PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE EUROPE? - TU Berlin

64
to other social scientists. For example, contrast Rasmussen’s (1997:352) entirely
process-oriented sociological interpretation:
Sustainability is a process with a beginning but no end: and in considerable measure it
is a social construct. … It is thus a matter of human imagination and dreaming as well
as concrete technologies, tasks and policies
with the reductionist formula for sustainability that Heal (2000:5) offers
[Some economists] argued that sustainability is captured by a Rawlsian definition of
intertemporal welfare. [And] welfare is maximized by maximizing the welfare of the
least well-off generation. One can write this formally and succinctly as
{ max feasible paths { min generations t { welfare t } }}.
One key message regarding the sustainability concept forcefully voiced even by
economists is the fact that markets to not adequately protect nature and public health.
Thus calls for greater sustainability have typically gone hand in hand with caller for a
greater role of the state in protecting the environment and human health. As Anand and
Sen (1994:2) argue:
the obligation of sustainability cannot be left entirely to the market. The future is not
adequately represented in the market … and there is no reason that ordinary market
behavior will take care of whatever obligation we have to the future. Universalism
demands that the state should serve as a trustee for the interests of future generations.
[Emphasis in the original.]
Nevertheless, many scholars are rather defeatist with regard to the usefulness of
the concept: “To put is crassly, consumers want consumptions sustained. Workers want
jobs sustained. … With the term meaning something different to everyone, the quest for
sustainability is off to a cacophonous start” (Norgaard 1994:11). 9
9 The last two quotes are adapted versions from longer quotes presented in Prugh, Constanza and Daly
2000:4.