ldquothe end of historyrdquois that capitalism is not sustainable in itspresent form and that there necessarily willbe other forms of economic organization re-placing it because it cannot continue as it istoday Is that a logical criticism of contempo-rary capitalism I think not It only becomessuch if the further argument is made that thenegatives of its end will outweigh the posi-tives of its growth It is then not the fact ofunsustainability that matters but the conse-quences that flow from it a quite differentmatter A single personrsquos life is not ldquosustain-ablerdquo indefinitely but that is no reason not tovalue it

109Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

Since then it has increased more than five-fold andis better nourished and lives longer We know we needto deal with the problem of global warming and weknow that relying on technological fixes is dangerousThose two propositions should lead us to scale downcertain activities linked to growth and to seek substi-tutes for others they mandate adoption of a limitedset of specific policies to achieve specific goals by spe-cific actors in a specific timetable But apart from thosespecific policies a great deal is uncertain Valid long-range concerns do not help very much in reaching aconclusion on even medium-range questions

In any event environmental long-term considerationsare not the only ones that need to be taken into ac-count when making decisions(31) Other goals weigh inand other constraints need to be brought into the bal-ance Matters of social justice of economic develop-ment of international relations of democracy of demo-cratic control over technological change and globali-zation also have both short and long-term implicationsFor a given policy to be desirable it must meet theconstraints of sustainability in each of these dimen-sions failure in any one is in theory sufficient causefor rejection Environmental sustainability seems atfirst blush to be the most ldquoobjectiverdquo the most ines-capable of all these constraints if humankind diesof f the game is over But may that not ultimately besaid also if freedom or democracy or tolerance disap-peared Since none of these events would be one-shotcatastrophes is the danger of environmental degra-dation greater today than that of war fascism pov-erty hunger disease or impoverishment for large num-bers of people

The problem of balancing differing goals and con-straints is a well-recognized one There is for instancean important debate on the relationship betweengrowth and development(32) a difficult issue and oneviewed very differently in the developed as against thedeveloping world The discussion of sustainability hasmade a significant contribution to advancing the un-derstanding of policy alternatives and their implica-tions but it is not quite clear why using the conceptldquosustainablerdquo in only half of the balancing equationclarifies the debate

If we want to talk about sustainability as a constraintaffecting all goals we not only have to face the balanc-ing problem but we have also to recognize the practi-cal fact that sustainability in most usages is heavilyfocused on ecological concerns That is not surpris-ing considering that ldquosustainabilityrdquo had its origins inthe environmental movement But why given limitedresources and limited power to bring about changeare efforts in the real world thus focused what are thepolitics of the environmental sustainability movement

20 The point is the same as with the frequentdebates about whether a given proposal isldquopracticalrdquo or not if practicality becomes a goalrather than a constraint the result is sheeropportunism

21 In the interesting evaluation of projectsundertaken by the European Foundation forthe Improvement of Living and Working Con-ditions (Towards an Economic Evaluation ofUrban Innovative Projects Dublin November1996) the usefulness of such an approach canbe seen Issues such as ldquolevel of crimerdquo arelisted as a measure of social sustainabilitybut no distinction is made between long andshort-term impacts so that unsustainablemeasures might well be given a higher ratingthan sustainable ones eg police crackdownsor long prison sentences vs job generation orrehabilitation

22 That precise calculation is made when itis decided to finance housing constructionthrough borrowing rather than all at once upfront more gets built now even if the certaintyof as many being built next year is reducedby the on-going burden of repayment for pastconstruction The opposite calculation wasmade by the Austrian Social Democrats in the1920s in deciding to pay for new social hous-ing projects all at once hoping thereby tomake it easier to fund new construction in fol-lowing years See Marcuse Peter (1986) ldquoAuseful instalment of socialist work housingin red Vienna in the 1920srdquo in Bratt RachelHartman Chester and Ann Meyerson (edi-tors) (1986) Critical Perspectives on Hous-ing Temple University Press Philadelphia

23 Not only possible but frequent The Sus-tainable Cities Programme of UNCHSUNEPfor instance states flatly ldquoThe SCP activitiesare primarily focused upon promoting moreefficient and equitable use of natural re-sources and control of environmental haz-ards in citieshelliprdquo in Sustainable City News(1998) Vol1 No4 June page 1

24 I am aware that a conflict between the twoprinciples of low-cost housing and environ-mental protection can generally be avoidedand is often used as a cloak to oppose hous-ing for poor people (see Mary Brooksrsquo workfor instance) nevertheless the possibility ofa conflict is real

25 ldquoThe Llujiazui International ConsultativeProcess also perpetuated the contradictoryapproach to lsquosustainable developmentrsquo plan-ning where a designerrsquos concerns rest withreducing energy consumption within a smallspatial area while ultimately supporting

110 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

I would suggest that it is not for reasons of logic notbecause the dif ficult issues of balance have been facedand brought to that conclusion but because of muchmore pragmatic concerns that the environmentalmovement is a multi-class if not indeed upper andmiddle-class movement in its leadership financingand political weight While the environmental justicemovement is making a substantial contribution bothto social justice and to environmental protection theenvironmental movement as a whole often proclaimsitself to be above party above controversy seeking so-lutions from which everyone will benefit to which noone can object Thus we get the report of a two-dayworkshop of the Sustainable Cities Programme stat-ing

ldquoOne of the most important conclusions of the meet-ing was that implementation of concrete actions isoften hampered by a variety of obstacles and themeeting therefore recommended and agreed that theforthcoming annual meeting of the SCP be centeredaround this key themerdquo (33)

How nice it would be if the next meeting figured outhow to get over this variety of obstacles so that wecould go on to other things Perhaps it will build onthe ldquotool development activitiesrdquo of the SCP and utilizeits process

The SCP process consists of a logically sequencedand interactive set of key activities whose systematicimplementation and infusion into the existing institu-tions would bring about profound changes in man-agement approaches and improvements in informa-tion decision-making and implementation The proc-ess forms the basis of the Source Book series(34)

Maybe the next workshop will find a programme wecan all rally round and we could escape the unpleas-ant business of facing conflicting interests having todeal with the unequal distribution of power the ne-cessities of redistribution the defeats that accompanythe victories No wonder ldquosustainabilityrdquo is an attrac-tive slogan with such a hope But if the goal is redis-tribution of wealth or opportunity or sharing poweror reducing oppression sustainability does not get usfar

To the extent that sustainability requires the reviewof policies designed today to meet the needs of todayin such a way that they do not make things worse inthe future it is an important if for planners not verynew concept It might then be reformulated to buildon the words of the Brundtland Commission

ldquoSustainable development is development that meetsspecific needs of the present and can be maintained

broader processes such as the plunderingof Chinarsquos natural resources by financial in-stitutions which use these urban spaces asbases for their lsquocommand and controlrsquo activi-tiesrdquo Quoted in Olds Kris (1997) ldquoGlobaliz-ing Shanghai the lsquoglobal intelligence corpsrsquoand the Building of Pudongrdquo in Cities Vol14No2 pages 109-123

26 From a review by Kristin Kaul of van derRyn Sim and Stuart Cowan (1995) Ecologi-cal Design Island Press Washington DC

27 The literature by now is extensive Seethe citations in a recent excellent reviewCollin Robin Morris and Robert Collin (1994)ldquoWhere d id al l the blue skies goSustainability and equity the new paradigmrdquoin Journal of Environmental Law and Litiga-tion Vol9 pages 399-460

28 Many have made the same point For arecent comment in our specific context seeAlbrechts Louis (1997) ldquoGenesis of a West-ern European spatial policyrdquo in Journal ofPlanning Education and Research Vol17

29 David Harvey has put forward this argu-ment very eloquently in Harvey David (1996)Justice Nature and the Geography of Differ-ence Blackwell London also more recentlyand concisely in Harvey David (1998) ldquoMarx-ism metaphors and ecological politicsrdquo inMonthly Review April pages 17-31 in whichhe points out that a wing of capitalism is quitecontent to judge sustainability in terms of thecontinuity of capital accumulation and callsfor a ldquomore nuanced view of the interplaybetween environmental transformations andsocialityrdquo (page 30)

30 McGranahan G Songsore J and MKjellen (1996) ldquoSustainability poverty andurban environmental transitionsrdquo in PughCedric (1996) Sustainability the Environmentand Urbanization Earthscan London pages103-133

31 As many definitions do not See for in-stance the formulation of the Commission ofEuropean Communities ldquosustainable isintended to reflect a policy and strategy forcontinued economic and social developmentwithout detriment to the environmentrdquo Citedin Lawrence page 64 (see reference 7)

32 See for instance the pieces collected inHamm Bernd et al (editors) (1992) Sustain-able Development and the Future of CitiesTrier Centre for European Studies Universityof Trier

108 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

and political the other scientificSocially the costs of moving towards environmental

sustainability (like the costs of environmental degra-dation)(27) will not be borne equally by everyone In con-ventional economic terms different people have dif-ferent discount rates for the same cost or benefit Meet-ing higher environmental standards increases costsSome will profit from supplying the wherewithal to meetthose standards others not being able to pay for themwill have to do without The effects of income inequal-ity are likely to be aggravated by such raising of stand-ards We encounter the problem internationally in con-nection with issues such as atomic power plants indeveloping countries without other available sourcesof energy or in the rainforest disputes in South AmericaThey are paralleled by issues raised in the environ-mental justice movement in the United States Betterenvironments for some will be at the expense of worseenvironments for others as waste disposal sites airpollution and water contamination are moved aroundEven when there is a solution that improves condi-tions for some without hurting others the benefits willbe unevenly distributed costs and benefits to dif fer-ent groups and individuals cannot be simply nettedout in quantitative terms(28) The balancing act is oftendif ficult indeed What is clear is that the simple crite-rion of sustainability does not get us far(29)

Indeed the very definition of ldquobetter environmentrdquovaries in practice by class and poverty level AsMcGranahan Songsore and Kjellen point out(30) theissues tend to vary by scale and class In the UnitedStates (and perhaps not only in the United States -certainly historically in South Africa also I suspectincreasingly in England and to varying degrees else-where) race plays a central role the differential loca-tion of toxic waste sites by racial composition of sur-roundings is a classic example For the poor the is-sues tend to be immediate and very local water sup-ply and waste disposal are immediate environmentalproblems The affluent can escape these problems bychoice of neighbourhood or private market provisiontheir problems tend to be on a larger scale automo-bile pollution at a city level perhaps global warmingat a national or worldwide level The agenda even foran environmentally limited definition of sustainabilitywill be very dif ferent for dif ferent groups

Scientifically our knowledge is limited and the fur-ther into the future we wish to project it the more theuncertainties grow Malthus who might uncharitablybe called the grandfather (and the Club of Rome itsfather) of the environmental sustainability movementcalculated with the best of the scientific knowledge ofhis day that food production would not sustain a worldpopulation much beyond its size at the time he wrote

16 The World Business Council certainlysees ldquoeco-efficiencyrdquo as a profitable marketconsistent and indeed market driven aspectof international business See De SimoneLivio D and Frank Popoff with the World Busi-ness Council for Sustainable Development(1998) Eco-efficiency the Business Link toSustainable Development MIT Press effec-tively reviewed by Gina Neff ldquoGreenwashrdquoThe Nation November 1997 page 50 DeSimone is CEO of 3M and Popoff Chairmanof the Board of Dow Chemical JoshuaKarliner in The Corporate Planet Ecology andPolitics in the Age of Globalization Sierra Club(1998) points out as cited by Neff that Chev-ron spent US$ 5000 on a butterfly protectionprogramme at its El Segundo refinery butspent more than US$ 200000 producing anad boasting about it - and el Segundo is oneof the largest single sources of pollution inthe greater Los Angeles area

17 What ldquolong runrdquo means is of course al-ways a matter for debate In 1992 the UnitedNations Conference on Environment and De-velopment (UNCED) concluded that timeframes should be extended from a few yearsto a few generations Cited in Lawrence page46 (see reference 7) But any specific defini-tion is necessarily arbitrary

18 ldquohellipecological stewardship social equityand economic prosperity are the essentialingredients for sustainable human progressrdquosummarizes a review of four leading workson sustainable communities The statementis more of a postulate than a conclusionLukerman Barbara L and Rolf Nordstrom(1997) ldquoSustainable communitiesrdquo in Journalof the American Planning Association Vol63Autumn page 513

19 An interesting logical question is a meas-ure that is not sustainable ipso facto undesir-able One argument against the worship ofthe capitalist system as ldquothe end of historyrdquois that capitalism is not sustainable in itspresent form and that there necessarily willbe other forms of economic organization re-placing it because it cannot continue as it istoday Is that a logical criticism of contempo-rary capitalism I think not It only becomessuch if the further argument is made that thenegatives of its end will outweigh the posi-tives of its growth It is then not the fact ofunsustainability that matters but the conse-quences that flow from it a quite differentmatter A single personrsquos life is not ldquosustain-ablerdquo indefinitely but that is no reason not tovalue it

109Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

Since then it has increased more than five-fold andis better nourished and lives longer We know we needto deal with the problem of global warming and weknow that relying on technological fixes is dangerousThose two propositions should lead us to scale downcertain activities linked to growth and to seek substi-tutes for others they mandate adoption of a limitedset of specific policies to achieve specific goals by spe-cific actors in a specific timetable But apart from thosespecific policies a great deal is uncertain Valid long-range concerns do not help very much in reaching aconclusion on even medium-range questions

In any event environmental long-term considerationsare not the only ones that need to be taken into ac-count when making decisions(31) Other goals weigh inand other constraints need to be brought into the bal-ance Matters of social justice of economic develop-ment of international relations of democracy of demo-cratic control over technological change and globali-zation also have both short and long-term implicationsFor a given policy to be desirable it must meet theconstraints of sustainability in each of these dimen-sions failure in any one is in theory sufficient causefor rejection Environmental sustainability seems atfirst blush to be the most ldquoobjectiverdquo the most ines-capable of all these constraints if humankind diesof f the game is over But may that not ultimately besaid also if freedom or democracy or tolerance disap-peared Since none of these events would be one-shotcatastrophes is the danger of environmental degra-dation greater today than that of war fascism pov-erty hunger disease or impoverishment for large num-bers of people

The problem of balancing differing goals and con-straints is a well-recognized one There is for instancean important debate on the relationship betweengrowth and development(32) a difficult issue and oneviewed very differently in the developed as against thedeveloping world The discussion of sustainability hasmade a significant contribution to advancing the un-derstanding of policy alternatives and their implica-tions but it is not quite clear why using the conceptldquosustainablerdquo in only half of the balancing equationclarifies the debate

If we want to talk about sustainability as a constraintaffecting all goals we not only have to face the balanc-ing problem but we have also to recognize the practi-cal fact that sustainability in most usages is heavilyfocused on ecological concerns That is not surpris-ing considering that ldquosustainabilityrdquo had its origins inthe environmental movement But why given limitedresources and limited power to bring about changeare efforts in the real world thus focused what are thepolitics of the environmental sustainability movement

20 The point is the same as with the frequentdebates about whether a given proposal isldquopracticalrdquo or not if practicality becomes a goalrather than a constraint the result is sheeropportunism

21 In the interesting evaluation of projectsundertaken by the European Foundation forthe Improvement of Living and Working Con-ditions (Towards an Economic Evaluation ofUrban Innovative Projects Dublin November1996) the usefulness of such an approach canbe seen Issues such as ldquolevel of crimerdquo arelisted as a measure of social sustainabilitybut no distinction is made between long andshort-term impacts so that unsustainablemeasures might well be given a higher ratingthan sustainable ones eg police crackdownsor long prison sentences vs job generation orrehabilitation

22 That precise calculation is made when itis decided to finance housing constructionthrough borrowing rather than all at once upfront more gets built now even if the certaintyof as many being built next year is reducedby the on-going burden of repayment for pastconstruction The opposite calculation wasmade by the Austrian Social Democrats in the1920s in deciding to pay for new social hous-ing projects all at once hoping thereby tomake it easier to fund new construction in fol-lowing years See Marcuse Peter (1986) ldquoAuseful instalment of socialist work housingin red Vienna in the 1920srdquo in Bratt RachelHartman Chester and Ann Meyerson (edi-tors) (1986) Critical Perspectives on Hous-ing Temple University Press Philadelphia

23 Not only possible but frequent The Sus-tainable Cities Programme of UNCHSUNEPfor instance states flatly ldquoThe SCP activitiesare primarily focused upon promoting moreefficient and equitable use of natural re-sources and control of environmental haz-ards in citieshelliprdquo in Sustainable City News(1998) Vol1 No4 June page 1

24 I am aware that a conflict between the twoprinciples of low-cost housing and environ-mental protection can generally be avoidedand is often used as a cloak to oppose hous-ing for poor people (see Mary Brooksrsquo workfor instance) nevertheless the possibility ofa conflict is real

25 ldquoThe Llujiazui International ConsultativeProcess also perpetuated the contradictoryapproach to lsquosustainable developmentrsquo plan-ning where a designerrsquos concerns rest withreducing energy consumption within a smallspatial area while ultimately supporting

110 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

I would suggest that it is not for reasons of logic notbecause the dif ficult issues of balance have been facedand brought to that conclusion but because of muchmore pragmatic concerns that the environmentalmovement is a multi-class if not indeed upper andmiddle-class movement in its leadership financingand political weight While the environmental justicemovement is making a substantial contribution bothto social justice and to environmental protection theenvironmental movement as a whole often proclaimsitself to be above party above controversy seeking so-lutions from which everyone will benefit to which noone can object Thus we get the report of a two-dayworkshop of the Sustainable Cities Programme stat-ing

ldquoOne of the most important conclusions of the meet-ing was that implementation of concrete actions isoften hampered by a variety of obstacles and themeeting therefore recommended and agreed that theforthcoming annual meeting of the SCP be centeredaround this key themerdquo (33)

How nice it would be if the next meeting figured outhow to get over this variety of obstacles so that wecould go on to other things Perhaps it will build onthe ldquotool development activitiesrdquo of the SCP and utilizeits process

The SCP process consists of a logically sequencedand interactive set of key activities whose systematicimplementation and infusion into the existing institu-tions would bring about profound changes in man-agement approaches and improvements in informa-tion decision-making and implementation The proc-ess forms the basis of the Source Book series(34)

Maybe the next workshop will find a programme wecan all rally round and we could escape the unpleas-ant business of facing conflicting interests having todeal with the unequal distribution of power the ne-cessities of redistribution the defeats that accompanythe victories No wonder ldquosustainabilityrdquo is an attrac-tive slogan with such a hope But if the goal is redis-tribution of wealth or opportunity or sharing poweror reducing oppression sustainability does not get usfar

To the extent that sustainability requires the reviewof policies designed today to meet the needs of todayin such a way that they do not make things worse inthe future it is an important if for planners not verynew concept It might then be reformulated to buildon the words of the Brundtland Commission

ldquoSustainable development is development that meetsspecific needs of the present and can be maintained

broader processes such as the plunderingof Chinarsquos natural resources by financial in-stitutions which use these urban spaces asbases for their lsquocommand and controlrsquo activi-tiesrdquo Quoted in Olds Kris (1997) ldquoGlobaliz-ing Shanghai the lsquoglobal intelligence corpsrsquoand the Building of Pudongrdquo in Cities Vol14No2 pages 109-123

26 From a review by Kristin Kaul of van derRyn Sim and Stuart Cowan (1995) Ecologi-cal Design Island Press Washington DC

27 The literature by now is extensive Seethe citations in a recent excellent reviewCollin Robin Morris and Robert Collin (1994)ldquoWhere d id al l the blue skies goSustainability and equity the new paradigmrdquoin Journal of Environmental Law and Litiga-tion Vol9 pages 399-460

28 Many have made the same point For arecent comment in our specific context seeAlbrechts Louis (1997) ldquoGenesis of a West-ern European spatial policyrdquo in Journal ofPlanning Education and Research Vol17

29 David Harvey has put forward this argu-ment very eloquently in Harvey David (1996)Justice Nature and the Geography of Differ-ence Blackwell London also more recentlyand concisely in Harvey David (1998) ldquoMarx-ism metaphors and ecological politicsrdquo inMonthly Review April pages 17-31 in whichhe points out that a wing of capitalism is quitecontent to judge sustainability in terms of thecontinuity of capital accumulation and callsfor a ldquomore nuanced view of the interplaybetween environmental transformations andsocialityrdquo (page 30)

30 McGranahan G Songsore J and MKjellen (1996) ldquoSustainability poverty andurban environmental transitionsrdquo in PughCedric (1996) Sustainability the Environmentand Urbanization Earthscan London pages103-133

31 As many definitions do not See for in-stance the formulation of the Commission ofEuropean Communities ldquosustainable isintended to reflect a policy and strategy forcontinued economic and social developmentwithout detriment to the environmentrdquo Citedin Lawrence page 64 (see reference 7)

32 See for instance the pieces collected inHamm Bernd et al (editors) (1992) Sustain-able Development and the Future of CitiesTrier Centre for European Studies Universityof Trier

109Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

Since then it has increased more than five-fold andis better nourished and lives longer We know we needto deal with the problem of global warming and weknow that relying on technological fixes is dangerousThose two propositions should lead us to scale downcertain activities linked to growth and to seek substi-tutes for others they mandate adoption of a limitedset of specific policies to achieve specific goals by spe-cific actors in a specific timetable But apart from thosespecific policies a great deal is uncertain Valid long-range concerns do not help very much in reaching aconclusion on even medium-range questions

In any event environmental long-term considerationsare not the only ones that need to be taken into ac-count when making decisions(31) Other goals weigh inand other constraints need to be brought into the bal-ance Matters of social justice of economic develop-ment of international relations of democracy of demo-cratic control over technological change and globali-zation also have both short and long-term implicationsFor a given policy to be desirable it must meet theconstraints of sustainability in each of these dimen-sions failure in any one is in theory sufficient causefor rejection Environmental sustainability seems atfirst blush to be the most ldquoobjectiverdquo the most ines-capable of all these constraints if humankind diesof f the game is over But may that not ultimately besaid also if freedom or democracy or tolerance disap-peared Since none of these events would be one-shotcatastrophes is the danger of environmental degra-dation greater today than that of war fascism pov-erty hunger disease or impoverishment for large num-bers of people

The problem of balancing differing goals and con-straints is a well-recognized one There is for instancean important debate on the relationship betweengrowth and development(32) a difficult issue and oneviewed very differently in the developed as against thedeveloping world The discussion of sustainability hasmade a significant contribution to advancing the un-derstanding of policy alternatives and their implica-tions but it is not quite clear why using the conceptldquosustainablerdquo in only half of the balancing equationclarifies the debate

If we want to talk about sustainability as a constraintaffecting all goals we not only have to face the balanc-ing problem but we have also to recognize the practi-cal fact that sustainability in most usages is heavilyfocused on ecological concerns That is not surpris-ing considering that ldquosustainabilityrdquo had its origins inthe environmental movement But why given limitedresources and limited power to bring about changeare efforts in the real world thus focused what are thepolitics of the environmental sustainability movement

20 The point is the same as with the frequentdebates about whether a given proposal isldquopracticalrdquo or not if practicality becomes a goalrather than a constraint the result is sheeropportunism

21 In the interesting evaluation of projectsundertaken by the European Foundation forthe Improvement of Living and Working Con-ditions (Towards an Economic Evaluation ofUrban Innovative Projects Dublin November1996) the usefulness of such an approach canbe seen Issues such as ldquolevel of crimerdquo arelisted as a measure of social sustainabilitybut no distinction is made between long andshort-term impacts so that unsustainablemeasures might well be given a higher ratingthan sustainable ones eg police crackdownsor long prison sentences vs job generation orrehabilitation

22 That precise calculation is made when itis decided to finance housing constructionthrough borrowing rather than all at once upfront more gets built now even if the certaintyof as many being built next year is reducedby the on-going burden of repayment for pastconstruction The opposite calculation wasmade by the Austrian Social Democrats in the1920s in deciding to pay for new social hous-ing projects all at once hoping thereby tomake it easier to fund new construction in fol-lowing years See Marcuse Peter (1986) ldquoAuseful instalment of socialist work housingin red Vienna in the 1920srdquo in Bratt RachelHartman Chester and Ann Meyerson (edi-tors) (1986) Critical Perspectives on Hous-ing Temple University Press Philadelphia

23 Not only possible but frequent The Sus-tainable Cities Programme of UNCHSUNEPfor instance states flatly ldquoThe SCP activitiesare primarily focused upon promoting moreefficient and equitable use of natural re-sources and control of environmental haz-ards in citieshelliprdquo in Sustainable City News(1998) Vol1 No4 June page 1

24 I am aware that a conflict between the twoprinciples of low-cost housing and environ-mental protection can generally be avoidedand is often used as a cloak to oppose hous-ing for poor people (see Mary Brooksrsquo workfor instance) nevertheless the possibility ofa conflict is real

25 ldquoThe Llujiazui International ConsultativeProcess also perpetuated the contradictoryapproach to lsquosustainable developmentrsquo plan-ning where a designerrsquos concerns rest withreducing energy consumption within a smallspatial area while ultimately supporting

110 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

I would suggest that it is not for reasons of logic notbecause the dif ficult issues of balance have been facedand brought to that conclusion but because of muchmore pragmatic concerns that the environmentalmovement is a multi-class if not indeed upper andmiddle-class movement in its leadership financingand political weight While the environmental justicemovement is making a substantial contribution bothto social justice and to environmental protection theenvironmental movement as a whole often proclaimsitself to be above party above controversy seeking so-lutions from which everyone will benefit to which noone can object Thus we get the report of a two-dayworkshop of the Sustainable Cities Programme stat-ing

ldquoOne of the most important conclusions of the meet-ing was that implementation of concrete actions isoften hampered by a variety of obstacles and themeeting therefore recommended and agreed that theforthcoming annual meeting of the SCP be centeredaround this key themerdquo (33)

How nice it would be if the next meeting figured outhow to get over this variety of obstacles so that wecould go on to other things Perhaps it will build onthe ldquotool development activitiesrdquo of the SCP and utilizeits process

The SCP process consists of a logically sequencedand interactive set of key activities whose systematicimplementation and infusion into the existing institu-tions would bring about profound changes in man-agement approaches and improvements in informa-tion decision-making and implementation The proc-ess forms the basis of the Source Book series(34)

Maybe the next workshop will find a programme wecan all rally round and we could escape the unpleas-ant business of facing conflicting interests having todeal with the unequal distribution of power the ne-cessities of redistribution the defeats that accompanythe victories No wonder ldquosustainabilityrdquo is an attrac-tive slogan with such a hope But if the goal is redis-tribution of wealth or opportunity or sharing poweror reducing oppression sustainability does not get usfar

To the extent that sustainability requires the reviewof policies designed today to meet the needs of todayin such a way that they do not make things worse inthe future it is an important if for planners not verynew concept It might then be reformulated to buildon the words of the Brundtland Commission

ldquoSustainable development is development that meetsspecific needs of the present and can be maintained

broader processes such as the plunderingof Chinarsquos natural resources by financial in-stitutions which use these urban spaces asbases for their lsquocommand and controlrsquo activi-tiesrdquo Quoted in Olds Kris (1997) ldquoGlobaliz-ing Shanghai the lsquoglobal intelligence corpsrsquoand the Building of Pudongrdquo in Cities Vol14No2 pages 109-123

26 From a review by Kristin Kaul of van derRyn Sim and Stuart Cowan (1995) Ecologi-cal Design Island Press Washington DC

27 The literature by now is extensive Seethe citations in a recent excellent reviewCollin Robin Morris and Robert Collin (1994)ldquoWhere d id al l the blue skies goSustainability and equity the new paradigmrdquoin Journal of Environmental Law and Litiga-tion Vol9 pages 399-460

28 Many have made the same point For arecent comment in our specific context seeAlbrechts Louis (1997) ldquoGenesis of a West-ern European spatial policyrdquo in Journal ofPlanning Education and Research Vol17

29 David Harvey has put forward this argu-ment very eloquently in Harvey David (1996)Justice Nature and the Geography of Differ-ence Blackwell London also more recentlyand concisely in Harvey David (1998) ldquoMarx-ism metaphors and ecological politicsrdquo inMonthly Review April pages 17-31 in whichhe points out that a wing of capitalism is quitecontent to judge sustainability in terms of thecontinuity of capital accumulation and callsfor a ldquomore nuanced view of the interplaybetween environmental transformations andsocialityrdquo (page 30)

30 McGranahan G Songsore J and MKjellen (1996) ldquoSustainability poverty andurban environmental transitionsrdquo in PughCedric (1996) Sustainability the Environmentand Urbanization Earthscan London pages103-133

31 As many definitions do not See for in-stance the formulation of the Commission ofEuropean Communities ldquosustainable isintended to reflect a policy and strategy forcontinued economic and social developmentwithout detriment to the environmentrdquo Citedin Lawrence page 64 (see reference 7)

32 See for instance the pieces collected inHamm Bernd et al (editors) (1992) Sustain-able Development and the Future of CitiesTrier Centre for European Studies Universityof Trier

110 Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

I would suggest that it is not for reasons of logic notbecause the dif ficult issues of balance have been facedand brought to that conclusion but because of muchmore pragmatic concerns that the environmentalmovement is a multi-class if not indeed upper andmiddle-class movement in its leadership financingand political weight While the environmental justicemovement is making a substantial contribution bothto social justice and to environmental protection theenvironmental movement as a whole often proclaimsitself to be above party above controversy seeking so-lutions from which everyone will benefit to which noone can object Thus we get the report of a two-dayworkshop of the Sustainable Cities Programme stat-ing

ldquoOne of the most important conclusions of the meet-ing was that implementation of concrete actions isoften hampered by a variety of obstacles and themeeting therefore recommended and agreed that theforthcoming annual meeting of the SCP be centeredaround this key themerdquo (33)

How nice it would be if the next meeting figured outhow to get over this variety of obstacles so that wecould go on to other things Perhaps it will build onthe ldquotool development activitiesrdquo of the SCP and utilizeits process

The SCP process consists of a logically sequencedand interactive set of key activities whose systematicimplementation and infusion into the existing institu-tions would bring about profound changes in man-agement approaches and improvements in informa-tion decision-making and implementation The proc-ess forms the basis of the Source Book series(34)

Maybe the next workshop will find a programme wecan all rally round and we could escape the unpleas-ant business of facing conflicting interests having todeal with the unequal distribution of power the ne-cessities of redistribution the defeats that accompanythe victories No wonder ldquosustainabilityrdquo is an attrac-tive slogan with such a hope But if the goal is redis-tribution of wealth or opportunity or sharing poweror reducing oppression sustainability does not get usfar

To the extent that sustainability requires the reviewof policies designed today to meet the needs of todayin such a way that they do not make things worse inthe future it is an important if for planners not verynew concept It might then be reformulated to buildon the words of the Brundtland Commission

ldquoSustainable development is development that meetsspecific needs of the present and can be maintained

broader processes such as the plunderingof Chinarsquos natural resources by financial in-stitutions which use these urban spaces asbases for their lsquocommand and controlrsquo activi-tiesrdquo Quoted in Olds Kris (1997) ldquoGlobaliz-ing Shanghai the lsquoglobal intelligence corpsrsquoand the Building of Pudongrdquo in Cities Vol14No2 pages 109-123

26 From a review by Kristin Kaul of van derRyn Sim and Stuart Cowan (1995) Ecologi-cal Design Island Press Washington DC

27 The literature by now is extensive Seethe citations in a recent excellent reviewCollin Robin Morris and Robert Collin (1994)ldquoWhere d id al l the blue skies goSustainability and equity the new paradigmrdquoin Journal of Environmental Law and Litiga-tion Vol9 pages 399-460

28 Many have made the same point For arecent comment in our specific context seeAlbrechts Louis (1997) ldquoGenesis of a West-ern European spatial policyrdquo in Journal ofPlanning Education and Research Vol17

29 David Harvey has put forward this argu-ment very eloquently in Harvey David (1996)Justice Nature and the Geography of Differ-ence Blackwell London also more recentlyand concisely in Harvey David (1998) ldquoMarx-ism metaphors and ecological politicsrdquo inMonthly Review April pages 17-31 in whichhe points out that a wing of capitalism is quitecontent to judge sustainability in terms of thecontinuity of capital accumulation and callsfor a ldquomore nuanced view of the interplaybetween environmental transformations andsocialityrdquo (page 30)

30 McGranahan G Songsore J and MKjellen (1996) ldquoSustainability poverty andurban environmental transitionsrdquo in PughCedric (1996) Sustainability the Environmentand Urbanization Earthscan London pages103-133

31 As many definitions do not See for in-stance the formulation of the Commission ofEuropean Communities ldquosustainable isintended to reflect a policy and strategy forcontinued economic and social developmentwithout detriment to the environmentrdquo Citedin Lawrence page 64 (see reference 7)

32 See for instance the pieces collected inHamm Bernd et al (editors) (1992) Sustain-able Development and the Future of CitiesTrier Centre for European Studies Universityof Trier

111Environment and Urbanization Vol 10 No 2 October 1998

SUSTAINABILITY

into the future without detracting from the satis-faction of other needs in the present or futurerdquo

It then amounts to little more than a call for long-term planning something that has always been plan-nersrsquo bread and butter but puts perhaps a little moreemphasis on long-term implications

But the pursuit of sustainability is a snare and adelusion to the extent that calling for ldquosustainablerdquoactivities in any sphere be it housing planning infra-structure economic development etc suggests thatthere are policies that are of universal benefit thateveryone every group every interest will or should ormust accept in their own best interests If the appealfor sustainability implies that only our ignorance orstupidity prevents us from seeing what we all needand prevents us from doing it(35) it can undercut realreform Indeed a just humane and environmentallysensitive world will in the long run be better for all ofus But getting to the long run entails conflict and con-troversy issues of power and the redistribution ofwealth The frequent calls for ldquousrdquo to recognize ldquoourrdquoresponsibility for the environment avoids the real ques-tions of responsibility the real causes of pollution anddegradation (36) The slogan of ldquosustainabilityrdquo hidesrather than reveals that unpleasant fact

We should rescue sustainability as an honourableindeed critically important goal for environmentalpolicy by confining its use only to where it is appropri-ate recognizing its limitations and avoiding the temp-tation to take it over as an easy way out of facing theconflicts that beset us in other areas of policy If we dofeel called upon to use it in the area of social policy itshould be to emphasize the criterion of long-term po-litical and social viability in the assessment of other-wise desirable programmes and not as a goal replac-ing social justice which must remain the focal pointfor our efforts

33 Sustainable City News Vol1 No4 June1998 page 2

34 See reference 33 page 3

35 See the innumerable calls for ldquous to re-think our prioritiesrdquo ldquoA new ethic must be putinto practice But this will remain impossibleunless we stop thinking of our participation inthe common good as a taxrdquo Head of the Ur-ban Affairs Division OECD Or ldquoThe devel-oped countries have to recognize that theirurban lifestyleshellip are an important part of theglobal environment problemrdquo Klaus ToumlpferUN Commission on Sustainable Develop-ment quoted in page (iii) of Price and Tsouris(1996) see reference 10 The creation of aPresidentrsquos Council on ldquoSustainable Develop-mentrdquo flows from the political belief that theformulation is a non-controversial universallyaccepted one

36 A point also eloquently made by SandraRodriguez in ldquoSustainable and environmen-tally just societiesrdquo Plannersrsquo NetworkNo129 May 1998 pages 4-7 To quote fromthis ldquoAn underlying premise in discussionsof sustainability is that lsquowersquo are in this togetherThis generic lsquowersquo assumes that all people areequally to blame for societyrsquos environmentalproblems and that lsquowersquo all have a responsibil-ity to change our lifestyles to lsquosave the planetrsquoAs Catherine Lerza asks lsquoAre the poor themarginalized equally to blame for the wasteand pollution that exists when they are thepeople least benefiting from economic growthand they are bearing most of the environmen-tal burdenrdquo (page 5)