Weak Sustainability Paradigm
Sustainability refers to the process that can help in maintaining change in a manner that is balanced. It states that exploitation of the resources, technological development along with institutional change should be in harmony that can help in enhancing the potential of meeting the human needs along with aspirations (Carruthers, 2001). Weak sustainability can be defined by making use of concepts like human along with natural capital. Weak sustainability refers to the idea in environmental economics that human capital can help in substituting natural capital. Strong sustainability on the other hand refers to the fact that economic along with environmental capital can be complementary but they are not interchangeable. Strong sustainability acknowledges the fact that environment helps in performing certain functions that cannot be done by making use of human made capital. This essay discusses about the strength and weaknesses in relation to weak and the strong sustainability approach. It explores whether these sustainability approaches can help in addressing the environmental problems in both short and in the long term.
Weak sustainability paradigm evolved in the year 1970 and it was an extension of that of neoclassical theory in relation to economic growth. It came into the mainstream in 1990 in the context pertaining to sustainable development discourse. In weak sustainability, there is high substitution between that of natural along with man-made capital. The weakness of “weak sustainability” lies in the fact that it would turn out to be more destructive for the environment in the long term. This concept treats the natural capital like a homogenous category as opposed to that of man-made capital (Connick & Innes, 2003). Natural resources perform various kinds of functions within the economy. The natural capital can help in the supporting functions related to life systems along with the non-critical natural capital. The literature in relation to natural resource price formation reveals the fact that prices can turn out to be different from that of reflecting true scarcities. The disadvantages of weak sustainability can be said to lie in the fact that the economic resources cannot produce technologies that can help in saving that of natural capital in the long term. A problem that arises owing to this is that positive effect that technological change can bring that can offset limit to that of growth cannot be analysed in the proper manner (Meadowcroft, 2007).It has to consider negative feedback that new technologies can have on the environment in the long term. It can hence be stated that estimating elasticity pertaining to substitution can present various kinds of difficulties.
Adjusted Net Savings and Natural Capital
Adjusted net savings (ANS) exhibits great amount of weakness in treating the intangible capital which is a variable that is performing poorly. Characteristics pattern in relation to wealthy countries has revealed that intangible wealth amounts to more than 80 % whereas the natural wealth comprises less than 5 percent of all the wealth. It can hence not be believed that educational expenditure can provide the right account in relation to net additions to the large stock of the intangible capital. France and United Kingdom show the pattern of the wealthy countries where intangible capital becomes more than 80 percent of all the capital (Neumayer, 2003). The natural capital can be said to bring less than that of 5 %. Australia along with Canada on the other hand can be said to be more dependent on natural resources as compared to the wealthy countries but even here he natural capital can be said to be less than 10 % of that of the capital (Clugston & Calder, 2014).
It has been found that half of the surface water of Australia occur in the areas where water is either fully committed or overused. 30 % of the groundwater management unit can be said to be overcommitted (Ott, 2003). The water supply problems becomes more problematic owing to ecological requirement for that of in-stream flow that has been recognised by Australia much later. The trends have shown that area for the plantation of forests is growing and almost 60 % of timber comes from the plantations. Area of the native forests is undergoing decline on account of land clearing (Wilson & Wu, 2017). Land clearing has decreased in the present age and there are many policies for reinforcing this trend. There are as many as 3000 ecosystems that are threatened throughout the world. There are many bioregions that have threatened ecosystems and it has been brought out that the condition of the wetland along with riparian areas is undergoing decline (Pelenc & Ballet, 2015). Australian State of Environment 2006 has revealed the fact that there has been decline of the riparian areas.
Strong sustainability can prove to be a more diffuse paradigm and there are various rules that have been brought forward which can operationalize it. There are two schools of thought in relation to strong sustainability. One points out that value pertaining to natural capital should always be preserved. On the other hand, pertaining to non-renewable resources extraction should be compensated with the help of an investment into that of sustainable renewable resources. There should be proper balancing of natural capital depreciation by that of investment within that of the shadow projects (Martins, 2016). This concept harps on the fact that there are unlimited substitutability between the different forms of the natural capital. There are certain forms in relation to natural capital that cannot be substituted by the other form of that of natural capital. Strong sustainability needs total natural capital to be preserved in that of physical terms so that the function can remain intact in the long term (Janeiro & Patel, 2015). Strong sustainability is on the basis of the fact that human life along with activity takes place within the planet Earth. Strong sustainability acts as the prerequisite in relation to the development of the human beings and it helps in preserving the integrity of ecological system that is present within the biosphere. Ecological integrity is indicative of ability of eco-system to re-establish diversity along with resilience (Dedeurwaerdere, 2014). Ethics along with the world views help in supporting strong sustainability as they are integral to that of the ecological system pertaining to biosphere.
Environmental Issues in Australia
The present age states that it is the age of pollution control that is closely related to weak sustainability and it bears the notion that human innovation can help in solving problem in the long term. The viewpoint that can be adopted in the present age is that of eco-socialism. It can be deemed as a strong approach both in the socio-economic form and in the environmental form that can help in attaining maximum equality (Utz, 2018). Dichotomies should be broken down if some kind of progress has to made and the two spectrum should be brought together-weak and strong sustainability that can help in proper environmental management. They can them meet on the common ground that can help in giving birth to a better world. Norton has however stated that the paradigms pertaining to sustainability can be stated to be non-falsifiable and these paradigms are not supported by that of science (Schaltegger, Hansen & Lüdeke-Freund, 2016). It can be stated that people in the modern age are moving towards that of a ecology approach with the help of commodification of the nature. This progression should be hailed because this can help in the preservation of nature from being used by other human beings. It can hence be stated to be a strong approach in relation to sustainability. It is important that monetary value should be placed on nature that can help in developing strong approach in relation to sustainability. Substantial amount of intergenerational capital should be maintained for the future that can help in developing of strong sustainability. Evolutionary economics can help in the merging of the two ends- strong and weak sustainability (Vlasov & Vincze, 2019).The human species are maladapted to the natural environment and strong sustainability should be seen from the point of view of deep ecology approach that can help in enhancing the environmental quality in the long term. The reconciliation of strong and weak sustainability will need reconsideration from that of an ecological perspective the idea pertaining to total capital. There should be an aggregation of the productive capacity of the economy along with that of aggregate pertaining to the social capital. Sustainability can be said to be achieved if these two minimum requirements have been fulfilled (Ott, 2014).
Natural capital can support functions related to the life system and that of non-critical natural capital. The weakness of weak sustainability is owing to the fact that economic resources cannot give birth to technologies that can contribute in saving natural capital. Strong sustainability can act like a diffuse program and various rules have helped in its operationalization. Total natural capital is required by strong sustainability that can help in the preservation of the physical terms. People in the present age are moving in the direction of ecological approach by taking recourse to commodification of nature. Aggregation of productive capacity along with social capital that can help in saving the environment. The satisfying of these minimum requirements can help in ensuring that sustainability is achieved.
References:
Carruthers, D. (2001). From opposition to orthodoxy: The remaking of sustainable development. Journal of Global South Studies, 18(2), 93.
Clugston, R., & Calder, W. (2014). Higher education for strong sustainability. In Intergenerational learning and transformative leadership for sustainable futures (pp. 209-227). Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Connick, S., & Innes, J. E. (2003). Outcomes of collaborative water policy making: Applying complexity thinking to evaluation. Journal of environmental planning and management, 46(2), 177-197.
Dedeurwaerdere, T. (2014). Sustainability science for strong sustainability. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Janeiro, L., & Patel, M. K. (2015). Choosing sustainable technologies. Implications of the underlying sustainability paradigm in the decision-making process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 105, 438-446.
Martins, N. O. (2016). Ecosystems, strong sustainability and the classical circular economy. Ecological economics, 129, 32-39.
Meadowcroft, J. (2007). Who is in charge here? Governance for sustainable development in a complex world. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 9(3-4), 299-314.
Neumayer, E. (2003). Weak versus strong sustainability: exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Ott, K. (2003). The case for strong sustainability. Greifswald’s environmental ethics, 59-64.
Ott, K. (2014). Institutionalizing strong sustainability: A Rawlsian perspective. Sustainability, 6(2), 894-912.
Pelenc, J., & Ballet, J. (2015). Strong sustainability, critical natural capital and the capability approach. Ecological economics, 112, 36-44.
Schaltegger, S., Hansen, E. G., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2016). Business models for sustainability: Origins, present research, and future avenues.
Utz, S. (2018). Not necessary to overfocus on financial performance in strong Sustainability investing: evidence from a GABV Bank case study.
Vlasov, M., & Vincze, Z. (2019). Re-learning with Permaculture: Exploring Knowledges of Innovation for Strong Sustainability.
Wilson, M. C., & Wu, J. (2017). The problems of weak sustainability and associated indicators. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 24(1), 44-51.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
