Sustainable community development: integrating environmental, economic, and social objectives☆
Introduction
In the context of growing concern over the global environment and related quality of life issues (e.g. WCED, 1987, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, 1992, ICPQL, 1996), the purpose of this article is to stimulate and inform discussion about the community role in sustainable development and to broaden our understanding of the opportunities for sustainable community development activity.
While there has been considerable attention in recent years to thinking globally (e.g. the Montreal Accord on stratospheric ozone protection; the Rio “Earth Summit;” the Kyoto Summit), relatively little attention has been devoted to examining local activity within this global context. Our communities as presently planned and developed are not sustainable in a global ecological sense. A typical North American city of 100 000 inhabitants imports 200 tons of food, 1000 tons of fuel, and 62 000 tons of water every day; it exports 100 000 tons of garbage and 40 000 tons of human waste each year (Morris, 1990a, Morris, 1990b). Indeed, it is these unsustainably “developed” cities of the world that produce most of the world's solid and liquid wastes, consume most of the world's fossil fuels, emit the majority of ozone depleting compounds and toxic gases, and give economic incentive to the clearing of the world's forests and agricultural lands (UNEP, 1990).
Seemingly ordinary local planning and development decisions have a significant impact on global environmental sustainability (see e.g. City of Vancouver, 1990, Haughton and Hunter, 1994, Wackernagel and Rees, 1996). Although local governments are not necessarily the only agencies charged with community planning and development, they are the only locally elected, representative and accountable bodies responsible for community decision-making. This makes them critical players in the movement toward sustainable communities (Roseland, 1997, Roseland, 1998). Indeed, “it is clear that if the agreements reached at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 are to be implemented, most, if not all will require concerted action at the local level” (Agyeman and Evans, 1996).
This article complements recent publications in Progress in Planning concerned with sustainability (e.g. Mazza and Ryden, 1997, Feitelson, 1998), although it takes a different approach. It begins with an overview of sustainable development, questioning its focus on poverty as a major source of environmental degradation, and suggesting instead that both poverty and environmental degradation result largely from wealth. It next examines the concepts of natural capital and social capital, whether (and if so, how) they are linked, and explores their implications for sustainable development at the community level.
In Chapter 3 we examine planning theory and sustainable development, asking whether planning theory is relevant to sustainable development, and investigating Friedmann (1987)’s four traditions of planning theory. It finds that while planning theory is, or should be, relevant to sustainable development, planners concerned with key aspects of sustainable development will have to look to “greener” pastures for relevant theoretical guidance. It continues with an exposition of what arguably is, or ought to be, a “fifth tradition” in planning theory, one which can help planners grapple with some tremendously important issues that are otherwise usually addressed inadequately or ignored completely in regard to sustainable development. This survey of the paradigms associated with healthy communities, appropriate technology, social ecology, the green movement, bioregionalism, and native worldviews implies that planning theory educators should re-evaluate their syllabi to expose their students to this body of literature.
Chapter 4 considers the implications for achieving sustainable development in communities, particularly regarding the future of work and community economic development. It is informed by four arguments which, taken together, indicate that we must explicitly aim to nurture and multiply social capital in order not only to preserve our stock of natural capital but also to improve our economic and social well-being.
Chapter 5 details a framework for sustainable community development. It begins by elaborating the concept of a sustainable community, examines distinctions relevant to communities in developed and developing parts of the world, proceeds to investigate some of the reasons why North American communities are presently unsustainable, explores some characteristics of more sustainable communities, and concludes with the role of citizens and their governments in moving toward sustainable communities. Applying the concept of sustainable development to North American communities begins with unprecedented and simultaneous emphasis on the efficient use of urban space, on minimizing the consumption of essential natural capital, on multiplying social capital, and on mobilizing citizens and their governments toward these ends. This last element is crucial to co-ordinating and balancing the other three.
Chapter 6 concerns questions of governance for sustainable community development. It explores both governance and government in this context. In particular, it focuses on public participation, decision-making, the role of local government, and planning for action.
Chapter 7 examines relevant policy instruments and planning tools. The policy instruments are presented in four categories: traditional regulations such as permits and licenses that have a legal basis; voluntary mechanisms or actions taken that generally do not require expenditure; direct government expenditure such as money spent on improved infrastructure; and financial incentives such as taxes, subsidies, tradable permits, and rewards. The planning tools are organized into planning tools and assessment tools, and further organized into community planning and assessment tools and technical planning and assessment tools.
Finally, Chapter 8 explores the challenge ahead for sustainable community development. In summary, this article aims to develop a framework which could itself contribute to sustainable community development. It attempts in part to bridge the gap between traditional community development concerns (of e.g. local decision-making and self-reliance, co-operative endeavour and broad participation in community affairs) with more recent global sustainability concerns. It illustrates the implications of this framework for governance, and demonstrates that a wide range of policy instruments and planning tools now exist which can be used to implement the framework.
This introduction concludes with a comment on the presentation of the research in this article. The information employed in the study consists of case studies and examples of specific municipal and local government initiatives related to sustainable development, but no single detailed case study is presented as the focus of an entire chapter. This is quite deliberate, since the purpose of the work is to view a broad set of topics holistically so as to develop an understanding of the implications of sustainable development per se at the community level.
Section snippets
Sustainable development: an overview
As we enter the new millennium it has become clear that human activity has damaged the natural integrity of major ecosystems on every continent, seriously threatening the security of the societies that depend on these ecosystems (e.g. Brown et al., 1998). Moreover, the most worrisome environmental trends are global in scope, and thus threaten all of humanity. As many international gatherings have agreed:
The best predictions available indicate potentially severe economic and social dislocation
Is planning theory relevant to sustainable development?
In light of the preceding discussion, what can sustainable development proponents and practitioners hope to learn from planning theory? The answer depends largely upon: (1) how sustainable development is interpreted; and (2) how planning theory is interpreted.
As discussed above, the range of definitions, or interpretations, of sustainable development is quite broad. Like sustainable development, planning theory also suffers from an abundance of interpretation. There may well be as many
Implications for achieving sustainable development in communities
Much of the debate over the meaning of sustainable development focuses on the tension between the economic necessity for material growth and the ecological reality of limits. In the years since The Limits to Growth (Meadows et al., 1972) was published, few researchers have seriously explored the implications of this concept for social organization, work, and community economic development (e.g. see Meadows et al., 1992). Ryle (1988) notes that “ecological limits may limit political choices, but
A framework for sustainable community development*
This chapter builds upon the previous material to develop a framework for sustainable community development. It will add to the concepts of natural capital and social capital discussed in Chapter 2 to make them meaningful and relevant at the community level. The framework under discussion here is presented visually in Fig. 1.
What is a sustainable community? The concept of a “sustainable community” does not describe just one type of neighborhood, town, city or region. Activities that the
Governance for sustainable community development
With our framework for sustainable community development in hand, we turn our attention now to governance for sustainable community development.
Governance and government are not the same. Government is about “doing” things, and delivering services, whereas governance is “leading” society, convincing its various interest groups to embrace common goals and strategies (Osborne and Gaebler, 1993).
This chapter is about governing sustainable communities, and explores both governance and government in
Policy instruments and planning tools
There are many ways to mobilize citizens and their governments toward sustainable communities, but there are also many barriers and obstacles that hamper our progress in this direction. We cannot realistically expect most people to choose sustainable options if they appear to be more difficult or expensive than unsustainable choices. The question arises, then, how can we change the systems around us, “level the playing field,” and provide ample opportunities for individuals to make behavioural
Conclusion: the challenge ahead
Sustainable community development will not come easily—it requires significant change in our structures, attitudes and values. Sustainable development implies a shift in the capacity of individuals, companies and nations to use resources which they have the right to use—and are encouraged to use—under present legal and economic arrangements. Although even the most conventional analyses recognize the need for changing these arrangements, few openly acknowledge that moving toward a sustainable
Acknowledgements
Many people have helped with the development of these ideas over the years. In particular, I am obliged to Joan Fletcher for background research on social capital, to Ryan Hill for research assistance on policy instruments, to Dorli Duffy for research on shared decision-making, and to Zane Parker for research on sustainability indicators. I also gratefully acknowledge financial support for this project from the President's Research Fund at Simon Fraser University, and from the Science Council
References (156)
- et al.
Socio-ecological indicators for sustainability
Ecological Economics
(1996) - et al.
The inherently political nature of program evaluators and evaluation research
Evaluation and Program Planning
(1987) Boundaries of Home: Mapping for Local Empowerment
(1993)- Agyeman, J., Evans, B. (Eds.), 1996. Statement of Purpose, Local Environment,...
- Alcamo, J.M., 1990. Compact City Design as a Strategy to Cut Dangerous Air Pollution, presented to the First...
After rationality
Society
(1988)Fifteen ways to make growth management work
A ladder of citizen participation
Journal of American Institute of Planners
(1969)The Good Society
(1991)
A Green City Program for San Francisco Bay Area Cities and Towns
Adult Civic Education
The Rise of Urbanization and the Decline of Citizenship
Community Economic Development: An Introduction for Planners
Whole Life Economics: Revaluing Daily Life
Popular Development: Rethinking the Theory and Practice of Development
State of the World 1988: A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society
Love in a Cold World: The Voluntary Sector in an Age of Cuts
Cities Take Action: Local Environmental Initiatives, in World Resources Institute, United Nations Environment Program, United Nations Development Program, The World Bank, World Resources 1996–97: The Urban Environment
Is There a Method in Our Measurement? The use of indicators in local sustainable development planning
Local Environment
The incongruity of theory and practice
Society
Traditional American Indian and Western European attitudes toward nature: an overview
Environmental Ethics
Introduction: a reverse definition
Green Politics: The Global Promise
Social capital in the creation of human capital
American Journal of Sociology (supplement)
Foundations of Social Theory
Resource Manual for a Living Revolution
Strategic issues in structuring multi-party public policy negoticontribution
Negotiation Journal
Environmental Disputes: Community Involvement in Conflict Resolution
For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future
Appropriate Technology Sourcebook
Living by Life: Some Bioregional Theory and Practice
CoEvolution Quarterly
A preliminary assessment of shared decision-making in land use and natural resource planning
Environments: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies
Muddling toward sustainability: the transformation of environmental planning in Israel
Progress in Planning
Slowing global warming
Entrepreneurial social infrastructure: a necessary ingredient
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Can evaluation help an organization to learn?
Evaluation Review
The Taoists and the amish: kindred expressions of eco-anarchism
The Ecologist
Planning in the Public Domain
Should environmentalists pursue ‘sustainable development’?
Probe Post
Putting cities in their place: ecosystem-based planning for canadian urban regions
Making Cities Work: The Role of Local Authorities in the Urban Environment
Cited by (279)
Examining urban polarization in five Spanish historic cities through online datasets and onsite perceptions
2023, Habitat InternationalImproving sustainability in communities: Linking the local scale to the concept of sustainable development
2023, Environmental Impact Assessment ReviewSustainable Development in Old Communities in China—Using Redesigned Nucleic Acid Testing Booths for Community-Specific Needs
2024, Sustainability (Switzerland)The well-being of indigenous peoples in India and its alignment with the sustainable development goals (SDGs)
2024, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal
- ☆
This article is adapted in large part from my book Toward Sustainable Communities: Resources for Citizens and Their Governments. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, BC, 1998. An earlier version of the chapter on natural capital and social capital appeared in Pierce, J.T. and Dale, A. (ed.), Communities, Development, and Sustainability across Canada, UBC Press, Vancouver, 1999, pp. 190–207, and an expanded version of the chapter on policy instruments first appeared in 1996 in: Local Environment 1(2).