Sustainability

Sustainability is often defined by the UN Brundtland Commission as meeting present needs without compromising future generations, but this can introduce uncertainty as to what comprises a “need”. Instead, “absolute sustainability” can be defined as something being able to sustain itself into the future without using more than its allowance of potential impact on the planet. We can define these allowances by using the planetary boundaries.

Modern sustainability emerged from fields like forestry, economics, and ecology, gaining global prominence through the 1972 Limits to Growth report, the 1972 Stockholm Conference and the 1987 Brundtland Report, which reframed sustainable development as environmentally and socially responsible growth. This three‑pillar model (economic, social, environmental) was later embedded in global policy through the 1992 Rio Summit and reinforced by corporate frameworks like the Triple Bottom Line.

The three‑pillar model is widely used but heavily criticised for oversimplifying complex interdependencies and offering no clear way to balance trade‑offs, prompting researchers to propose alternatives such as nested models where the economy sits within society and both depend on the environment, better reflecting ecological limits, and systemic relationships. (2)

Western sustainability emerged through mid-20th-century environmental awareness and was formalised by the Brundtland Commission, framing sustainable development as a balance between economic growth and environmental protection. However, it has historically overlooked Indigenous perspectives, treats culture as secondary, and often struggles to reconcile growth‑driven economic priorities with ecological limits.

Indigenous sustainability is holistic and place‑based, integrating land, language, law, kinship and ceremony, emphasising reciprocity with nature, intergenerational knowledge and cultural continuity. Global sustainability efforts should meaningfully integrate Indigenous principles (such as stewardship, balance and cultural preservation) to create more inclusive and effective sustainability frameworks. (3)

The Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma (ISD) refers to situations where individuals must choose between short-term personal benefits and long-term sustainability. Many people tend to prioritise immediate gains, leading to environmental degradation, climate change, and resource depletion.

Researchers developed an experimental game to study individual decision-making in intergenerational contexts. It was found that individuals were more likely to choose unsustainable options when previous generations had done the same. Introducing the Future Ahead and Back (FAB) mechanism, where individuals were first asked to consider the perspective of future generations before making their actual decision, significantly increased sustainable choices, demonstrating that empathy for future generations can shift decision-making. (4)

Education is imperative for a sustainable future. As sustainability education is an emerging area of study, it can be challenging to approach and must be handled carefully. Sustainability pedagogy emphasises diverse ways of knowing aside from cognitive knowledge, known as the three ‘H’s (Head, hands, heart). It is also important that sustainability is naturally incorporated within existing structures and subject areas, rather than as an add-on, to avoid sustainability being seen as separate from the rest of learning.

Sustainability challenges are complex and multi-dimensional, meaning different perspectives and interpretations naturally lead to ambiguity. Ignoring ambiguity can reduce the legitimacy of sustainability science, as it may overlook diverse viewpoints and real-world complexities.

Reflexive Boundary Critique (RBC) is a way to navigate ambiguity in sustainability research. This considers three key processes: being (a researcher’s subjective orientation influences how ambiguity is perceived); knowing (knowledge is shaped by boundary judgments, making it partial and contextual); and intervening (research itself is a form of intervention that reinforces or marginalises certain perspectives). (6)