Johnston Paul, Everard Mark, Santillo David, Robèrt Karl-Henrik
Greenpeace Research Laboratories, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4PS, UK.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2007 Jan;14(1):60-6. doi: 10.1065/espr2007.01.375.
Since its inception two decades ago, the concept of sustainable development has suffered from a proliferation of definitions, such that it has increasingly come to mean many things to many different people. This has limited its credibility, called into question its practical application and the significance of associated achievements and, overall, limited the progress in environmental and social developments which it was designed to underpin.
This viewpoint article is intended to re-open the concept of sustainable development for discussion 20 years on from the Brundtland Report, in the context of the current state of the world, our growing understanding of ecosystems and their response to stressors and the parallel increase in recognition of inherent limitations to that understanding.
Following a brief review of the diverse manner in which the concept has developed over time, we present the case for application of a series of simple conditions for sustainability, originally developed by The Natural Step in the early 90s, which nevertheless still provide a sound basis on which progress towards sustainable development could be monitored. The paper also highlights the unavoidable links between sustainability and ethics, including those in the sensitive fields of population and quality of life.
Overall we argue the need for the concept of sustainable development to be reclaimed from the plethora of economically-focused or somewhat vague and un-measurable definitions which have found increasing favour in recent years and which all too often accompany relatively minor progress against 'business as usual'.
The vision encapsulated in the Brundtland Report was ground-breaking. If, however, true sustainability in human interactions with the biosphere is to be realised, a far stronger and more empirical interpretation of the original intent is urgently required. To be effective, such an interpretation must encompass and guide developments in political instruments and public policy as well as corporate decision-making, and must focus increasingly on addressing the root causes of major threats to sustainability rather than just their consequences.
自二十年前提出以来，可持续发展的概念因定义繁多而饱受困扰，以至于对许多不同的人来说，它的含义越来越五花八门。这削弱了其可信度，对其实际应用以及相关成就的意义提出了质疑，总体上也限制了它原本旨在支持的环境与社会发展的进程。
这篇观点文章旨在结合当今世界的现状、我们对生态系统及其对压力源的反应的不断加深的理解，以及对该理解固有局限性的认识同步增加的情况，在《布伦特兰报告》发布20年后重新开启对可持续发展概念的讨论。
在简要回顾该概念随时间发展的不同方式之后，我们阐述了应用一系列最初由自然步组织在90年代初提出的可持续性简单条件的理由，这些条件仍然为监测可持续发展的进展提供了坚实的基础。本文还强调了可持续性与伦理之间不可避免的联系，包括人口与生活质量等敏感领域中的联系。
总体而言，我们认为需要从近年来越来越受到青睐且往往伴随着相对于“照常营业”进展甚微的大量以经济为重点或有些模糊且不可衡量的定义中重新找回可持续发展的概念。
《布伦特兰报告》中所蕴含的愿景具有开创性。然而，如果要在人类与生物圈的互动中实现真正的可持续性，就迫切需要对其初衷进行更有力、更基于实证的解读。要想有效，这样的解读必须涵盖并指导政治工具和公共政策以及企业决策的发展，并且必须越来越注重解决对可持续性的重大威胁的根本原因，而不仅仅是其后果。
