This document discusses the concept of sustainability and criticisms of oversimplifying it as having only three pillars. It argues that sustainability requires meaningful engagement across knowledge systems and disciplines. The document advocates for approaches that view humanity as part of the natural system and emphasize complexity, contingency and adaptive learning over deterministic models. It calls for scientific communities to better communicate with society and support understanding of the human-earth relationship through interdisciplinary and participatory means.

1. 1
A PARTNER WITH
Trust me,
I’m a sustainability scientist
The perils of inattention to academic divides
Dr Sarah Cornell
Copenhagen, October 2014

2. Just for the record…
The Brundtland report did not define sustainability
in terms of ‘three pillars’.
It says ‘sustainable development aims to
promote harmony among human beings
and between humanity and nature’.
And it specifies a much more multifaceted integration:
• a political system that secures effective citizen participation in decision making.
• an economic system that is able to generate surpluses and technical knowledge on a self-reliant and
sustained basis
• a social system that provides for solutions for the tensions arising from disharmonious development.
• a production system that respects the obligation to preserve the ecological base for development,
• a technological system that can search continuously for new solutions,
• an international system that fosters sustainable patterns of trade and finance, and
• an administrative system that is flexible and has the capacity for self-correction.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our Common Future, A/42/427.
Chapter 2 The concept of Sustainable Development. www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm.
slippage + simplification = sloppiness
 suboptimal science

3. So a side-track…
Economics mission creep:
• Economic growth now a top-level goal in global sustainability
policy and discourse (an end, not the means)
• “Academia must price externalities” – why not
“Academia must stop internalizing a dogma of hardcore
corporate capitalism”?
Von Mises, 1949 – the error of taking economic valuation ‘for a category of all
human action’ rather than applying in a special condition (the exchange market)
Dugger, 1980 – how ‘social mechanisms’ inadvertently enable corporate
hegemony to emerge
Polanyi, 1967 – ‘the warrant of scientific judgment’:
“this constitution of science can work only so long as scientists
have similar conceptions of the nature of things”

4. Meaningful engagement and dialogue
lie at the heart of sustainability
• Aarhus Convention
• Rio Principles
• Local Agenda 21
• Convention on Biological Diversity
Tengö et al. 2014, Connecting diverse knowledge systems. Ambio 43: 579

5. The task in hand:
Moving towards a theory and practice that a) embed and b) support
an understanding of the Human/Earth relationship
Has academia noticed this
obligation for dialogue?
“Physical science has done its work. We need
social scientists to communicate the science
and make society change.”
“Hasn’t the IPCC heard of Latour?”
Liverman DM, Roman Cuesta RM (2008) Human interactions with the Earth system:
people and pixels revisited. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 33:1458–1471
Head, L. 2007, Cultural ecology: the problematic human and the terms of
engagement, Progress in Human Geography, 31, 837.

6. The planetary boundaries challenge:
Earth system science Social-ecological resilience
Approach to understanding
the world
Reduction, determinism Complexity, contingency
Focus for integration Physics, (geo)chemistry, biology Ecosystem processes,
social system behaviour
Tools Analytical/mathematical modelling Simulation modelling,
participatory engagement
Valuable for
Prediction Adaptive learning
Human role Semi-external driver of change Part of the system
Yearworth, M & Cornell, SE 2014, Contested modelling: a critical examination of expert modelling
in sustainability. Systems Research and Behavioral Science.

7. Postneotransdisciplinarity…
We are doing this already
Why not join… jellywatch.org,
www.rspb.org.uk/birdwatchbbc
Tea Bag Index (soil carbon), www.decolab.org/tbi
mappiness.org.uk
www.juegos.com/juego/climate-chaos

8. Postneotransdisciplinarity…
We are doing this already
…but we have to keep
relearning from experience
Nissani, M. 1997, Ten Cheers for Interdisciplinarity. Social Science Journal 34 (2) 201-216
Cornell et al. 2014, Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global
environmental change. Environmental Science & Policy, 28: 60-70

9. “Objective science” ≠ objective scientists
• Knowledge does not translate simply to action:
implementation gaps are widespread*
• Where is the realism? Drifting targets,
untethered metrics – humanity is getting very
good at tracking its own decline
* UNEP Global Environment Outlook 5, UN CBD Global Biodiversity Outlook 3,
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change AR5, UNEP Global Chemicals Outlook 2012…
Murray Gibson, 2003, Arrogance – a dangerous weapon of the physics trade.
Physics Today 56 (2) 54-55.
Demeritt D (2001) The construction of global warming and the politics of science.
Ann. Assoc. American Geogr. 91:307–337

10. Timeframe
Language
Dis/Comfort
Shotgun wedding approach
Pragmatic pick ´n mix
Building a shared understanding
Interdisciplinarities differ:

11. Thank you
sarah.cornell@su.se
Image: www.informationsecuritybuzz.com Global-network