PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE EUROPE? - TU Berlin

65
There are some common threads in all these definitions, however. Despite the
vast spectrum of definitions, almost all relevant definitions conceptualize sustainability as
a concept with three fundamental dimensions that can also be thought of as the three ‘e’s
of sustainability: economy, environment/ecology and equity (i.e. society). This central
and recurring distinction between different sustainability dimensions is commonly found
in the literature (see figure 2.1). In a nutshell, the image implies that there is indeed a
mode of development that can somehow balance the aims of economic growth,
environmental protection and social equity in a benign and mutually beneficial way.
If there is widespread dismay over the inherent vagueness of the concept, perhaps
the best explanation for its success is precisely this ambiguity which enabled its
promoters to integrate a vast array of policies and programs into the sustainability
agenda. In fact, Maarten Hajer (1995), whose discourse analytical approach to
environmental debates is discussed in more detail in later chapters, has long argued that it
is precisely the relative superficiality and ambiguousness of sustainability argument that
has assured the concept such widespread support. Even prior to the Rio Summit, Hajer
characterized the concept of sustainable development as “not only an attempt to provide
solutions to improve the objective state of the environment but also an effort to
accommodate latent social conflict” (Hajer 1991, quoted in Whitelegg 1993:6). This
interpretation rings ever more true today, with the term having suffered extremely
inflationary use in policy papers throughout the world over the last decade.