Never a blueprint: social construction of sustainability

Greening of Industry, Cardiff, 2-5 July 2006 Dr. Judith E.M. Klostermann

Wageningen University, The Netherlands

Outline of research

• What does sustainability mean?• In the literature?• In practice?• Conclusions: consequences of social

construction of sustainability

Social construction theory

reality ‘reality’

consensusdebate

Origins of the concept ‘sustainable development’

Sustainable forestry / fisheries

Club of Rome 1972:no economic growth

IUCN 1980: sustainable developmentwithin a free market?

Brundtland report 1987

Brundtland Commission in ‘Our Common Future’:

• “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Issues in the debate on sustainability:

Economic growth can be sustainable /

economic growth should stop.

Human needs are culturally determined /

a basic subsistence level can be defined.

Natural resources can be substituted by technology /

substitution is impossible and/or morally wrong.

Non-renewables can be used /

only renewables should be used

Extinction is allowed if it does not destabilize /

other species have a right to exist

Sustainability as a contested concept • Global carrying capacity can not be calculated

objectively, so it can only be guided by normative views (WRR 1994).

• ‘Ecological modernization’: environmental problems can be solved within existing arrangements such as democracy & market economy (Hajer, 1995).

• Sustainable development is nothing else but a discourse (Dryzek, 1997).

Anthropocentric vs ecocentric views Weak sustainability

Strong sustainability

Nature-human interaction

Nature mastered by humanity

Search for harmony nature/human

Gap between present and future

Incremental change 30-50 years

May take 150-200 years

Priorities Environmental and economic issues

Equity and ecojustice

Sustainability in practice

• Case studies in two Dutch drinking water companies– Provincial Water company North Holland (PWN)– Water Company Overijssel (WMO)

• Ho do they construct ‘sustainability’?• Ethnographic interviews

Two different views on resources: • PWN: “We initiated the reduction of groundwater

extractions by ourselves (...) And other water companies were not amused. (...) They thought that, as a water company, you should strive for maximal groundwater extraction. (...) groundwater is, of course, the most ideal resource for drinking water.”

• WMO: “But that report also made us aware that the present [groundwater] extraction sites, in terms of sustainability, offer many possibilities. A lot more possibilities than we thought in advance.”

Resources for drinking water in the Netherlands

Physical circumstances

play a role

Physical geography does not explain it all

• WMO has similar problems with desiccation and reduced biodiversity

• PWN is less pro-active in ‘het Gooi’:

“we were forced by the government to reduce groundwater extractions. (...) groundwater extractions had less influence than, for example, (...) keeping a certain polder dry. (...) But to fill up a polder again, that’s much more difficult for those institutions.”

• Institutions play a role in how problems are explained • Knowledge plays a role

PWN: sustainability in a relatively simple institutional context

• Provincial government owns 100% of the shares • PWN adheres to governmental monopoly• Provincial government assigned nature management to

PWN in 1934• Ideas on sustainability at PWN and at the provincial

government are similar • Most important theme: how to combine water production

and nature management?

PROV: “There was massive resistance from the companies. But when the Groundwater Plan was confirmed by the democratic procedures of the province, it was accepted rather quickly.”

PWN: “At a certain point (...) we said, ‘Well, if this is the direction that our owner (…) has chosen, then let’s not resist that. (...) let’s give it an extra impulse.’”

PWN: “Because we needed them to cover us, of course. All those new technologies cost a lot more money.”

“Dune nature reserve. Keep your dog on a

leash”

WMO: sustainability under complicated

institutional circumstances • WMO shares large groundwater system with a number

of other stakeholders

• WMO: “The water board says, ‘(...) we don’t really know what will happen when a water extraction moves out.’ (...) I do know what will happen, the moment drinking water moves out, the area will become wet (...) the water board will build a pumping station, will start draining the area, (...) because agriculture has to produce. So you only shift the problem.”

WMO: “So now we focus much more on cooperation and on creating consensus about the concept of sustainability.”

WMO: “We judge it by the level of debate among other stakeholders. (...) And that’s exactly the trouble. (…) when you’ve solved the problem in agriculture, nature organizations have a problem and then the water board has a problem. It’s a different stakeholder every time. So... what strategy do we choose? Or should we simply temporize and talk some more (...) and that’s more or less our strategy now.”

“Sustainable, sustainable, and sustainable once

more…”

Economic circumstances play a role

• WMO: “With water saving and losing business to farmers, (...) water sales have tumbled.”

• WMO: “When sales go down, and you have less income, and you also have to do a major restructuring of extraction sites, well, that’s very inconvenient. So you have to stay on top of the debate and make sure you safeguard the sustainability continuously.”

• PROV: “The smaller extraction sites, which are more difficult to operate economically, are the ones that are closed down. (...) And they also want to make them sustainable, the extraction sites. By doing that, they want to show a positive attitude.”

Conclusions 1: Factors influencing

construction of ‘sustainability’ • Physical circumstances: availability of resources• Knowledge of system: simple vs complicated• Institutional context: consensus vs debate• Economic circumstances: growth vs shrinking

market

Conclusions 2: consequences of social

construction of sustainability +: keeps human-nature relation on the agenda+: local knowledge can be included +: people feel that the concept is their own +: inspires to action+: in the process of implementation people can

learn new things -: limited by economic circumstances: only weak

sustainability (damage control)

Never a blueprint: social construction of sustainability

Greening of Industry, Cardiff, 2-5 July 2006 Dr. Judith E.M. Klostermann

Wageningen University, The Netherlands