1. Comments on Chapter 1: Sustainability Science and Sustainable Development University of Minnesota Students September 20, 2010

2. Human well-being as the foundation of sustainability science

3. Motivation for Sustainability “A false positive diagnosis is an inconvenience, but a false negative diagnosis can be catastrophic.”  -- “To What End,” EO Wilson Environmentalists and exemptionalists

4. Ethic of Sustainable Development Expand resources, improve quality of life for as many people with minimal prosthetic dependence Inextricably linked to population growth Measure of success: ecological footprint (per capita and total)

5. Path to Sustainable Development Full-cost accounting ◦ Include environmental degradation as a COST ◦ Natural world and human well-being must be included Conservation ethic: anthropocentric protection of ecological world ◦ Take the rest of life with us as we meet the environmental challenge

6. Need for Conservation Ethic Preserve habitat as the most efficient way to preserve biodiversity Consequence to not: end of the Cenozoic Era (Age of Mammals) and beginning of Eremozoic Age (Age of Loneliness) Necessity: More species  higher productivity  better resilience to environmental changes (which will become more frequent with climate change)

7. Anthropocentrism Framework To limit the sustainability debate, focus on humanity Anthropocentrism still requires ecocentrism, as natural ecosystems provide environments resilient to climate change, medicines, and the natural resources used to increase economic growth

8. Sustainable Development: Varying Contexts

9. Views of sustainability Across groups Present Vs. Future Micro Vs. Macro

10. players and perspectives PlayersViews Individuals Academia Industry Governments Developed nations Developing nations International forums Individuals Vs. Society Nation Vs. World Academia Vs. Industry Industry Vs. Industry Nation Vs. Nation Nation Vs. World

11. Industry views Varying views of sustainability in industry ◦ Dow Jones Sustainability Index ◦ Community Sustainability from Sustainable Measures New Framework: ‘Conditions, characteristics and indicators of sustainability’ ◦ Triple Bottom Line ◦ Natural Step

12. Nation Vs. Nation Environmental Kuznets Curve idea

13. And the Controversy

14. Convergence Optimal use of existing resources for a Sustainable Future ◦ The subject of this venture

15. Sustainable Development vs. Sustainability Science Revisited

16. Existing relationship between sustainability science and sustainable development? sustainability science sustainable development ?

17. Optimal relationship between sustainability science and sustainable development (?) Sustainable Development Science

18. Who are sustainability scientists? - Educated people - People who are interested enough in the ‘natural’ environment to want to study it - Do these often imply certain moral beliefs? - Are these moral beliefs necessary to practice sustainable development from an anthropocentric standpoint?

19. Who implements sustainable development? Citizens Politicians Industrial and economic leaders NGOs Sustainability scientists? Not all are educated Not all are interested in the ‘natural’ environment (except insofar as they depend on it) BUT ALL ARE REQUIRED TO BE ON BOARD FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT TO WORK!!

20. 20 Sustainable development: poster child for “concilience”? E.O. Wilson, Consilience The notion and need for a unity of knowledge across traditional boundaries of knowledge is critical to sustainable development. At such intersections of knowledge we can discuss the difference between scientific and ethical uncertainty

21. With that in mind…

22. Pros of high SS-SD overlap: Efficiency – knowledge is directly (and correctly!) transferred from science to practice Encourages education: if knowledge of sustainability science is required to practice sustainable development, more people might be encouraged to educate themselves Others?

23. Cons of high SS-SD overlap Elitism – as SD, arguably society’s greatest current challenge, becomes an elitist venture, participation and interest may decline Skewed moral compass – if only those who are educated/interested in the ‘natural’ world can participate, the values of society at large are not represented and anthropocentrism is potentially undermined

24. Where, then, should the lines be drawn? sustainability science sustainable development ?