strategic sustainable development

Strategic Sustainable Development (SSD) is a structured, strategic approach to planning for sustainability within the Earth system.

Framework for SSD
A five-level framework for strategic planning, developed in a trans-disciplinary learning dialogue supported by the non-governmental organization The Natural Step (TNS), in cooperation with scientists and practitioners from many nations, outlines a structured approach to the complex system of the individual within organization within society within the ecosphere. This approach helps simplify the planning process by creating order in complexity, without being reductionist. The five levels are:

System – understanding the characteristics of society existing within the biosphere and the dynamic interrelationship within and between ecological and social systems through ecological principles, e.g. conservation laws, laws of thermodynamics, biogeochemical cycles, interdependence, diversity and dynamic equilibrium; and social principles, e.g. human needs, self-organization, diversity, and interdependence);

Success – understanding the principles of success, within the constraints of the system, i.e. sustainability in this case;

Strategy – logical principles and guidelines to arrive at a successful outcome, i.e. a step-by-step approach, selecting measures that can serve as flexible stepping-stones towards the desired goal, while ensuring sufficient returns on investments to support the process;

Actions – all concrete actions taken in the system, guided by the strategic plan; and

Tools – means for executing actions (level 4), to be strategic (level 3) to arrive at success (level 2) in the system (level 1). Tools can be used to monitor progress, capacity-building, and actual results.
When one has a clear understanding of the difference between and interrelation of the five levels, one increases the likelihood that actions will lead to a s uccessful outcome.

SSD can be thought of as a game in which global society is aiming to achieve sustainability. Defining sustainability (success) in terms basic principles, rather than specific scenarios, guides the game of sustainable development to a shared vision of a sustainable future while not limiting the creative and dynamic means to arrive there.

Sustainability

The concept of sustainability has emerged as an aspiration for the direction of society that evolved from the conclusions of the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in its 1987 landmark report entitled "Our Common Future" (commonly referred to as the Brundtland Report). Achieving sustainability is about finding a better way for humans to live within our support system - the biosphere. Natural systems provide the essentials for our survival – clear air and water, healthy soil, a stable climate – through a massively complex and interconnected web that has evolved over billions of years, making a habitable environment for humans.

Sustainability can be scientifically defined as a dynamic state in which global ecological and social systems are not systematically undermined. The Brundtland Report defined Sustainable Development as that which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Ensuring that activities do not systematically undermine ecological and social systems is to ensure that the ability of future generations to meet their needs is not compromised.

There are four basic ways ecological and social systems can be undermined (as originally articulated by The Natural Step): When natural systems are subject to systematic increases in

1) ...concentrations of substances from the earth’s crust (e.g. fossil fuels, heavy metals)

2) ...concentrations of substances produced by society (e.g. CFCs, DDT)

3) ...degradation by physical means (e.g. deforestation, overfishing)

and when social systems are subject to

4) ...conditions that systematically undermine people’s ability to meet their needs (e.g. oppressive conditions, non-living wages)
Thus sustainability is a shared vision of success in which these four principles are not violated, and strategic sustainable development (SSD) is the process of moving towards this vision in systematic and strategic ways on the individual, organizational, community, national and global scales. To do this, we need an unprecedented shift in the way we think and act. These four principles represent the basic constraints we have been dealt as a global society. While at first this may seem negative, or limiting, it actually provides the basic structure – the rules of the game – within which we have unlimited potential for innovation and creativity. Having an understanding of these principles is like having an understanding of pitch and rhythm in order to make music instead of a jumble of sounds, or understanding the rules of football in order to play a fun and competitive game as opposed to merely chasing a ball.

Sustainability is often evaluated using the ‘triple bottom line’ for ecological, social, and economic health because economic considerations are such a large and central aspect of social systems, and vital to the continued operation of individual organizations.

Too often, we view health, social, economic, security, environmental, and other major societal issues as separate, competing, and hierarchical, when they are really systemic and interdependent. We do not have environmental problems per se, we have negative environmental consequences of the way we have designed our business, social, economic, and political systems. The challenge of addressing these flaws in societal design is unprecedented, daunting, and exciting. It is one that will require the best in all of us.


Strategic Sustainable Development Principles
While there is broad consensus around the four Sustainability Principles (success), development of principles for SSD (the strategic process) is an emerging field of study. There appears to be general agreement around certain principles regarding what one does (behavioural principles) and how one does it (intentional principles).

Backcasting
Backcasting is an approach to planning in complexity which begins with placing ourselves in an envisioned desired future, then asking the question: how did we achieve this? Backcasting from principles is a systematic approach to planning that is particularly useful in SSD. It is a normative view of strategic planning that acknowledges and embraces the inclusion of values in the creation of desirable future vision, within the basic constraints of the four Sustainability Principles.

Precaution
Exercising precaution is being wary of making unnecessary mistakes in order to avoid costly consequences. It is a principle that should be applied when there is uncertainty regarding the ecological consequences or the financial viability of a specific activity, and requires rational and strategic application so not to preclude untested, but inherently positive steps towards sustainability. It is also important to be aware that a decision to do nothing is still a decision. There is no reason to allow the burden of proof for decisions of inaction to be lower than the burden of proof to justify proactive decisions.

Communication
Effective communication is essential for teamwork and community-building, particularly in the development context. Sustainable development is about building a world in which people’s needs are met without compromising the needs of future generations. A true understanding of people’s needs can only be gained through communication. Empirical investigation will not yield a real depth of understanding, and treating a community as the object of the objective gaze, as opposed a subject in communication, is dehumanizing. If value is to be maximized for all interested parties in a development project, the needs and wants of the organization or community must be identified through listening and respectful dialogue between self-aware, empowered people. In the development context, a key means of communication is stakeholder engagement.

Values and intentions
It is often said that sustainability is a human vision laced with human values. The terminology around sustainability and sustainable development, and the difference between them, is confusing and often debated and misunderstood. The five-level framework for SSD clearly differentiates between sustainability (i.e. level 2 – success) and sustainable development (i.e. level 3 – strategy). At the success level, the Sustainability Principles are intrinsically value-free and sustainability technically can be defined as a dynamic state in which these Principles are not violated. However at the strategy level, the implementation of sustainable development strategies, or indeed the decision not to, is inherently full of values. The Sustainability Principles are not systemic laws; they can be broken, resulting in an unsustainable situation in which human beings will not be able to survive indefinitely, much the same way as breathing is a principle of human survival – it can be broken, but not without severe consequences. The degree to which we are prepared to let the system break down, to let people suffer from the results of unsustainable behaviour, etc. is a value judgement, encompassing expectations around life style, ethical considerations of intra- and inter-generational justice, etc. Similarly, the manner in which we choose to proceed with development is reflective of sets of values, norms, etc.

Societal development initatives affect people on a broad scale, and as such, should be guided by a set of principles that reflect a high-level global consensus on values, including: transparency, participation, responsibility, accountability, and honesty. Decision-makers should ask themselves:

Are decisions planned in a way that has enabled people to gain access to information and monitor the process throughout? Would this degree of transparency be acceptable to me?

Have decisions been based on enough participation from, and dialogue with, all affected parties? Would this degree of participation, if I were subjected to it, be acceptable to me?

Has the responsibility for decisions been clearly communicated between all people taking part in the planning process, including those who are affected indirectly by it? Would this degree of clarity in terms of responsibility and accountability be acceptable to me?

Am I being honest about my intentions? Would I maintain my dignity if all people suddenly gained access to my innermost thoughts and thus discovered exactly what was driving decisions? How would I react if I were subject to decisions driven by the same motivations?
These principles are informed by existing agreements such as the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and cross-cultural themes such as the Golden Rule - do not do to other that which you would not have done to you. They are aspects that facilitate good communication and are important for building trust. They allow people to see, understand, and correct mistakes, and they open up possibilities that would otherwise be difficult to identify and achieve.

Social and Cultural Principles
Social institutions can be both enablers and barriers to change. Political institutions (at the international, regional, national, state and municipal levels) can protect the commons and encourage movement towards sustainability through political means such as incentives, taxation and subsidisation, legislations. Economic policies can create market-based mechanisms (such as emissions trading) that encourage investment in sustainable development. Educational and religious institutions can communicate the sustainability message and organizations such as corporations can be incubators for innovative ideas. Conversely, these institutions and organizations can also represent barriers to change, particularly when their power structures may threatened by that change.

Where there are concentrations of authority and control, be it social, political, economic or environmental, there is the potential for abuses of this power. These social structures can both inform and be informed by our collective worldviews, paradigms, norms and standards. Awareness around how they interact can illuminate powerful intervention points to affect change on a broad scale.

We gratefully acknowledge the wisdom and knowledge of Dr. Karl-Henrik Robert, Founder of The Natural Step, and Dr. Anthony D. Cortese, President of Second Nature, in the development of our definition of sustainability



Hosted by ThinkHost - 100% green energy powered