Encyclopedia of Sustainability in Higher Education

2019 Edition
| Editors: Walter Leal Filho

“Deep” or “Strong” Sustainability

  • Renata BuritiEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11352-0_503

Synonyms

Introduction

Sustainable development has been described as “development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own demands” (WCED 1987). This conceptualization as presented in the report Our Common Future (ibid.), has been widely used as a standard definition (Barr 2008). It is the result of efforts to integrate social, economic, and environmental considerations into a new concept of development as a response to ideas of progress and growth which gained popularity in the 1970s. (See Du Pisani (2006) for a historical overview of the concept.) Under this rationale, sustainable development should allow for poverty alleviation and inequality reduction while ensuring intra- and intergenerational equity. Accordingly, future generations should be entitled to the same level of social and economic opportunities as available for present...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Al-Saidi M, Dos Santos Buriti R (in press) Ecosystem infrastructure for sustainability. Revaluating nature through community-based water and land policies in Brazil. In: Heikkurinnen P, Bonnedahl K (eds.) Strong sustainable societiesGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbier EB (2003) The role of natural resources in economic development. Aust Econ Pap 42(2):253–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbier EB, Burgess JC (2017) Natural resource economics, planetary boundaries and strong sustainability. Sustain For 9(10):1–12Google Scholar
  4. Barr S (2008) Environment and society: sustainability, policy and the citizen. Ashgate, AldershotGoogle Scholar
  5. Brand F (2009) Critical natural capital revisited: Ecological resilience and sustainable development. Ecol Econ 68:605–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiesura A, De Groot R (2003) Critical natural capital: a socio-cultural perspective. Ecol Econ 44:219–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christie M, Fazey I, Cooper R, Hyd T, Deri A, Hughes L, Bush G, Brander L, Nahman A, de Lange W, Reyers B (2008) An evaluation of economic and non-economic techniques for assessing the importance of biodiversity to people in developing countries. Defra, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Conesa-Sevilla J (2006) The intrinsic value of the whole: cognitive and utilitarian evaluative processes as they pertain ecocentric, deep ecological, and ecopsychological “valuing”. Trumpeter 22(2):26–42Google Scholar
  9. Costanza R, Daly HE (1992) Natural capital and sustainable development. Conserv Biol 6(1):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Daly HE (1990) Toward some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecol Econ 2:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daly HE (1992) From empty world to full world economics. In: Goodland R, Daly HE, El Serafy S (eds) Population, technology, and lifestyle: the transition to sustainability. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 23–37Google Scholar
  12. Daly HE (1995) On Wilfred Beckerman’s critique of sustainable development. Environ Values 4:49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dasgupta P, Heal G (1974) The optimal depletion of exhaustible resources. Rev Econ Stud 41:3–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Groot RS (1992) Functions of nature, evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision making. Wolters-Noordhoff, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  15. De Groot RS, Van der Perk J, Chiesura A, van Vliet A (2003) Importance and threat as determining factors for criticality of natural capital. Ecol Econ 44:187–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dietz S, Neumayer E (2007) Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: concepts and measurement. Ecol Econ 61(4):617–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Du Pisani JA (2006) Sustainable development: historical roots of the concept. Environ Sci 3(2):83–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ekins P (2003) Identifying critical natural capital: conclusions about critical natural capital. Ecol Econ 44:277–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ekins P, Simon S, Deutsch L, Folke C, De Groot R (2003) A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital an d strong sustainability. Ecol Econ 44:165–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ekins P, Dresner S, Dahlström K (2008) The four-capital method of sustainable development evaluation. Eur Environ 18:63–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Farber SC, Costanza R, Wilson MA (2002) Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 41:375–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Farley J (2008) The role of pricing in conserving critical natural capital. Conserv Biol 22(6):1399–1408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fisher B, Turner KR, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68(3):643–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Foster J (2002) Deep sustainability and the human future. The Trompeter 18(1). Available at http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/118/125
  26. Hartwick JM (1977) Intergenerational equity and investing of rents from exhaustible resources. Am Econ Rev 67:972–974Google Scholar
  27. Hediger W (1999) Reconciling “weak” and “strong” sustainability. Int J Soc Econ 26(7/8/9):1120–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ikerd J, Gamble L, Cox T (2014) Deep sustainability; the essentials. Available at https://sites.google.com/site/sustainabilitydeep/
  29. Kates RW, Parris TM, Leiserowitz AA (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values and practices. Environ: Sci Policy Sustain Dev 47(3):8–21Google Scholar
  30. MEA (2005) Ecosystems and human well being. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  31. Neumayer E (2013) Weak versus strong sustainability: exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms, 4th edn. Edward Elgar Publishing, CheltenhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pearce DW, Turner RK (1990) Economics of natural resources and the environment. John Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  33. Pelenc J, Ballet J (2015) Strong sustainability, critical natural capital and the capability approach. Ecol Econ 112:36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pires M (2004) Watershed protection for a world city. The case of New York. Land Use Policy 21(2):161–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson A, Chapin AS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Foke C, Schellnhuber HJ (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Small N, Munday M, Durance I (2017) The challenge of valuing ecosystem services that have no material benefits. Glob Environ Chang 44:57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Solow RM (1974) Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources. Rev Econ Stud 41:29–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity ecological and economic foundations. Earthscan, London and Washington. Available at http://www.teebweb.org/our-publications/teeb-study-reports/ecological-and-economic-foundations/
  39. Turner RK (1993) Sustainability: principles and practices. In: Turner RK (ed) Sustainable environmental economics and management: principles and practice. Belhaven Press, New York/London, pp 3–36Google Scholar
  40. US Environmental Protection Agency (2016) What is green infrastructure? Available at https://www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure/policy-guides
  41. WCED (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Available at http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdfGoogle Scholar
  42. Wunder S (2005) Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts. CIFOR occasional paper 42. Available at https://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-42.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Technology and Resources Management in the Tropics and SubtropicsTH Köln/University of Applied SciencesCologneGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Ulisses Azeiteiro
    • 1
  1. 1.University of AveiroAveiroPortugal