Weekly Assignment #11

General Questions:

How do you believe sustainability should be defined for policy-making?

There can be many interpretations of sustainability. To remain consistent for policy-making purposes, sustainability should include the “three E’s” that Wheeler discussed: environment, economy, and equity. Sustainability of the environment is important if future generations will be able to enjoy the quality of life we have today. The economy plays a major role in how much a country can focus on the long-term idea of sustainability because there may be more immediate and urgent needs. In an ideal world, we can have it all. Realistically, direct basic needs of shelter, food, and water trump the support of sustainability. Furthermore, it is important that sustainability is equal to all and not just focused in a particular area.

There should be room for interpretation and flexibility to allow for micro and macro analysis. Additionally, the definition should be flexible for the different types of problems that are faced. Needs differ and it is important to leave room for interpretation. Some progress is better than no progress. Allowing elasticity in the classification will hopefully result in advancement towards sustainability.

What are the difficulties associated with making sustainability a policy goal?

The difficulties associated with making sustainability a policy goal are vagueness, immediate results, and measuring outcomes/results. First, technology is ever changing. There are many gaps in our knowledge of the impact we are having on the environment. Many researchers are making assumptions and are not building their analysis on concrete facts. Therefore, there is no definite conclusion that can be reached. For example, we can not say with certainty if we do X it will result in Y.

Second, humans have a short-term memory. In our society, we are used to instant gratification and receiving results in real-time. Sustainability is not meant to have immediate results. This makes it more difficult to obtain funding and support. There are other needs that we have a society that can reap quicker foreseeable outcomes.

Third, measuring outcomes and results of sustainability efforts will take years. Taking this into consideration, there are no distinct methods we can take now to determine what those outcomes may be. Taking action may create a more sustainable environment in the future and it may not. We can invest years, resources, and funds into sustainability – with no guarantee of a positive outcome. If sustainability becomes a policy goal today and there are no seeable positive results in a few years – funding may be cut.

If you had to design a practical framework to help a state environmental agency (e.g., Arizona Department of Environmental Quality) achieve ecological, economic and social sustainability, what would that framework look like? For example, how would you include citizens? How would you include experts? Which experts would you include?

Under our current economic conditions, I would first begin designing a framework by bringing experts from all fields together. Experts would include corporations, small businesses, non-profit organizations, citizen groups, local governments, active citizens, etc. First, I would look solicit organizations within Arizona, since they are more likely to be familiar with the specific issues Arizona faces and have a higher interest in contributing to sustainability. After we have identified the organizations, individuals, and groups that have a stake, I would next look to national groups that have an interest in contributing to our cause. Finally, I would reach out to other State’s to see if they have designed similar frameworks in order to identify best practices.

When the ground work has been completed, I would then pull together a committee that would be responsible for overseeing the sustainability project. The committee would be comprised of stakeholders that have a vested interest in seeing the project through to completion. The State will oversee the committee. The main responsibilities of the committee would be to identify the main areas of ecological, economic, and social sustainability. The challenges of funding, gaining political and public support would need to be addressed and solutions identified. Additionally, implementation and tracking measures would need to be devised.

Voters and politicians often want short term results, but many argue that sustainable development calls for a long-term policy plan. How do we take the long term view that sustainable development requires in this political environment?

Americans want instant results. We face many challenges when a long-term view is necessary to obtain results. We see many examples of eagerness in our society today such as our current economic crisis, the multiple stimulus packages, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc. With the media frenzy and politicians campaigning for re-election, we’re faced with a difficult task in promoting long-term policies. With government, policies and change take time. When the government moves too quickly, problems usually arise. Therefore, it is important to educate the public and the politicians on the importance of sustainability.

A critical factor is getting the media more informed. The media plays a major role in influencing public perception and can be used as an advantage instead of a hindrance. Finally, we would need to emphasize small milestones in addition to the big picture. Informing the public of progressive steps would allow them to see some results of sustainable development and keep the progression moving forward. I believe that sometimes addressing the public has more to do with marketing and presentation than with concrete facts. If we’re able to combine the two together and market the initiative, garner support, and spread awareness – this will increase the likelihood of success.