Readings on the definition (in very broad terms) of sustainability were distributed by Michael Rawson and Brett Branco to stimulate a discussion on the following points:
1. Do the participants in the seminar need to reach a consensus on the definition of sustainability? If so, what is it?
2. Do the participants want to specify the attributes of sustainability? If so, what are they?
The first hour of the discussion was open and was highlighted by some of the following themes (as interpreted and generalized by Brett):
• Is society ready, willing and able to break free of the capitalist economic paradigm? What are the alternatives? What are some concrete examples from around the world?
• Where is the sustainability movement leading us, and what does the destination look like?
• Is a sustainability education based solely on principles of the natural sciences and quantitative assessment sufficient to meet all the needs of Brooklyn College and society in general?
• If humans are within a closed system only on the global scale, can sustainability be taught and practiced at the local level?
An attempt was then made to place the discussion within a conceptual diagrammatic framework to assist in achieving synthesis of themes and a tangible product from the seminar:
[Explanation of above figure (Brett’s vision): A comprehensive sustainability education includes identifying unsustainable conditions, defining the attributes, principles and laws of a sustainable destination for society in the future, identifying and enabling the changes in society (individuals as well as local and global community). Since the ecological utopia (sustainability) is difficult to define and societal changes can often be difficult to affect, we must often aim for smaller changes in order to make progress.]
The discussion then turned to the following themes:
− How specific do we need to be about the attributes that define the desired destination? Some were of the opinion that the attributes could be vague or undefined as long as we are teaching students how to fill in the box themselves. Others thought that without specific attributes, there are no tangible measures of progress towards the goal. We should be able to agree upon some attributes as a group. Others rejected the model that human interactions and the mechanisms of societal change are necessary for a holistic sustainability education.
− A few members strongly disagreed with some argument of the Wals and Jickling paper, which suggested a loose definition of sustainability empowers students to explore the issue unfettered by prejudices. The group seems to be in agreement that tangible goals must be set for a sustainable society.
− We mostly agreed to think about the attributes, principles or natural laws of a future sustainability society before the next meeting. It is possible that these may serve to define sustainability with respect to creating a comprehensive sustainability education for Brooklyn College students (and faculty).
No comments:
Post a Comment