In a nutshell my understanding of sustainability is that whatever is used is replaced, like for like. So for instance, chopping down oak and replanting with pine does not count as sustainability in my world.
It also has to incorporate evolution, so while the trend of planting the engineered crops hailed as savours in being able to sustain our ever growing population, the toll on wildlife with these deserts of monoculture and the ever-growing trend of climate change I feel biodiversity has to be part of sustainability.
From the previous unit, the following three viewpoints for sustainability were given.
1. The Ecologist doesn’t see the human race as a separate entity from the planet and its resources, but part of it. Their motivations for preserving the planet are that nature and humanity have an inherent value and should be protected because of that.
2. The Environmentalist sees nature or the planet as separate from the human race. It is there for humans, and as such humans should have stewardship over the world. They see the planet as something to be preserved so that humans can survive and evolve.
3. The Economist understands the measures of unsustainability arising from a consumer led culture treating finite resources as an income, but has faith that market forces and a “business as usual” approach will result in a natural crisis aversion occurring; that the system will sort itself out through technological advances if left to its own devices.
{ from Learning for Sustainability by Sarah Speight, and Sustainability in the Arts and Humanities by Naomi Sykes}
My starting point today is very definitely in the Ecologists camp with a slight foray into the Environmentalists camp, which is quite different from my youth when I was firmly in the Economists camp.
