Sally Smith.
SUSTAINABLE AIR QUALITY: Homework 1
Sally Smith
25 January 2006
Environmental Sustainability Definitions:

Though values vary greatly in detail within and between cultures, at the heart of the concept of
sustainability there is a fundamental, immutable value set that is best stated as ‘parallel care and
respect for the ecosystem and for the people within.’ (“Sustainability,” www.wikipedia.org)

Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs…sustainability has to mean, ‘for a time
period long compared to a human lifetime,’ (“Environmental Sustainability”
http://www.oilcrisis.com/bartlett/envSustain.htm)

The natural capital is comprised of intact ecosystem and ecosystems services (structurally and
functionally) comprised of: Gas regulation; climate regulation; disturbance regulation; water
regulation; water supply; erosion control and sediment retention; soil formation; nutrient cycling;
waste treatment; pollination; biological control; refugia; food production; raw materials; genetic
resources; and intact land/forest/soils, water/ocean/freshwaters, atmospheric
ecosystems…protecting natural capital would ensure sustainable stocks of resources and raw
materials for human needs and ensure the maintenance of natural sinks for humanity’s wastes, but
also ensure adequate resources are available for nature, and that humanity’s wastes do not disturb
nature. Waste emissions are held within the assimilative capacity of the environment without
impairing it. Harvest rates of renewables are kept within regeneration rates…sustainability means
maintaining environmental assets, or at least not depleting them. Sustainability demands that
production and consumption be equal so that we do not deplete our natural capital stocks…the
goal for environmental sustainability is ‘a conservative effort to maintain the traditional meaning
and measure of income in an era in which natural capital is no longer a free good’ but is limiting.
An ‘economic’ definition of sustainability is ‘non-declining wealth per capital,’ (“Global
Sustainability Concepts: Capital & Subsidies. UNCED and Rio,
http://darwin.bio.uci.edu/~sustain/state/chapter1.htm)

Long-term maintenance of ecosystem components and functions for future generations, (“Teach
Me Finance,” http://teachmefinance.com/Scientific_Terms/Environmental_Sustainability.html)

Environmental sustainability is the ability to maintain the qualities that are valued in the physical
environment, (“Living Within Our Environment,” http://www.ces.vic.gov.au)

Often refers to the global sustainability of all human activity…[and] to a pollution-free system
locally, (“Development – Yes. But on whose premises?” www.msnepal.org)

Capability to anticipate and meet the needs of both present and future generations of customers
and stakeholders. The three dimensions of the “triple bottom line:” economic prosperity and
continuity; societal responsibility and equity; ecological resource preservation (“Current Trends in
Sustainability and Corporate Responsibility, www.orc-sac.com)
1
Sally Smith.
Following a brief investigation of the term “environmental sustainability,” it seemed appropriate to
further examine the individual terms of the expression and, as it was difficult to locate a satisfying, allinclusive definition via cyberspace, necessary to distinguish what the term did not incorporate. In other
words, both “environmental” and “sustainability” were defined and words that did not pertain to
“environmental sustainability” were identified. Lastly, two definitions of “environmental
sustainability” were selected and analyzed.
“Environmental” may be described as “of, relating to, or associated with the environment,” or “relating
to or being concerned with the ecological impact of altering the environment.” It was interesting that
the definition remarked on altering the environment, although it mentioned the “ecological impact,”
not “human impact,” an issue that initially came to mind. Before identifying the definition of
“sustainability,” or “to keep in existence, maintain,” it was perceived that, on top of preserving the
environment, sustainability included some notion of improvement. This, however, was not the case. In
general, the definitions uncovered for “environmental sustainability” made no mention of improving
the environment to a more desirable or more excellent condition, but rather only noted that it should be
maintained unchanged. As someone who believes that the environment could use a lot of work and
should not solely be sustained, this was surprising. It has become, through this investigation of the
term “environmental sustainability,” more clear that improving and sustaining the environment are two
distinct issues and therefore require two separate definitions.
Two definitions of “environmental sustainability” were of particular interest. The first, “development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs,” possessed a theme that was found in many other definitions. The second definition came
from an economic standpoint and was found in an essay assigned to a business class. It defined the
term by stating: “production and consumption [should] be equal so that we do not deplete our natural
capital stocks.” Although applied to environmental sustainability in the essay, this definition seems
applicable to many areas.
As was discussed in class, it seems impossible to encapsulate “environmental sustainability” in a single
definition. After all, entire essays have been written on the topic and semester-long classes such as this
one are held about the sustainability of air, a mere component of the large sustainable environment. So,
the definition “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs” seems impossibly vague and limiting, although it is
difficult to imagine it more specific. It is encouraging that the future was included in this definition, as
the future is incapable of arguing for “environmental stock.” The future is never the present, after all,
and the demands of the present usually triumph over those of the future. It is hard, however, to assess
what the future may require and to adjust how the resources of the present should be used in
accordance with those needs. It seems that until the question of how much the future will necessitate
can be answered, sustainability in the present cannot be addressed.
The economic-based definition that “production and consumption [should] be equal so that we do not
deplete our natural and capital stock” seems very bare bones and non-specific, much like the first
definition. However, it uses a more quantified approach to describe the term, making comprehension
of how the environment may be sustained an easier task. It notes, however, that actions must be taken
“so that we do not deplete our natural…stock.” It seems inevitable, though, that natural stocks will
eventually be exhausted (stocks such as natural gas and oil) and thus, this definition is destined to
expire, failing to transcend time, a seemingly important aspect of an all-encompassing definition.
Arriving at a definition for “environmental sustainability” requires a better understanding of the
environment and sustainability both in the present and in the future, as well as what the term itself fails
to and succeeds at encompassing. As demonstrated by the several definitions obtained from Google
that at least have ambiguity in common, “environmental sustainability” will take much time and many
ideas to not only define, but to also achieve.
2