A common struggle in sustainable development is explaining the meaning of the term “sustainability” to people outside of the field. Use of the term has increased dramatically since the 1970s. It’s everywhere now, but what does it even mean? The term is generally conflated with environmental sustainability. Recycling, using public transportation, solar energy come to mind. Hence the meme. While yes, concern for the environment, natural resources, and recycling all fit into sustainability, it’s not the whole story.
Sustainability has three pillars called the three E’s. They are Economics, Environment, and Equity. For a system to be sustainable, it has to be able to be maintained in its current structure for five, fifty, a hundred years down the road. It has to be able to sustain its current trajectory, the way an ecosystem can. I’ll use the United States for examples.
Looking at the environment through the sustainability lens lends itself to the common thinking that sustainability is all about protecting the environment and our natural resources. Fossil fuels are a finite resource that will not last forever, and thus dependency on fossil fuels and petroleum products are unsustainable. Everything runs on oil. But once day in the far off future, there won't be any.
Reducing our use of resources, or using renewables, and protecting the environment in general are more popular and easily tackled solutions than, say, challenging a capitalist economy or creating (or even defining) true equity. No one wants sea turtles to eat plastic bags, nor do we want to see litter scattered about, and if they do, they're probably not very nice people. This, in my opinion, is why we get stuck at only thinking about environmental sustainability.
Looking at economics from a sustainability perspective, our current economic system is unsustainable because it cannot maintain a high rate of growth forever, although we may like for it to. Especially if we think about how it’s based largely on fossil fuels to use our previous example. We can’t sustain the economy based on fossil fuels forever, so eventually something’s gotta give. Yes, solutions by politicians, governments, grassroots movements and innovators can help our society make shifts when needed, but the point here is in its current state, because our economy is based on something that has a limited supply, logically it can’t exist the same way it’s operating now, forever.
The trickiest “e” is equity. An example is women getting paid less for equal work. The glass ceiling is a well- known phenomenon. Even among women, black and Hispanic women make less than Asian and white women for the same work. For something to be sustainable, it needs to work for everybody. And since we aren't all equal, solutions differ based on population, race, location, etc. This creates even more to wade through. Tough stuff.
Scratch that, the trickiest part is creating solutions that integrate all three of these pillars. This is why I love the field. It’s attempting to solve problems by imagining solutions that aren’t just “band-aids”. This kind of thinking requires creativity, compassion, consciousness, and constant education and learning. It’s relevant and timely, and so much bigger than recycling and solar panels, it’s our common future.
Sources:
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS802&biw=1920&bih=925&ei=rMIrW8SmGPLM5gKe3LvwAg&q=sustainability&oq=sustainability&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i67k1l4j0i7i30k1j0i67k1j0i7i30k1l2j0i67k1j0i7i30k1.2772.2772.0.3067.1.1.0.0.0.0.139.139.0j1.1.0