Sustainable development is an organizing principle for human life on a finite planet. It posits a desirable future state for human societies in which living conditions and resource-use meet human needs without undermining the sustainability of natural systems and the environment, so that future generations may also have their needs met.
Sustainable development ties together concern for the carrying capacity of natural systems with the social and economic challenges faced by humanity. As early as the 1970s, 'sustainability' was employed to describe an economy "in equilibrium with basic ecological support systems." Scientists in many fields have highlighted The Limits to Growth, and economists have presented alternatives, for example a 'steady state economy', to address concerns over the impacts of expanding human development on the planet.
The term sustainable development rose to significance after it was used by the Brundtland Commission in its 1987 report Our Common Future. In the report, the commission coined what has become the most often-quoted definition of sustainable development: "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
The United Nations Millennium Declaration identified principles and treaties on sustainable development, including economic development, social development and environmental protection. The Circles of Sustainability approach distinguishes the four domains of economic, ecological, political and cultural sustainability. This in accord with the United Nations Agenda 21, which specify's culture as the fourth domain of sustainable development.
- 1 Definition
- 2 History
- 3 Domains
- 4 Ecology
- 5 Economics
- 6 Culture
- 7 Politics
- 8 Themes
- 9 The Challenge of Sustainable Development Around the Persian Gulf
- 10 See also
- 11 Further reading
- 12 References
- 13 External links
The United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in its 1987 report Our Common Future defines sustainable development: "Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." Under the principles of the United Nations Charter the Millennium Declaration identified principles and treaties on sustainable development, including economic development, social development and environmental protection. Broadly defined, sustainable development is a systems approach to growth and development and to manage natural, produced, and social capital for the welfare of their own and future generations.
The concept of sustainable development was originally synonymous with that of sustainability and is often still used in that way. Both terms derive from the older forestry term "sustained yield", which in turn is a translation of the German term "nachhaltiger Ertrag" dating from 1713. Sustainability science is the study of the concepts of sustainable development and environmental science.
Michael Thomas Needham referred to sustainable development "as the ability to meet the needs of the present while contributing to the future generations’ needs." There is an additional focus on the present generations' responsibility to improve the future generations' life by restoring the previous ecosystem and resisting to contribute to further ecosystem degradation.
According to M. Hasna, sustainability is a function of social, economic, technological and ecological themes.
Important related concepts are 'strong' and 'weak' sustainability, deep ecology, and just sustainability. "Just sustainability" offers a socially just conception of sustainability. Just sustainability effectively addresses what has been called the 'equity deficit' of environmental sustainability (Agyeman, 2005:44). It is “the egalitarian conception of sustainable development" (Jacobs, 1999:32). It generates a more nuanced definition of sustainable development: “the need to ensure a better quality of life for all, now and into the future, in a just and equitable manner, whilst living within the limits of supporting ecosystems” (Agyeman, et al., 2003:5).
Not just the concept of sustainable development, but also its current interpretations have its roots in forest management. Strong sustainability stipulates living solely off the interest of natural capital, whereas adherents of weak sustainability are content to keep constant the sum of natural and human capital. The concept of sustainability in the sense of a balance between resource consumption and reproduction was applied to forestry in the 12th to 16th centuries.
The first use of the term sustainable in the modern sense was by the Club of Rome in 1972 in its epoch-making report on the "Limits to Growth", written by a group of scientists led by Dennis and Donella Meadows of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Describing the desirable "state of global equilibrium", the authors used the word "sustainable": "We are searching for a model output that represents a world system that is: 1. sustainable without sudden and uncontrolled collapse; and 2. capable of satisfying the basic material requirements of all of its people." The United Nations World Charter for Nature from 1982 raised five principles of conservation by which human conduct affecting nature is to be guided and judged.
The history of the concept of sustainability is however much older. Already in 400 BCE, Aristotle referred to a similar Greek concept in talking about household economics. This Greek household concept differed from modern ones in that the household had to be self-sustaining at least to a certain extent and could not just be consumption oriented.
In 1987, the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development released the report Our Common Future, now commonly named the 'Brundtland Report' after the commission's chairperson, the then Prime Minister of Norway Gro Harlem Brundtland. The report included what is now one of the most widely recognised definitions: "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."  The Brundtland Report goes on to say that sustainable development also contains within it two key concepts:
- The concept of 'needs', in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given
- The idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.
The UN Conference on Environment and Development published in 1992 the Earth Charter, which outlines the building of a just, sustainable, and peaceful global society in the 21st century. The action plan Agenda 21 for sustainable development identified information, integration, and participation as key building blocks to help countries achieve development that recognizes these interdependent pillars. It emphasises that in sustainable development everyone is a user and provider of information. It stresses the need to change from old sector-centered ways of doing business to new approaches that involve cross-sectoral co-ordination and the integration of environmental and social concerns into all development processes. Furthermore, Agenda 21 emphasises that broad public participation in decision making is a fundamental prerequisite for achieving sustainable development.
The Commission on Sustainable Development integrated sustainable development in the UN System. Indigenous peoples have argued, through various international forums such as the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the Convention on Biological Diversity, that there are four pillars of sustainable development, the fourth being cultural. The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity from 2001 states: "... cultural diversity is as necessary for humankind as biodiversity is for nature”; it becomes “one of the roots of development understood not simply in terms of economic growth, but also as a means to achieve a more satisfactory intellectual, emotional, moral and spiritual existence".
A study concluded in 2013, that sustainability reporting includes the four interconnected domains, ecology, economics, politics and culture.
There are different domains identified for sustainable development, which are broadly defined in three or four domains, ecology, economics, politics and culture - as used by the United Nations and a number of other international organizations.
The sustainability of human settlements is part of the relationship between humans and their natural, social and built environments. Also termed human ecology, this broadens the focus of sustainable development to include the domain of human health. Fundamental human needs such as the availability and quality of air, water, food and shelter are also the ecological foundations for sustainable development; addressing public health risk through investments in ecosystem services can be a powerful and transformative force for sustainable development which, in this sense, extends to all species.
Sustainable agriculture may be defined as consisting of environmentally friendly methods of farming that allow the production of crops or livestock without damage to human or natural systems. More specifically, it might be said to include preventing adverse effects to soil, water, biodiversity, surrounding or downstream resources—as well as to those working or living on the farm or in neighboring areas. Furthermore, the concept of sustainable agriculture extends intergenerationally, relating to passing on a conserved or improved natural resource, biotic, and economic base instead of one which has been depleted or polluted. Some important elements of sustainable agriculture are permaculture, agroforestry, mixed farming, multiple cropping, and crop rotation.
Numerous sustainability standards and certification systems have been established in recent years to met development goals, thus offering consumer choices for sustainable agriculture practices. Well-known food standards include organic, Rainforest Alliance, fair trade, UTZ Certified, Bird Friendly, and the Common Code for the Coffee Community(4C).
Sustainable energy is the sustainable provision of energy that is clean and lasts for a long period of time. Unlike the fossil fuel that most of the countries are using, renewable energy only produces little or even no pollution. The most common types of renewable energy in US are solar and wind energy, solar energy are commonly used on public parking meter, street lights and the roof of buildings. On the other hand, wind energy is expanding quickly in recent years, which generated 12,000 MW in 2013. The largest wind power station is in Texas and followed up by California. Household energy consumption can also be improved in a sustainable way, like using electronic with energy star logo, conserving water and energy.
Beyond ecology as the intersection of humans in the environment, environmental sustainability concerns the natural environment and how it endures and remains diverse and productive. Since Natural resources are derived from the environment, the state of air, water, and the climate are of particular concern. The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report outlines current knowledge about scientific, technical and socio-economic information concerning climate change, and lists options for adaptation and mitigation. Environmental sustainability requires society to design activities to meet human needs while preserving the life support systems of the planet. This, for example, entails using water sustainably, utilizing renewable energy, and sustainable material supplies (e.g. harvesting wood from forests at a rate that maintains the biomass and biodiversity).
An "unsustainable situation" occurs when natural capital (the sum total of nature's resources) is used up faster than it can be replenished. Sustainability requires that human activity only uses nature's resources at a rate at which they can be replenished naturally. Inherently the concept of sustainable development is intertwined with the concept of carrying capacity. Theoretically, the long-term result of environmental degradation is the inability to sustain human life. Such degradation on a global scale should imply an increase in human death rate until population falls to what the degraded environment can support. If the degradation continues beyond a certain tipping point or critical threshold it would lead to eventual extinction for humanity.
|Consumption of renewable resources||State of environment||Sustainability|
|More than nature's ability to replenish||Environmental degradation||Not sustainable|
|Equal to nature's ability to replenish||Environmental equilibrium||Steady state economy|
|Less than nature's ability to replenish||Environmental renewal||Environmentally sustainable|
It has been suggested that because of rural poverty and overexploitation, environmental resources should be treated as important economic assets, called natural capital. Economic development has traditionally required a growth in the gross domestic product. This model of unlimited personal and GDP growth may be over. Sustainable development may involve improvements in the quality of life for many but may necessitate a decrease in resource consumption. According to ecological economist Malte Faber, ecological economics is defined by its focus on nature, justice, and time. Issues of intergenerational equity, irreversibility of environmental change, uncertainty of long-term outcomes, and sustainable development guide ecological economic analysis and valuation.
In 1987 the economist Edward Barbier published the study The Concept of Sustainable Economic Development, where he recognized that goals of environmental conservation and economic development are not conflicting and can be reinforcing each other.
A World Bank study from 1999 concluded that based on the theory of genuine savings, policymakers have many possible interventions to increase sustainability, in macroeconomics or purely environmental. A study from 2001 noted that efficient policies for renewable energy and pollution are compatible with increasing human welfare, eventually reaching a golden-rule steady state. The study, Interpreting Sustainability in Economic Terms, found three pillars of sustainable development, interlinkage, intergenerational equity, and dynamic efficiency.
A meta review in 2002 looked at environmental and economic valuations and found a lack of “sustainability policies”. A study in 2004 asked if we consume to much. A study concluded in 2007 that knowledge, manufactured and human capital(health and education) has not compensated for the degradation of natural capital in many parts of the world. It has been suggested that intergenerational equity can be incorporated into a sustainable development and decision making, as has become common in economic valuations of climate economics. A meta review in 2009 identified conditions for a strong case to act on climate change, and called for more work to fully account of the relevant economics and how it affects human welfare. According to John Baden “the improvement of environment quality depends on the market economy and the existence of legitimate and protected property rights.” They enable the effective practice of personal responsibility and the development of mechanisms to protect the environment. The State can in this context “create conditions which encourage the people to save the environment.”
The most broadly accepted criterion for corporate sustainability constitutes a firm’s efficient use of natural capital. This eco-efficiency is usually calculated as the economic value added by a firm in relation to its aggregated ecological impact. This idea has been popularised by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) under the following definition: "Eco-efficiency is achieved by the delivery of competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and bring quality of life, while progressively reducing ecological impacts and resource intensity throughout the life-cycle to a level at least in line with the earth’s carrying capacity." (DeSimone and Popoff, 1997: 47)
Similar to the eco-efficiency concept but so far less explored is the second criterion for corporate sustainability. Socio-efficiency describes the relation between a firm's value added and its social impact. Whereas, it can be assumed that most corporate impacts on the environment are negative (apart from rare exceptions such as the planting of trees) this is not true for social impacts. These can be either positive (e.g. corporate giving, creation of employment) or negative (e.g. work accidents, mobbing of employees, human rights abuses). Depending on the type of impact socio-efficiency thus either tries to minimize negative social impacts (i.e. accidents per value added) or maximise positive social impacts (i.e. donations per value added) in relation to the value added.
Both eco-efficiency and socio-efficiency are concerned primarily with increasing economic sustainability. In this process they instrumentalize both natural and social capital aiming to benefit from win-win situations. However, as Dyllick and Hockerts point out the business case alone will not be sufficient to realise sustainable development. They point towards eco-effectiveness, socio-effectiveness, sufficiency, and eco-equity as four criteria that need to be met if sustainable development is to be reached.
In sustainable architecture the recent movements of New Urbanism and New Classical Architecture promote a sustainable approach towards construction, that appreciates and develops smart growth, architectural tradition and classical design. This in contrast to modernist and globally uniform architecture, as well as opposing to solitary housing estates and suburban sprawl, with long commuting distances and large ecological footprints. Both trends started in the 1980s. (It should be noted that sustainable architecture is predominantly relevant to the economics domain while architectural landscaping pertains more to the ecological domain.)
Working with a different emphasis, some researchers and institutions have pointed out that a fourth dimension should be added to the dimensions of sustainable development, since the triple-bottom-line dimensions of economic, environmental and social do not seem to be enough to reflect the complexity of contemporary society. In this context, the Agenda 21 for culture and the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) Executive Bureau lead the preparation of the policy statement “Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development”, passed on 17 November 2010, in the framework of the World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders – 3rd World Congress of UCLG, held in Mexico City. This document inaugurates a new perspective and points to the relation between culture and sustainable development through a dual approach: developing a solid cultural policy and advocating a cultural dimension in all public policies.
Other organizations have also supported the idea of a fourth domain of sustainable development. The Network of Excellence "Sustainable Development in a Diverse World", sponsored by the European Union, integrates multidisciplinary capacities and interprets cultural diversity as a key element of a new strategy for sustainable development. The Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development Theory has been referenced by executive director of IMI Institute at UNESCO Vito Di Bari in his manifesto of art and architectural movement Neo-Futurism, whose name was inspired by the 1987 United Nations’ report Our Common Future. The Circles of Sustainability approach used by Metropolis defines the (fourth) cultural domain as practices, discourses, and material expressions, which, over time, express continuities and discontinuities of social meaning.
The proposal for adding a fourth 'cultural' dimension has not been accepted by all agencies and organizations, some which still argue that economics is primary, and culture and politics should be included in the 'the social'.
A study concluded that social indicators, and therefore sustainable development indicators are scientific constructs whose principal objective is to inform public policy-making. The International Institute for Sustainable Development has similarly developed a political policy framework, linked to a sustainability index for establishing measurable entities and metrics. The framework consists of six core areas, international trade and investment, economic policy, climate change and energy, measurement and assessment, natural resource management, and the role of communication technologies in sustainable development.
The United Nations Global Compact Cities Programme has defined sustainable political development is a way that broadens the usual definition beyond states and governance. The political is defined as the domain of practices and meanings associated with basic issues of social power as they pertain to the organisation, authorisation, legitimation and regulation of a social life held in common. This definition is in accord with the view that political change is important for responding to economic, ecological and cultural challenges. It also means that the politics of economic change can be addressed. They have listed seven subdomains of the domain of politics:
- Organization and governance
- Law and justice
- Communication and critique
- Representation and negotiation
- Security and accord
- Dialogue and reconciliation
- Ethics and accountability
This accords with the Brundtland Commission emphasis on development that is guided by human rights principles (see above).
The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), also known as Rio 2012, Rio+20, or Earth Summit 2012 was the third international conference on sustainable development aimed at reconciling the economic and environmental goals of the global community.
According to data it presents to the United Nations, Cuba was the only nation in the world in 2006 that met the World Wide Fund for Nature's definition of sustainable development, with an ecological footprint of less than 1.8 hectares per capita, 1.5 hectares, and a Human Development Index of over 0.8, 0.855.
In 2007 a report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency stated: “While much discussion and effort has gone into sustainability indicators, none of the resulting systems clearly tells us whether our society is sustainable. At best, they can tell us that we are heading in the wrong direction, or that our current activities are not sustainable. More often, they simply draw our attention to the existence of problems, doing little to tell us the origin of those problems and nothing to tell us how to solve them.” Nevertheless a majority of authors assume that a set of well defined and harmonised indicators is the only way to make sustainability tangible. Those indicators are expected to be identified and adjusted through empirical observations (trial and error).
The most common critiques are related to issues like data quality, comparability, objective function and the necessary resources. However a more general criticism is coming from the project management community: How can a sustainable development be achieved at global level if we cannot monitor it in any single project?
The Cuban-born researcher and entrepreneur Sonia Bueno suggests an alternative approach that is based upon the integral, long-term cost-benefit relationship as a measure and monitoring tool for the sustainability of every project, activity or enterprise. Furthermore this concept aims to be a practical guideline towards sustainable development following the principle of conservation and increment of value rather than restricting the consumption of resources.
Reasonable qualifications of sustainability are seen U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). This design incorporates some ecological, economic, and social elements. The goals presented by LEED design goals are sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmospheric emission reduction, material and resources efficiency, and indoor environmental quality. Although amount of structures for sustainability development is many, these qualification has become a standard for sustainable building.
The sustainable development debate is based on the assumption that societies need to manage three types of capital (economic, social, and natural), which may be non-substitutable and whose consumption might be irreversible. Daly (1991), for example, points to the fact that natural capital can not necessarily be substituted by economic capital. While it is possible that we can find ways to replace some natural resources, it is much more unlikely that they will ever be able to replace eco-system services, such as the protection provided by the ozone layer, or the climate stabilizing function of the Amazonian forest. In fact natural capital, social capital and economic capital are often complementarities. A further obstacle to substitutability lies also in the multi-functionality of many natural resources. Forests, for example, not only provide the raw material for paper (which can be substituted quite easily), but they also maintain biodiversity, regulate water flow, and absorb CO2.
Another problem of natural and social capital deterioration lies in their partial irreversibility. The loss in biodiversity, for example, is often definite. The same can be true for cultural diversity. For example with globalisation advancing quickly the number of indigenous languages is dropping at alarming rates. Moreover, the depletion of natural and social capital may have non-linear consequences. Consumption of natural and social capital may have no observable impact until a certain threshold is reached. A lake can, for example, absorb nutrients for a long time while actually increasing its productivity. However, once a certain level of algae is reached lack of oxygen causes the lake’s ecosystem to break down suddenly.
Business as usual
If the degradation of natural and social capital has such important consequence the question arises why action is not taken more systematically to alleviate it. Cohen and Winn (2007) point to four types of market failure as possible explanations: First, while the benefits of natural or social capital depletion can usually be privatized the costs are often externalized (i.e. they are borne not by the party responsible but by society in general). Second, natural capital is often undervalued by society since we are not fully aware of the real cost of the depletion of natural capital. Information asymmetry is a third reason—often the link between cause and effect is obscured, making it difficult for actors to make informed choices. Cohen and Winn close with the realization that contrary to economic theory many firms are not perfect optimizers. They postulate that firms often do not optimize resource allocation because they are caught in a "business as usual" mentality.
The Challenge of Sustainable Development Around the Persian Gulf
The ultimate intention of this research is to raise consciousness of the need and benefits of “Sustainable Design Thinking” and to help influence decision making about the built environment through creditable approaches, relevant design guidelines and prototyping that can be legitimized and realized by innovative economics and creative governance.
- Applied sustainability
- Conservation biology
- Conservation development
- Conservation (ethic)
- Ecological modernization
- Ecologically sustainable development
- Environmental issue
- Environmental justice
- Planetary boundaries
- Social sustainability
- Sustainable development goals
- Sustainable fishery
- Sustainable forest management
- Sustainable land management
- Sustainable living
- Sustainable yield
- Zero-carbon city
- Ahmed, Faiz (2008). An Examination of the Development Path Taken by Small Island Developing States. (pp. 17–26)
- Atkinson, G., S. Dietz, and E. Neumayer (2009). Handbook of Sustainable Development. Edward Elgar Publishing, ISBN 1848444729.
- Bakari, Mohamed El-Kamel. "Globalization and Sustainable Development: False Twins?." New Global Studies 7.3: 23-56. ISSN (Online) 1940-0004, ISSN (Print) 2194-6566, DOI: 10.1515/ngs-2013-021, November 2013.
- Bertelsmann Stiftung, ed. (2013). Winning Strategies for a Sustainable Future. Reinhard Mohn Prize 2013. Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh. ISBN 978-3-86793-491-6.
- Book Review on An Introduction to Sustainable Development by Peter Rogers, Kazi Jalal, & John Boyd Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, Published online June 18, 2008
- Beyerlin, Ulrich. Sustainable Development, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law
- Danilov-Danil’yan, Victor I., Losev, K.S., Reyf, Igor E. Sustainable Development and the Limitation of Growth: Future Prospects for World Civilization. Transl. Vladimir Tumanov. Ed. Donald Rapp. New York: Springer Praxis Books, 2009. Google Book
- Edwards, A.R., and B. McKibben (2010). Thriving Beyond Sustainability: Pathways to a Resilient Society. New Society Publishers, ISBN 0865716412.
- Li, Rita Yi Man. , Building Our Sustainable Cities" Illinois, Published by Common Ground Publishing.
- James, Paul, Yaso Nadarajah, Karen Haive, and Victoria Stead, Sustainable Communities, Sustainable Development Sustainable Communities, Sustainable Development: Other Paths for Papua New Guinea, Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press, 2012.
- Mark Jarzombek, "Sustainability - Architecture: between Fuzzy Systems and Wicked Problems," Blueprints 21/1 (Winter 2003), pp. 6–9.
- Huesemann, M.H., and J.A. Huesemann (2011). Technofix: Why Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment, Chapter 6, “Sustainability or Collapse?”, and Chapter 13, “The Design of Environmentally Sustainable and Socially Appropriate Technologies”, New Society Publishers, ISBN 0865717044.
- Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Tengö M, Bennett EM, Holland T, Benessaiah K, MacDonald GM and Pfeifer L (2010) "Untangling the Environmentalist's Paradox: Why is Human Well-Being Increasing as Ecosystem Services Degrade?" BioScience, 60 (8): 576–589.
- Rogers, P., K.F. Jalal, and J.A. Boyd (2007). An Introduction to Sustainable Development. Routledge, ISBN 1844075214.
- Pezzey, J; M. Toman (January 2002). "The Economics of Sustainability:A Review of Journal Articles". Resources for the Future DP 02-03: 1–36. Retrieved 2009-06-16.
- Van der Straaten, J., and J.C van den Bergh (1994). Towards Sustainable Development: Concepts, Methods, and Policy. Island Press, ISBN 1559633492.
- Wallace, Bill (2005). Becoming part of the solution : the engineer’s guide to sustainable development. Washington, DC: American Council of Engineering Companies. ISBN 0-910090-37-8.
- White, F; Stallones, L; Last, JM. (2013). Global Public Health: Ecological Foundations. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-975190-7.
- World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, ISBN 019282080X.
- Sianipar, C. P. M., Dowaki, K., Yudoko, G., & Adhiutama, A. (2013). Seven Pillars of Survivability: Appropriate Technology with a Human Face. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(4), 1-18. ISSN 2239-5938.
- Stivers, R. 1976. The Sustainable Society: Ethics and Economic Growth. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.
- Meadows, D.H., D.L. Meadows, J. Randers, and W.W. Behrens III. 1972. The Limits to Growth. Universe Books, New York, NY. ISBN 0-87663-165-0
- Meadows, D H; Randers and Meadows (2004). Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update. Chelsea Green Publishing. ISBN 978-1-931498-58-6.
- Daly, H. E. 1973. Towards a Steady State Economy. San Francisco: Freeman. Daly, H. E. 1991. Steady-State Economics (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
- Brundtland Commission (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. United Nations.
- Smith, Charles; Rees, Gareth (1998). Economic Development, 2nd edition. Basingstoke: Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-72228-0.
- United Cites and Local Governments, "Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development".
- Ulrich Grober: Deep roots - A conceptual history of "sustainable development" (Nachhaltigkeit), Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, 2007; pp. 8–9
- Donovan Finn: Our Uncertain Future: Can Good Planning Create Sustainable Communities?; University of Illinois, 2009; p. 3
- Needham, M. T. (2011). A Psychological Approach to a Thriving Resilient Community. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, vol. 1 no. 3. NY, USA.: CPI
- Hasna, A. M. (2007). "Dimensions of sustainability". Journal of Engineering for Sustainable Development: Energy, Environment, and Health 2 (1): 47–57.
- Agyeman, J., Sustainable Communities and the Challenge of Environmental Justice, (New York, USA: New York University Press, 2005), 44.
- Jacobs, M., Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept, in A. Dobson, Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999), 32.
- Agyeman, J., Bullard, R. D., and Evans, B. eds., Just Sustainabilities: Development in an Unequal World (Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 2003), 5.
- Marian Quigley: Encyclopedia of Information Ethics and Security, Monash University, 2008; p. 623
- Ina Ehnert: Sustainable Human Resource Management: A Conceptual and Exploratory Analysis from a Paradox Perspective; Springer, 2009; pp. 35–36
- Leopold, Aldo. 1949. A Sand County Almanac. Oxford University Press, New York.
- World Commission on Environment and Development. "Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development". Un-documents.net. Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- Will Allen. 2007."Learning for Sustainability: Sustainable Development."
- Liam Magee, Andy Scerri, Paul James, James A. Thom, Lin Padgham, Sarah Hickmott, Hepu Deng, Felicity Cahill (2013). "Reframing social sustainability reporting: Towards an engaged approach". Environ Dev Sustain (University of Melbourne). doi:10.1007/s10668-012-9384-2.
- http://citiesprogramme.com/aboutus/our-approach/circles-of-sustainability; Andy Scerri and Paul James, ‘Accounting for Sustainability: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Research in Developing ‘Indicators’ of Sustainability’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, vol. 13, no. 1, 2010, pp. 41–53.
- White, F; Stallones, L; Last, JM. (2013). Global Public Health: Ecological Foundations. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-975190-7.
- Bringing human health and wellbeing back into sustainable development. In: IISD Annual Report 2011-12. http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/annrep_2011_2012_en.pdf
- Networld-Project (1998-02-09). "Environmental Glossary". Green-networld.com. Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- Manning, S., Boons, F., Von Hagen, O., Reinecke, J. (2011). "National Contexts Matter: The Co-Evolution of Sustainability Standards in Global Value Chains." Ecological Economics, Forthcoming.
- Reinecke, J., Manning, S., Von Hagen, O. (2012). "The Emergence of a Standards Market: Multiplicity of Sustainability Standards in the Global Coffee Industry" Organization Studies, Forthcoming.
- Fainstein, Susan S. 2000. “New Directions in Planning Theory,” Urban Affairs Review 35:4 (March)
- Bedsworf, Louise W. and Ellen Hanak. 2010. “Adaptation to Climate Change, “Journal of the American Planning Association, 76:4.
- Barbour, Elissa and Elizabeth A. Deakin. 2012. “Smart Growth Planning for Climate Protection” 78:1
- America Wind Power Association. US Gov. Web. http://www.awea.org/
- IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (PDF). Geneva (Switzerland): IPCC.
- Jeon, C M; Amekudzi (March 2005), "Addressing Sustainability in Transportation Systems: Definitions, Indicators, and Metrics", Journal of Infrastructure Systems: 31–50
- Deakin, Elissa; Deakin, Elizabeth A. (March 29, 2012). Smart Growth Planning for Climate Protection 78 (1). University of California Davis. Retrieved 9 April 2014.
- Barbier, Edward B. (2006). Natural Resources and Economic Development. http://books.google.de/books?id=fYrEDA-VnyUC&pg=PA45&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false: Cambridge University Press. pp. 44–45. ISBN 9780521706513. Retrieved April 8, 2104.
- Korowitz, David (2012), Ignorance by Consensus, Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability
- Brown, L. R. (2011). World on the Edge. Earth Policy Institute. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-08029-2.
- Malte Faber. (2008). How to be an ecological economist. Ecological Economics 66(1):1-7. Preprint.
- Barbier, E. (1987). "The Concept of Sustainable Economic Development". Environmental Conservation 14 (2): 101–110. doi:10.1017/S0376892900011449.
- Hamilton, K.; Clemens, M. (1999). "Genuine savings rates in developing countries". World Bank Economy Review 13 (2): 333–356. doi:10.1093/wber/13.2.333.
- Ayong Le Kama, A. D. (2001). "Sustainable growth renewable resources, and pollution". Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 25 (12): 1911–1918. doi:10.1016/S0165-1889(00)00007-5.
- Stavins, R.; Wagner, A.; Wagner, G. "Interpreting Sustainability in Economic Terms: Dynamic Efficiency Plus Intergenerational Equity". Economic Letters 79 (3): 339–343. doi:10.1016/S0165-1765(03)00036-3.
- Pezzey, John C. V.; Michael A., Toman (2002). The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal Articles. Resources for the future. Retrieved April 8, 2104.
- Arrow, K. J.; Dasgupta, P.; Goulder, L.; Daily, G.; Ehrlich, P. R.; Heal, G. M.; Levin, S.; Maler, K-G.; Schneider, S.; Starrett, D. A.; Walker, B. (2004). "Are we consuming too much?". Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (3): 147–172. JSTOR 3216811.
- Dasgupta, P. (2007). "The idea of sustainable development". Sustainability Science 2 (1): 5–11. doi:10.1007/s11625-007-0024-y.
- Heal, G. (2009). "Climate Economics: A Meta-Review and Some Suggestions for Future Research". Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 3 (1): 4–21. doi:10.1093/reep/ren014.
- Heal, Geoffrey (2009). "Climate Economics: A Meta-Review and Some Suggestions for Future Research". Review of Environmental Economics and Policy (Oxfors Journals). doi:10.1093/reep/ren014. Retrieved April 8, 2104.
- chairman of the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE)
- « L'économie politique du développement durable », John Baden, document de l'ICREI
- Schaltegger, S. & Sturm, A. 1998. Eco-Efficiency by Eco-Controlling. Zürich: vdf.
- DeSimone, L. & Popoff, F. 1997. Eco-efficiency: The business link to sustainable development. Cambridge: MIT Press.
- Dyllick, T. & Hockerts, K. 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11(2): 130–141.
- Charter of the New Urbanism
- "Beauty, Humanism, Continuity between Past and Future". Traditional Architecture Group. Retrieved 23 March 2014.
- Issue Brief: Smart-Growth: Building Livable Communities. American Institute of Architects. Retrieved on 2014-03-23.
- "Sus.Div". Sus.Div. Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- "Agreement between UNESCO and the City of Milan concerning the International Multimedia Institute (IMI) - Appointment of Executive Director - UNESCO Archives ICA AtoM catalogue". Atom.archives.unesco.org. 1999-10-08. Retrieved 2014-01-17.
- Paul-Marie Boulanger (2008). "Sustainable development indicators: a scientific challenge, a democratic issue. ''S.A.P.I.EN.S.'' '''1''' (1)". Sapiens.revues.org. Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- "Living Planet Report 2006". World Wide Fund for Nature, Zoological Society of London, Global Footprint Network. 24 October 2006. p. 19. Retrieved 18 August 2012.
- World failing on sustainable development
- Joy E. Hecht, Can Indicators and Accounts Really Measure Sustainability? Considerations for the U.S. Environmental Protection
- KM.FAO.org "An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities". Ecological economics 59 (2006) 406-418
- "Annette Lang, Ist Nachhaltigkeit messbar?, Uni Hannover, 2003" (PDF). Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- "Project Management T-kit, Council of Europe and European Commission, Strasbourg, 2000" (PDF). Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- "Do global targets matter?, The Environment Times, Poverty Times #4, UNEP/GRID-Arendal, 2010". Grida.no. Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- "Sostenibilidad en la construcción. Calidad integral y rentabilidad en instalaciones hidro-sanitarias, Revista de Arquitectura e Ingeniería, Matanzas, 2009". Empai-matanzas.co.cu. 2009-01-17. Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- "Transforming the water and waste water infrastructure into an efficient, profitable and sustainable system, Revista de Arquitectura e Ingeniería, Matanzas, 2010" (PDF). Retrieved 2011-09-28.
- Dyllick, T. & Hockerts, K. 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11(2): 130–141
- Daly, H. E. 1973. Towards a Steady State Economy. San Francisco: Freeman.
- Cohen, B. & Winn, M. I. 2007. Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1): 29–49.
- Template:Zohadi, Ahmad, The Challenge of sustainable Development Around the Persian Gulf, Urban Design Journal, London, Autumn 2012, p.124
- Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform - United Nations platform on Sustainable Development
- United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network - United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network
- World Bank website on sustainable development.
- U.K. Sustainable Development Commission
- Sustainable Development Law & Policy
- Sustainable Development: Center for Global Studies at the University of Illinois
- Principles of Sustainability - University of Idaho-Washington State University 50-Part HD/Surround Sound Doculecture Open Course
- United Nations Division for Sustainable Development
- The Vrinda Project Channel - videos on the work in progress for the achievement of the MDGs connected to the Wikibook ⇒ Development Cooperation Handbook