Volume 8 ● Issue 12 Journal Editor (New Jersey Institute of Technology) Winter 2012 Maurie Cohen Managing Editor ISSN: 1548-7733 Amy Forrester

Special Issue: A Missing Pillar? Challenges in Theorizing and Practicing Social Guest Editor: Magnus Boström, Södertörns University, Sweden

Editorial

On in a world of limits facing prolonged austerity Tim O’Riordan (University of East Anglia, United Kingdom)………………………………………...... 1

Articles

A missing pillar? Challenges in theorizing and practicing social sustainability: introduction to the special issue Magnus Boström, (Södertörn University, Sweden) ……………………………..…...... ………...... 3

The social pillar of : a literature review and framework for policy analysis Kevin Murphy (Institute of Technology Blanchardstown, Ireland)………………………………..…….15

Growing the social: alternative agrofood networks and social sustainability in the urban ethical foodscape Katerina Psarikidou & Bronislaw Szerszynski (Lancaster University, United Kingdom)……………...30

Making sense of the social: human-nonhuman constellations and the wicked road to sustainability Juha Hiedanpää, Ari Jokinen, & Pekka Jokinen (Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute, Finland)...…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….40

Organizing for social sustainability: governance through bureaucratization in meta- organizations Åsa Casula Vifell & Renita Thedvall (Södertörn University, Sweden)………………...... …50

Issues of scale in the global accreditation of : schemes toward harmonized re-embeddedness? Mikael Klintman (Lund University, Sweden)...... ……59 (Continued)

Tradeoffs and entanglements among sustainability dimensions: the case of accessibility as a missing pillar of sustainable mobility policies in Roberta Cucca & Enrico Maria Tacchi (Politecnico di Milano, Italy)...... ……70

Green social cooperatives in Italy: a practical way to cover the three pillars of sustainability? Giorgio Osti (University of Trieste, Italy)...... …82

Has social sustainability left the building? The recent conceptualization of “sustainability” in Danish buildings Jesper Ole Jensen, Michael Søgaard Jørgensen, Morten Elle, & Erik Hagelskjær Lauridsen (Danish Building Research Institute, Denmark)...... …94

Contention, participation, and mobilization in environmental assessment follow-up: the Itabira experience John Devlin & Denise Isabel Tubino (University of Guelph, Canada)...... …106

Book Review Perspectives

Understanding the Environment and Social Policy by Tony Fitzpatrick (Editor) Karin Bradley (Linköping University, Sweden); Henrike Rau (National University of Ireland, Ireland); Ylva Uggla (Örebro University, Sweden); Rejoinder from author: Tony Fitzpatrick (Nottingham University, United Kingdom)…………...... ……………………………………….…116

Published online ● http://sspp.proquest.com email: [email protected]

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

EDITORIAL

Tim O’Riordan Emeritus Professor, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

On social sustainability in a world of limits facing prolonged austerity

I applaud Magnus Boström and his colleague on the best evidence available—that in three of these authors for addressing the still hugely neglected topic cycles, nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon, the “hand of social sustainability in its broad context. of man” has exceeded natural tolerances and that for We are entering a decade without precedent for the game is almost up. We have no idea human well-being. One-fifth of people alive today of what might happen to the rest, or what might be have experienced wealth creation, technological su- the consequences. These boundaries may be unmap- premacy, longer lifespan, international outreach, pable, but they provide a “ceiling” for our future ex- more leisure, greater comfort, and an ambiguous sen- traction and manipulation. sitivity to the plight of the remaining four-fifths of Kate Raworth (2011) offers the phrase “social global population that are losing on all fronts. floor” to this zone of potential human use of our These achievements can no longer be guaranteed planet. These are irreducible platforms of human for the majority of this minority. Unemployment well-being which should not be lowered without among young adults below 25 in the causing morally unacceptable injustice. She posits is approaching one in seven. Throughout Europe, five poverty, lack of basic human rights, illiteracy and ill- workforce entrants are chasing every job opening. education, ill-health, personal insecurity, lack of Entrenched unions continue to demand jobs for life community, unemployability, and loss of self-esteem for those already employed, and resist attempts criti- as constituting this platform. cally to evaluate declining productivity among their This coupling of and social members. The economic turbulence of the past three floor gives us a “space” in which it is safe to operate years is rooted in deep economic and social inequali- so as to create wealth and enable secure and equitable ties and working safeguards which shield uncompeti- well-being. This collection of articles provides the tive wage structures at both the top and the bottom of basis for the social protection floor. It mirrors the the pay scales. Protecting currencies and banks adds United Nations Social Protection Report (Bachelet & to these injustices. The social “floor” is being exca- Somavia, 2011) specially prepared for the forth- vated throughout the globe. coming Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sus- In an age of austerity, it is deemed convenient to tainable Development due to be held in Rio de jettison much, if not all, of sustainability. The term is Janeiro in June, 2012. This document also introduces so abused and so mishandled that it no longer has the notion of a “social protection floor” which, it political meaning. Essentially it is regarded as “con- claims, should form the basis for a re-evaluation of tinuous”: more of the same for as long as we can see. the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Yet its real meaning is “self-reliance”; recycling and This combination of planetary boundaries and a reconstituting materials and energy, creating well- social floor is leading to coherent calls for a new set being for everyone and ensuring that everything we of world sustainability goals for 2020. This could be do is everlasting, mimicking the enduring materials the first time that the unifying concepts of ecological and energy cycles of the planet. But in recession, resilience and social well-being are coupled into de- such bold concepts are deemed fanciful. finable and achievable targets. This may well prove Yet we dismiss sustainability at our peril. We do to be the legacy of Rio+20. It would involve rede- indeed live in a world of planetary boundaries. fining the MDGs into Millennium Sustainability Rockström and his colleagues (2009) in the Resil- Goals, placing the purposes of human betterment and ience Alliance chart eight fluxes of life-giving fairness of treatment at the heart of the sustainability chemicals and the all important ninth of biodiversity agenda for the forthcoming, much-troubled decade. and ecosystem functioning. They contend—drawing

 2012 O’Riordan Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

1

O’Riordan: On Social Sustainability

But let us not kid ourselves. Part of Rio+20 is to guarding this critical planetary “safe operating and reassess the institutions that currently guide the paths socially fair space” will surely become the driving to sustainability. Yet none is presently designed to do force for sustainability. This is the real agenda for so. This is the case for two reasons. One is that sus- Rio+20. Sadly, more suffering may have to afflict us tainability is simply not “designed in” to any politi- all before we confront that ultimate reality. cal, economic, or social governing process at present. Indeed, only “nonsustainability” drivers enable these mechanisms to survive the suspicious frowns of mar- References kets and electoral democracies (to say nothing of cor- rupt governments and dictatorships). The other is that Bachelet, M. & Somavia, J. 2011. UN Social Protection the human condition cannot foresee far-off danger Report. New York: United Nations. that affects future generations, and which, if ad- Raworth, K. 2011. Planetary Boundaries and Social dressed, could result in real “losers” without clearly Boundaries: Defining a Safe and Just Operating defined “beneficiaries.” So the ceiling is heightened Space for Humanity. Oxford: Oxfam. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, A., Chapin, and the floor is lowered. F., Lambin, E., Lenton, T., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., This important collection of articles offers the Schellnhuber, H., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C., Hughes, T., beginning of the much-needed redress of this dys- van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P., functional sustainability deficit. It is likely that pro- Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, longed suffering from human-induced hazards (e.g., L., Corell, R., Fabry, V., Hansen, J., Walker, B., floods, storms, drought, fires, disease, exotic migra- Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P., & Foley, J. tions of pests and parasites) and dangerously in- 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature creased inequality (e.g., migration, chronic indebted- 461(282):472–475. ness, wage reduction, household poverty, inflation, insecurity) will lead to social strife, to profound physical and mental-health crises, to deepening vio- About the Author lence and criminality, and to a whole “lost genera- tion.” This last factor is already in place over large Tim O’Riordan OBE is Emeritus Professor of Environ- mental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, a Fellow parts of the globe. As it seeps into the nooks and of the British Academy, and a Deputy Lieutenant of Nor- crannies of formerly contented families, social un- folk. He actively engages in creating citizenship schemes sustainability will surely be noticed. for young people unable to find employment and who wish There is no precedent in our lifetimes for such to create social enterprises for sustainable futures. He can wholesale calamity across so much of the human be contacted at [email protected]. race. Identifying, measuring, monitoring, and safe-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

2

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

A missing pillar? Challenges in theorizing and practicing social sustainability: introduction to the special issue

Magnus Boström Department of Life Sciences, Södertörn University, Huddinge SE-141 89 Sweden (email: [email protected])

Since publication of the Brundtland Report in 1987, the notion of sustainable development has come to guide the pursuit of environmental reform by both public and private organizations and to facilitate communication among ac- tors from different societal spheres. It is customary to characterize sustainable development in a familiar typology comprising three pillars: environmental, economic, and social. The relationships among these dimensions are gener- ally assumed to be compatible and mutually supportive. However, previous research has found that when policy makers endorse sustainable development, the social dimension garners less attention and is particularly difficult to realize and operationalize. Recent years though have seen notable efforts among standard setters, planners, and practitioners in various sectors to address the often neglected social aspects of sustainability. Likewise, during the past decade, there have been efforts to develop theoretical frameworks to define and study social sustainability and to empirically investigate it in relation to “sustainability projects,” “sustainability practice,” and “sustainability initia- tives.” This introductory article presents the topic and explains some of the challenges of incorporating social sustain- ability into a broad framework of sustainable development. Also considered is the potential of the social sustainability concept for sustainability projects and planning. This analysis is predicated on the work represented in this special issue and on related initiatives that explicitly discuss the social pillar of sustainable development and its relationship to the other dimensions.

KEYWORDS: human-environment relationship, environmental sociology, socioeconomics, sustainable development, public policy

Introduction: The Hope pears promising and compelling. However, a consid- erable amount of sustainable development research Since publication of the Brundtland Report in indicates that huge are involved in the realization of 1987, the notion of sustainable development has this hope. The obstacles are of two related kinds. The come to guide the pursuit of environmental reform by first is theoretical and concerns how we should define both public and private organizations and to facilitate and understand this fluid concept of social sustaina- communication among actors from different societal bility. The other involves the practice: how are the spheres. While there is no universal consensus on social sustainability aspects to be operationalized and how to define the concept, its inherent vagueness and incorporated into various sustainability projects and interpretative flexibility contribute to its broad ap- planning? Partly due to its contested character, a peal. It is nonetheless customary to characterize sus- number of scholars argue that the social dimension tainable development in a familiar typology com- garners less attention or is dismissed altogether prising three pillars: environmental, economic, and (Dobson, 1999; Agyeman et al. 2003; Agyeman & social (or sociocultural). These are also known as the Evans, 2004; Lehtonen, 2004; Agyeman, 2008; three “Ps” (People, Planet, and Profit) or the three Cuthill, 2009; Dillard et al. 2009). Rather, it is mainly “Es” (Environment, Economy, and Equity). For both the merging of environmental and economic dimen- substantive and normative reasons, the relationships sions that has been seen to create synergies and po- among these dimensions are generally assumed to be tentials for environmental policies and reforms (Littig compatible and mutually supportive (Littig & & Grießler, 2005; Bluhdorn & Welsh, 2007). Fur- Grießler, 2005). For instance, the Johannesburg Con- thermore, at least thus far, very little actual attention ference in 2002 further stressed the need to integrate has been paid to the linkages between and integration the three dimensions, as well as to build a humane, of the social and environmental dimensions equitable, and caring global society for present and (Lehtonen, 2004; Fitzpatrick, 2011a). While social future generations. policies in terms of welfare institutions have a long This broad call for a comprehensive and integra- history in developed countries, they have been deeply tive understanding and practice of sustainability ap- embedded and reliant upon a society marked by

 2012 Boström Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 3

Boström: A Missing Pillar

productivism, , and economic previous literature that explicitly discusses the social growth, as well as national and short-term timescales. dimension, or its relationship to the other sustainabil- These are all objectives that most variants of green ity dimensions. In the next section, I describe how a thinking oppose (Fitzpatrick, 2011c). Rethinking and selection of scholars uses and defines the concept of reorganizing for green social policies and welfare— social sustainability, and present a table with aspects social sustainability—is thus both a crucial task and a to which they commonly refer. This discussion is very big challenge. followed by an analysis of six challenges to integrat- It must be acknowledged, however, that recent ing the social dimension into concrete sustainability years have seen notable efforts to address and inte- projects and planning. In the concluding part, I con- grate social aspects of sustainability on the part of sider some potential benefits of the frame. standard setters, planners, and practitioners. This has occurred within such diverse areas as urban and re- What Does Social Sustainability Refer To? gional planning (Schlossberg & Zimmerman, 2003; Cuthill, 2009; Davidson, 2009; Dempsey et al. 2011), Like the general concept of sustainable devel- fair trade certification (e.g., Taylor, 2004), forest opment (e.g., Baker, 2006), social sustainability is an certification (e.g., Klooster, 2010; Boström, 2011), open and contested concept. According to Nicola organic agriculture (e.g., Shreck et al. 2006), con- Dempsey and colleagues (2011), “social sustainabil- ventional agriculture (Nordström Källström & Ljung, ity is neither an absolute nor a constant…[it] has to 2005; Mancini et al. 2008), as well as corporate so- be considered as a dynamic concept, which will cial and environmental management, reporting, and change over time (from year to year/decade to dec- responsibility (e.g., Sharma & Ruud, 2003; ade) in a place.” Bebbington & Dillard, 2009; Brown et al. 2009). This Such conceptual imprecision and interpretative special issue contributes to this trajectory first pre- flexibility is often seen as both a strength (in that it senting a typology for organizing research on social encourages communication among different and dis- sustainability (Murphy, 2012) and then featuring agreeing actors) and a weakness (in that people must studies on alternative agrofood networks and prac- constantly elaborate what they actually mean when tices (Psarikidou & Szerszynski, 2012), conflicts they address social sustainability) (e.g., Davidson, surrounding human-animal relations (Hiedanpää et 2009; Dempsey et al. 2011). Such vagueness has al. 2012), bureaucratization of fair trade and organic given rise to many efforts by scholars to suggest ty- food policy making (Casula Vifell & Thedvall, pologies and frameworks. Accordingly, during the 2012), sustainable tourism (Klintman, 2012), access past decade, a body of literature has emerged that to mobility (Cucca & Tacchi, 2012), green social focuses specifically on developing theoretical cooperatives (Osti, 2012), sustainable buildings schemes to define and study social sustainability (Jensen, et al. 2012), and participatory environmental (Agyeman & Evans, 2004; Lehtonen, 2004; Littig & monitoring of a Brazilian mining company (Devlin & Grießler, 2005; Pawlowski, 2007; Cuthill, 2009; Tubino, 2012).. These examples demonstrate some Dillard et al. 2009; Larsen, 2009: Magis & Shinn, progress toward the realization of an integrative vi- 2009; Seghezzo, 2009; Casula Vifell & Soneryd, sion of sustainability in various sectors, but they also 2012). confirm many challenges. A few examples deserve specific consideration. Readers of this special issue will encounter use- Cuthill (2009), based on an action research approach ful frameworks, understandings, and analyses of so- that involved input from government managers and cial sustainability. With this introductory article, I do other stakeholders involved with social policy and not aim to provide a ready-to-use definition and community development, developed a social sustain- schema. I rather envisage the concept of sustainable ability framework that includes 1) social justice and development, including social sustainability, as a equity, 2) social infrastructure, 3) engaged govern- “frame.” In other words, it is a conceptual tool that ance, and 4) social capital. Littig & Grießler (2005) policy makers and practitioners can use to communi- argue that social sustainability has to be guided by an cate, make decisions, and measure or assess current analytical concept that provides a sound theory of the developments, and that scholars can very well study relationship between society and nature. Sustainabil- and even refine. My objective is primarily to seek a ity strategies and indicators should have both analyti- number of explanations for why it seems challenging cal depth and clarity, including clearly defined ideas to incorporate social sustainability into a robust about what kinds of social values to promote. Littig framework of sustainable development, as well as to & Grießler (2005) expand on the notion of needs, point out this concept’s potential for sustainability taken from the Brundtland definition of sustainabil- projects and planning. To accomplish this, I refer to ity, and introduce work in a very broad sense to dis- articles included in this special issue as well as to cuss key elements of social sustainability. Georgio

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

4

Boström: A Missing Pillar

Osti, in his analysis of green social cooperatives in to integrate a set of issues often treated disparately this special issue, also emphasizes work as a basis not (see also the next section). merely for income but for human dignity, recovery, Second, articles in this special issue connect the recognition, and social integration. An anthology notion of social sustainability to a variety of other so- entitled Understanding the Social Dimension of Sus- cial science perspectives, concepts, and theories in- tainability (Dillard et al. 2009) discusses a number of cluding theories of scale (Klintman, 2012), notions of relevant perspectives. In one chapter, Magis & Shinn temporality (Devlin & Tubino, 2012; Hiedanpää et al. (2009) define four universal principles covering so- 2012; Psarikidou & Szerszynski, 2012), moral econ- cial sustainability: human well-being, equity, demo- omy and moral taskscape (Psarikidou & Szerszynski, cratic government, and democratic civil society. 2012), human-nonhuman animal relations Yet another relevant tradition is found in the (Hiedanpää et al. 2012), concepts of work related to “environmental justice” literature (Agyeman & green social enterprises (Osti, 2012), ecological mod- Evans, 2004), concerned with questions of distribu- ernization and transition theory (Jensen et al. 2012), tion. On one hand, this work focuses on who—in governance through bureaucratization (Casula Vifell terms of gender, race, and class—experiences im- & Thedvall, 2012), as well as social movement the- pacts from environmental “bads” and access to envi- ory (Devlin & Tubino, 2012). ronmental “goods” (e.g., natural resources, quality of Third, a couple of articles penetrate the term “so- life). On the other hand, research on environmental cial” and by this route challenge the very pillar- justice deals with questions of procedure and partici- oriented view of sustainability. For example, pation—what social groups have access to delibera- Hiedanpää and colleagues develop a pragmatically tive forums and participatory decision making. This oriented socioecological perspective in which both perspective rests on the assumption that “most envi- humans and nonhuman animals take part in estab- ronmental pollution and degradation is caused by the lishing the social. When the present social order is actions of the more affluent” at the same time as “en- disturbed, such as when wolves attack sheep or when vironmental problems are vested disproportionately animal welfare groups politicize swine-rearing prac- upon the poor” (Agyeman & Evans, 2004). Agyeman tices, “the social” (including cultural habits and cus- & Evans (2004) coined the term “just sustainability” toms related to the unsettled practices) becomes acti- to emphasize the conceptual linkages between sus- vated, contested, and reorganized. Psarikidou & tainable development and environmental justice, as Szerszynski (2012) also criticize the view that social well as to avoid a one-sided emphasis on the envi- sustainability should constitute a separate pillar adja- ronmental dimension of sustainability. cent to the “dominating dyad of the ecological and The proliferation of various frameworks—and the economic.” Instead, they stress a sociomaterial not one hegemonic theory—is constructive because perspective of sustainability in which the economy sustainable development is enormously complex. and the environment are always entangled in the so- Pluralism is preferable to a single common approach. cial. The latter refers to social relations, practices, As Lehtonen (2004) notes, “Different geographical cultural meanings, and so forth. The material dimen- and temporal scales as well as situational contexts sion would recognize “that social life is conducted by require their own frameworks, which do not neces- embodied beings in constant exchange with their sarily provide a coherent picture, but a mosaic of physical environment.” A lesson from these and other partly contradicting views of reality.” The various contributions in the special issue is that neglect of the approaches reflect the need for “framing” or “con- social dimension of sustainability not only leads to structing” social sustainability (Davidson, 2009). inattention to a number of social aspects, but that our Contributions to this special issue further theorize the understanding of environmental problems, and concept of social sustainability and authors outline society-nature relationships in general, becomes fun- four different types of theoretical contributions. damentally flawed. First, several articles (including the present one) Finally, the special issue highlights a number of engage in a dialogue with the literature on the con- concrete social aspects that are commonly referred to cept of social sustainability. For instance, Kevin in empirical studies and policy debates about social Murphy (2012) provides a comprehensive literature sustainability. While my aim here is not to provide review and outlines a framework relevant for policy yet another definition and framework of social sus- development and assessment. He bases his scheme on tainability, it is instructive to map out what social four key dimensions: equity, awareness, participa- sustainability often includes in such studies (Table 1). tion, and social cohesion. An important element of Such a map helps to visualize that social sustainabil- this approach is that it links social sustainability to ity often refers to both the improvement of conditions environmental implications and thus provides a way for living people and future generations and the quality of governance of the development process.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

5

Boström: A Missing Pillar

Table 1 Examples of substantive (What) and procedural (How) aspects of social sustainability.*

Substantive aspects: What social sustainability goals to Procedural aspects: How to achieve sustainable achieve? development? • Basic needs such as food, housing, and income and • Access to information about risks and the sustainabil- extended needs such as recreation, self-fulfillment ity project • Inter- and intra-generational justice along gender, race, • Access to participation and decision making in class, and ethnicity dimensions different stages of the process and over time o Fair distribution of income • Proactive stakeholder communication and con- o Fair distribution of environmental “bads” and sultation throughout the process “goods” • Empowerment for taking part in the process (e.g., • Equality of rights, including human rights, land user awareness, education, networking, economic and tenure rights, and indigenous people’s rights compensation) • Access to social infrastructure, mobility, local services, • Participating in the framing of issues, including facilities, green areas, and so forth defining criteria, scope, and subjects of justice • Employment and other work-related issues, facilitating • Social monitoring of the policy, planning, and for local small and medium enterprises standard-setting process • Opportunity for learning and self-development • Accountable governance and management of the • Community capacity for the development of civil policy, planning, and standard-setting process society and social capital • Security (e.g., economic, environmental) • Health effects among workers, consumers, and communities • Social cohesion, inclusion, and interaction • Cultural diversity and traditions • Sense of community attachment, belonging, and identity • Social recognition • Attractive housing and public realm • Quality of life, happiness, and well-being * In addition to the articles in this special issue, other work along these lines includes Agyeman et al. 2003; Agyeman & Evans, 2004; Lehtonen, 2004; Littig & Grießler, 2005; Nordström Källström & Ljung, 2005; Cuthill, 2009; Davidson, 2009; Dillard et al. 2009; Magis & Shinn, 2009; Seghezzo, 2009; Dempsey et al. 2011; Fitzpatrick, 2011a; Casula Vifell & Soneryd, 2012.

Accordingly, I find it instructive to distinguish be- that foster sustainable development in general, that is, tween a substantive and procedural dimension, a dif- in all of its dimensions.1 ferentiation found in the environmental justice liter- ature (Agyeman & Evans, 2004; cf. Fitzpatrick, What Explains Challenges to Integrate Social 2011d) and implicitly discussed more widely (in- Aspects in Sustainability Projects and cluding in the contributions that comprise this special Planning? issue). The social pillar of sustainable development could thus be seen as including both procedural as- The following discussion departs from the argu- pects, such as the role of democratic representation, ment, introduced by a number of scholars, that the participation, and deliberation and substantive as- concept of social sustainability is more difficult to pects, that center on “what” is to be done (i.e., the analyze, comprehend, define, and incorporate into social goals of sustainable development). The proce- sustainability projects and planning than the other dural aspects include the “how” or the means to dimensions of sustainability (e.g., Lehtonen, 2004; achieve these goals. Procedures cannot be static, but Littig & Grießler, 2005; Dillard et al. 2009).2 I seek should always include a temporal dimension. Aspects to explain some of the challenges reported in the lit- overlap, and it is also not always easy to distinguish erature and the obstacles discussed in the contribu- between substantive and procedural issues as they tions to this special issue. The first three topics relate may reinforce one another. For example, by achiev- ing certain social sustainability goals—such as 1 providing opportunities for learning or improving the It would, of course, be equally relevant to label this as an participatory capacities of local civil societies—one “institutional” or “governance” dimension, but this is just a matter is simultaneously improving opportunities for actors of wording. My intent here is to collect and sort elements that are commonly seen as social sustainability aspects. 2 to take part in sustainability projects and planning. I certainly do not claim that “social problems” are more difficult While the “what” aspects specifically concern social to solve than, for example, “environmental problems.” Considering sustainability goals and their relationship to eco- a global issue such as climate change, for example, it would be nomic and environmental dimensions, the “how” unreasonable to suggest that the “environmental” dimension of this aspects may be seen as social sustainability elements issue is easier to tackle than the “social” dimension, because these are inseparable.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

6

Boström: A Missing Pillar

to framing issues, while the last three concern organi- (Cucca & Tachi, 2012) effectively illustrates the zational, institutional, and structural factors. complex tradeoffs that arise in policy practice. Envi- ronmental problems often imply the need for re- High Expectations strictions on access to long- and short-range mobility. As seen in Table 1, notions of social sustainabil- Such measures tend to affect the population asym- ity often refer to such aspects as social welfare, qual- metrically—wealthy people still find ways to reach ity of life, social justice, social cohesion, cultural their intended destinations—and thus clash with so- diversity, democratic rights, gender issues, workers’ cial goals such as equal accessibility and integration. rights, broad participation, development of social capital and individual capabilities, and so forth. It Vague, Subjective, and Ideological Framing goes without saying that achieving “success” in terms Many scholars agree that the meaning of social of all these aspects would be an enormous task. A sustainability remains unclear and there exists un- comment by Johan Hedrén (2009) illustrates the certainty about how it relates to both the other dimen- enormity of actually putting the world on an effective sions and wider policy issues (Littig & Grießler, pathway to social sustainability. 2005; Davidson, 2009; Dillard et al. 2009; Casula Vifell & Soneryd, 2012; Dempsey et al. 2011). It has In the Johannesburg documents this is defi- been argued that environmental sustainability has nitely not just a matter of slight corrections more concrete objectives and is easier to measure to the current structures, but rather a creation (Davidson, 2009; Bebbington & Dillard, 2009). A of something fundamentally new: a world related argument is that there is no evident scientific without chronic hunger, malnutrition, for- basis for measuring social sustainability. As eign occupation, armed conflict, illicit drug Bebbington & Dillard (2009) observe, problems, organized crime, corruption, natu- ral disasters, illicit arms trafficking, traf- [S]ocial sustainability appears to present dif- ficking in persons, terrorism, intolerance and ferent and more severe challenges in specifi- incitement to racial ethnic, religious and cation, understanding, and communication other hatreds, xenophobia, and endemic, than environmental sustainability because communicable and chronic diseases, in par- there is no widely accepted scientific basis ticular AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis (em- for analysis, unlike the ability to debate phasis in original). population ecology, acceptable levels of toxicity, or acceptable concentrations of Such goals are, of course, tremendously ambi- green-house gases in the atmosphere. Nor is tious, especially given the extremely complex and there a common unit of measure such as problematic circumstances that exist today on a monetary units with the economic dimen- worldwide basis. Indeed, there is nothing wrong with sion of sustainability. high ambitions. Hedrén (2009) discussed the im- portant political role of “utopian thought” in both These authors referred particularly to corporate, abstract and concrete manifestations. The concept of social, and environmental accounting. In these fields, sustainable development is a good example of uto- social sustainability appears to be more subjective, pian thought because it offers a formulation of alter- soft, less scientific, more ideological, and local in natives with which existing societies can be com- contrast to global (cf. Klintman, 2012), which in pared. Visions, utopias, and aspirations are surely many instances puts it in a disadvantageous position needed. At the same time, expressions of extremely relative to both the economic and environmental di- high ambition can create unrealistic expectations and mensions. Brown et al. (2009) develops the argument may, in the long run, lead to great disappointment further, claiming that the “triple bottom line” concept and claims of major failure. in corporate reporting implies three separate, assessa- The win-win-win framing embedded in the con- ble measures. This atomistic view masks and misrep- cept of sustainable development (the positive inte- resents the complex relations among the three dimen- gration of the three pillars) may conceal the fact that sions and neglects the fundamentally different nature clashes or tradeoffs between environmental and so- of social systems. cial goals are sometimes (or even often) unavoidable (cf. Fitzpatrick, 2011c). Given this rhetoric, real-life In a broad sense, social systems differ dra- examples of such putative tradeoffs are likely to lead matically from systems that can be maxim- to frustrations. For example, ecotaxes have often ized (or minimized)…In economic systems, given rise to heated discussion about negative distri- maximizing wealth may be appropriate. In butional effects. The case of access to mobility natural systems, maximizing (or minimiz-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

7

Boström: A Missing Pillar

ing) biological diversity (or greenhouse gas that a more systematic focus on the social dimension emissions) may be desirable, but does it has been secondary to environmental and economic make sense to either maximize or minimize considerations (Marcuse, 1998; Agyeman, 2008; in the realm of social sustainability (Brown Bebbington & Dillard, 2009). Some scholars have et al. 2009)? discussed the risk that the concept of sustainable de- velopment tends to depoliticize matters because no- Aspects of social sustainability such as employ- tions of nature and environmental sustainability often ment rates or income equality can be measured (and remain tied to a particular ontology. maximized), but the problems Brown and colleagues highlight are very relevant when it comes to such As such, calls for sustainability, made gen- social sustainability issues as quality of life, commu- erally or with specific reference to particular nity well-being, and social recognition. They argue pillars, can attach themselves to certain on- that “the fundamental differences in the attributes of tological and consequently epistemological economic, environmental, and social sustainability positions—most notably notions about illustrate the inappropriateness of measuring, report- “equilibrium,” “balance” and “stability” ing and conceiving of these facets in the same way” (Davidson, 2009). (Brown et al. 2009). An observation by Osti (2012) in this special is- As the sustainability framing emerges from its sue is relevant to address here. He remarks that green environmental roots, a conservative bias is potentially social cooperatives offer great potential both for job created. It is easy to see the many complexities in- creation and environmental services, for example in volved if one tries to integrate such abstract catego- relation to waste recycling or energy supplies. How- ries as “social” and “environment” without much ever, they face huge difficulties entering these fields reflection on what constitutes the social and the envi- due to the requirement of expertise in ecosystems or ronmental. As Marcuse (1998) observes, “[s]ustain- other complex systems. The majority of green social ability as a goal in itself, if we are to take the term’s enterprises engages in more labor-intensive services ordinary meaning, is the preservation of the status such as urban sanitation. As little or no expertise is quo. It would, taken literally, involve making only needed for such tasks, these enterprises impart only those changes that are required to maintain that weak social recognition and negotiating power. status.” Because of the vague, subjective, and often more While the conservation or strengthening of the politicized nature of social sustainability, it generally environment “as it is” is usually assumed to be desir- appears to be more difficult to legitimize. However, able, this is less often the case regarding the conser- state or nonstate initiated sustainability projects often vation of some social sustainability features. “No one refer to well-established principles such as the United who is interested in justice wants to sustain things as Nations Declaration of Human Rights or the Interna- they are now” (Marcuse, 1998). Indeed, far-reaching tional Labour Organization’s conventions. Such social change may well be required to achieve con- global frameworks help to validate inclusion of some servation of the environment. Goals of environmental social aspects (cf. Tamm Hallström & Boström, and social sustainability may be conflicting rather 2010). Furthermore, the proliferation of social sus- than compatible. For example, efforts to overcome tainability frameworks discussed earlier can be seen social inequalities and develop human capabilities as an effort to clarify for both academics and practi- could easily mean increasing the use of natural re- tioners how social sustainability should be delimited, sources to the detriment of the conservation or resili- what it contains, and how it relates to the other di- ence of the biophysical environment. Likewise, social mensions (see also Murphy’s article in this special sustainability goals could be internally inconsistent issue). Such efforts make social sustainability more when the interests of the present generation are con- visual, measurable (also through qualitative means), fronted with those of future generations, as environ- and hence more legitimate. mental justice theorists have observed. A related topic is the criticism that social scien- Historical Roots: The Sustainability Framing is tists raise in relation to the conceptual separation Better Suited to Environmental than Social among the three sectors (see above), which are as- Issues sumed to be on equal levels, and in relation to the Although the and Rio corresponding lack of clarification of the connections documents clearly stressed a social dimension, for across the sectors (Littig & Grießler, 2005). Such a instance through their insistence on intra- and inter- division may, for example, give the wrong impres- generational justice, gender equity, and calls for par- sion that the economy is independent of a social or ticipatory decision making, several scholars argue institutional context and that the economy and the

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

8

Boström: A Missing Pillar

social are instead independent from the environment Similarly, measurement and monitoring of eco- (Lehtonen, 2004; Hopwood et al. 2005; Dillard et al. nomic development, social welfare, and environ- 2009). As discussed below, the conceptual separation mental conditions are usually institutionally distinct of sectors is also reflected organizationally in institu- practices. For example, Lehtonen (2004), on the basis tions. of an investigation of the environmental performance reviews carried out by the Organization for Economic A Missing Institutional Link (Rather Than a Cooperation and Development, argues that interac- Missing Pillar) tion (synergies and tradeoffs) between the social and The division between “environment” and “so- environmental dimensions is the least developed as- cial” (or “nature” and “culture”) reflects a historical pect of sustainability analysis and measurement. dualism that has been institutionalized in administra- Similar results were reported in a case study of tion and management. We tend to use phrases such as statewide sustainability indices in Oregon the “environmental sector,” which is meant to include (Schlossberg & Zimmerman, 2003). The authors of such activities as nature protection and environmental this study, however, argue that the development of management, while the “social sector” encompasses sustainability indicators itself is an area with the po- welfare politics, social insurance systems, and so tential to bridge the gap between previously separated forth. activities. These two sectors have very distinct and separate Sometimes, as Davidson (2009) has observed, traditions, and are only beginning to relate to one the term social sustainability is simply used to de- other (cf. Fitzpatrick, 2011a). Is the sustainability scribe the current system of social welfare and policy. discourse helpful for overcoming this dualism or Particularly in urban studies, social sustainability has should it be blamed for preserving it? Psarikidou & been discussed only in terms of social relations—or Szerszynski (2012) argue in their article in this spe- socially sustainable communities—thereby excluding cial issue that the difficulty in conceptualizing and social-environmental relationships. Such usage of the implementing social sustainability partly originates social sustainability frame achieves nothing more from its very conceptualization as a separate pillar. than further perpetuating the institutional separation I may take Sweden as an example that supports between social and environmental sectors. this latter view. In Sweden, despite all the talk about The article by Kevin Murphy in this special issue sustainable development and recognition of its three explicitly aims to develop a framework that should dimensions, and notwithstanding a strong emphasis help analysts and policy makers to connect social and on sector integration, sustainable development is seen environmental sustainability. The book edited by as being covered by a huge administrative system Tony Fitzpatrick (2011a), which is the subject of a with sixteen “environmental quality objectives,” that review symposium in this issue, also fills a very im- actually only consider the environmental dimension. portant role in this regard. And other articles featured No, or at best few, links to social objectives are con- here by Katerina Psarikidou & Bronislaw sidered. Sector integration is to be achieved by re- Szerszynski; Juha Hiedanpää, Ari Jokinen, & Pekka quiring that an extensive number of public agen- Jokinen; and John Devlin & Denise Tubino show cies—including “social” agencies—on different lev- how the “social” and the “environmental” are in real- els integrate environmental goals and concerns, but ity inseparable. And they could also be deliberately there is no similar system for taking “social sustaina- integrated. For example, Jensen, Jørgensen, Elle, & bility goals” into account. A previous study on sus- Hagelskjær Lauridsen (2012) demonstrate that the tainability planning in the areas of food production sustainability concept applied in in Den- and electromagnetic fields in Sweden confirmed this mark reveals a close relationship between the envi- picture (Casula Vifell & Soneryd, 2012). There is ronmental and social dimensions (community- very little incorporation of the social dimension, re- building, local empowerment, shared facilities) in garding either the procedural (participation of actors contrast with the new wave of “sustainable” buildings representing social goals and concerns) or substantive that rely more exclusively on an environmental di- elements, despite the explicit conceptual connection mension. It should be mentioned, however, that inte- to the goals of sustainable development (see also grating the “social” and the “environmental” in pol- Casula Vifell & Thedvall in this issue). We see the icy, administration, and management is not some- same separation in civil society. Historically, labor thing done overnight, but will require a long-term unions have seldom collaborated with environmental learning process, and careful attention to the proce- organizations (Boström, 2001) because the former dural dimension including participatory aspects (dis- have tended to defend what the latter has opposed: cussed further below). the productivist, growth paradigm that is believed to ensure continual “full employment.”

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

9

Boström: A Missing Pillar

Global Capitalism for Sustainable Development? to the pressures of resourceful and powerful actors. Several novel sustainability projects are embed- Thus, dilemmas stem “not so much from an opposi- ded within local and/or global capitalist structures, tional strategy as from their significant success in the and this special issue highlights cases such as sus- market” (Taylor, 2004). tainable buildings (Jensen et al. 2012), certification of Studies reported in this special issue confirm sustainable tourism (Klintman, 2012), fair trade, and these situations. Jensen et al. (2012) demonstrate how organic food (Casula Vifell & Thedvall, 2012). These mainstreaming in the area of sustainable buildings and other sustainability initiatives—framed as corpo- implies a narrow/technical sustainability framing in rate social responsibility or the triple bottom line— which social sustainability goals came to be ex- are often seen as concrete attempts to integrate all cluded. Klintman (2012) shows how the movement three dimensions of sustainability. To date, scholars toward international harmonization of criteria for have discussed the inherent contradictions and limi- sustainable tourism elicited protracted debate. More- tations of using market-based governance and politi- over, important tradeoffs are involved in finding a cal action to foster sustainable production and con- balance between overly strict and excessively lax sumption (e.g., Guthman, 2009; Shaw & Black, criteria. For instance, very exacting sustainability 2010). Klooster (2010), who focuses on forest certifi- criteria may induce negative effects in terms of social cation, claims, sustainability because they undermine the ability of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to attain Certification cannot make the current model certification. of insatiable demands for goods from all A related topic is that a market-based approach over the world either environmentally sus- has great difficulty dealing with structural issues tainable or socially equitable. This reflects such as poverty reduction, capacity building in de- the contradiction of using a market-based, veloping country contexts, or equitable wealth distri- consumption-dependent strategy to leverage bution (Klooster, 2010; Boström, 2011); prerequisites sustainable development in a world where that may be a necessary if one is to work for all di- markets and consumption patterns are fun- mensions of sustainability. damentally inequitable. However, pessimism should not be exaggerated. Researchers are recognizing that companies at times Hopwood et al. (2005) argue that the interpreta- do shoulder responsibilities and develop proactive tive flexibility and ambiguity of the sustainability strategies to prevent harmful social and environmen- concept “allows business and governments to be in tal side effects from their production. The corporate favour of sustainability without any fundamental sector can play a key role in achieving social goals, challenge to their present course.” In this way, the such as improving conditions for workers and local concept helps to legitimize (or greenwash) the status communities. Although based on compromises as quo which means further expansion of capitalism, discussed above, labeling and certification have at more economic growth, increasing social inequalities least potential to go a few steps beyond status quo. and more environmental destruction (Lehtonen, As an example, in a recent study of how the For- 2004). In other words, it helps to “sustain the unsus- est Council has pursued social sustaina- tainable” (Bluhdorn & Welsh, 2007). bility, Boström (2011) found tangible benefits re- The literature reminds us that fundamental con- garding some substantive social goals (for example, tradictions in such market-based strategies need to be related to labor issues such as safe and humane acknowledged. Contradictions are not solved, only working conditions, and respect of local communi- handled. On the whole, market-based solutions can- ties’ right for other uses of forest resources) as well not avoid a general compromise between market as procedural goals related to local organization, em- pragmatist/expansionist goals, on one hand, and am- powerment, and stakeholder communication. Never- bitious environmental and social goals on the other theless, many problems were unresolved and the dif- (Taylor, 2004; Boström & Klintman, 2008). To fulfill ficulties accomplishing these benefits were not insig- its objectives, market-based systems such as product nificant. Moreover, Klooster (2010) argues that we certification and labeling must enter into the main- should acknowledge various instantiations of “ne- stream market. Overly stringent social and environ- oliberal ,” as some may mental criteria would imply huge costs and prevent a contain elements of questioning current practices, substantial market impact. Approaches originally “especially when certification institutions were con- identified as “alternative” face challenges maintain- structed with the participation of social movements ing their “outsider” political identity as they move promoting social and environmental goals that seem toward the mainstream. At the same time, as they to counter neoliberal tendencies.” Accordingly, he become more influential, such products are exposed emphasizes the importance of the procedural (partici-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

10

Boström: A Missing Pillar patory) dimension of social sustainability, which I local community is and who is supposed to represent elaborate in the next section. it (often a local elite). A focus on how procedures affect substance Relation Between the Procedural (How) and ought to take into account a longitudinal perspective. Substantive (What) Dimension of Social Devlin & Tubino (2012) highlight instances of both Sustainability success and failure in the very same case, but at dif- Allow me to turn back to Table 1 and to suggest ferent stages. The authors demonstrate how rising that many challenges to fully incorporate social sus- public mobilization/participation, in connection with tainability have to do with insufficient attention to the certain enabling conditions, could bring about change relationship between procedural and substantive di- in the environmental plan of a Brazilian mining com- mensions. A number of scholars indeed assume posi- pany. Yet, the initial victory turned to failure during tive internal linkage between these dimensions of implementation due to the firm’s strategic moves and social sustainability (e.g., Agyeman & Evans, 2004; changing conditions (such as less vigilant attention Dillard et al. 2009). The way a sustainability project by the state). As public mobilization is episodic, a is organized, which entails, for example, participatory powerful company has considerable flexibility to aspects (who is allowed to contribute) and the way behave as it wants. The case under study reveals that that leaders frame the issues that participants discuss, the firm in question could reach out directly to com- may affect if and how substantive sustainability as- munities and introduce new programs to deflect at- pects are considered. As Casula Vifell & Soneryd tention from past agreements. In light of these chal- (2010) remark, “[I]f no actors explicitly addressing lenges, Devlin & Tubino (2012) argue that continu- the social dimension are invited, this pillar is likely to ous supervision and participation need to be institu- remain weak.” And merely providing opportunities tionalized. Deliberative democracy cannot be re- for participation is not sufficient. “Social recogni- stricted to public participation only during the plan- tion” is important for participants’ motivation and ning process. confidence (Nordström Källström & Ljung, 2005) and it is also essential to consider individual stake- What is the Potential Benefit of the Concept? holders’ capabilities (e.g., financial, cognitive, or- ganizational) to play effective roles in sustainability The inherent vagueness and interpretative flexi- projects (Boström & Tamm Hallström, 2010; bility of both the sustainability concept in general and Boström, 2011). If one fails to develop a system in social sustainability in particular cannot be fully which procedural aspects are taken into account (ef- overcome. And indeed, it is precisely this feature that fective participation of social stakeholders), then one explains why it has played an extraordinarily im- can expect few incentives to include goals and con- portant historical role in facilitating communication cerns that run counter to leaders’ framing of the issue among actors with colliding interests (Hajer, 1995; (Casula Vifell & Soneryd, 2012). The organizing Jacobs, 1999). Similarly, Fitzpatrick (2011b) argues process itself may lead to bureaucratization, as seen that sustainability can be “thought of as a ‘portal,’ in the cases of fair trade and organic food policy and entrance into a series of debates.” Before Brund- making (Casula Vifell & Thedvall, 2012), that can tland, few such conceptual tools were in place that obscure power struggles and the political aspects of could bring various actors together. negotiations, as well as create obstacles to partici- The consequence is that (social) sustainable de- pation, particularly for weak social stakeholders (see velopment needs to be framed, filled with content, also Tamm Hallström & Boström, 2010). and interpreted from time to time and place to place. Klintman considers scale-related participatory In the absence of active engagement, it is merely an and representational challenges, including the dis- empty conceptual space (Davidson, 2009). Green- tance between the global actors that dominate the washing will always be a risk, as will the possibility definition and regulation of sustainable tourism and that the sustainability framing just helps to cement the local communities and SMEs that are targets for the institutional separation of “the environment” and such activity. This case is an echo of the common “the social” in policy, administration, and manage- social sustainability call for local empowerment and ment. Yet, the various frameworks, such as those participation in planning accreditation/certification. It briefly discussed here, or the one suggested by also reveals the difficulties involved in deciding who Murphy in his contribution to this special issue, as are legitimate participants/representatives. Who well as the various aspects listed in Table 1, shed should represent social sustainability? This difficult light on topics that ought to be considered in policies question is, according to Klintman, related to the and planning. vagueness of the scale entity “local”—and what the Sustainable development is, as I see it, not a very useful theoretical concept for social scientists for

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

11

Boström: A Missing Pillar

understanding the relationship between society and participatory process of working toward sustainabil- nature, or for studying environmental governance, ity (cf., Dillard et al. 2009). Furthermore, Cuthill management, and communication, and so forth. This (2009) showed how the social sustainability concept criticism is, for example, echoed in the articles by worked well as a communicative platform among Juhu Hiedanpää and colleagues and Katerina academics and planners. Psarikidou & Bronislaw Szerszynski. Neither should we treat “social sustainability” as the best theoretical [A] focus on the concept of “Social sustain- tool for studying social-environmental relations in ability” was seen to provide a meeting place, general, although parts of the referenced literature which drew together participants’ diverse clearly provide useful analytical tools for under- perspectives around a relatively new concept standing and investigating sustainability projects and that did not carry any political or academic planning, as well as normative tools for improving baggage from previous use. This concept them. In its very broadest sense, the “social” has to provided an umbrella under which existing do with the entire relationship between society and disciplinary and operational perspectives, nature, which thereby includes economic, cultural, relating to the social dimension of sustaina- political, and institutional structures and processes. ble development, could be sheltered. Social From a social constructionist perspective, there is sustainability appeared to have a “low pro- nothing in principle—including nature—that cannot file,” among both researchers and bureau- be labeled as “social.” Environmental sociology chal- crats. lenges the dualism between society and nature, and economic sociology teaches us that the economy is Second, opportunities are to be found in the sys- socially embedded. However, the aim in this intro- tematic focus on the very process of defining social ductory article is not to carry out a sociological anal- sustainability goals and criteria. If certain “social ysis—or deconstruction—of the sustainability dis- stakeholders,” such as labor unions or community course. groups, are both given access and empowered (eco- If we take this discourse as given (in the sense of nomic, education, social capital) to take part in sus- having a robust place in the public debate), we can tainability planning and projects, it is unlikely that ask if and how social sustainability, viewed as frame social sustainability will be defined as all or nothing. (discourse), enables policy makers to take into ac- The effective participation of such social stakehold- count, integrate, and simultaneously work for social, ers should prevent very narrow or unbalanced fram- economic, and environmental goals. This article has ings. As Cuthill (2009) argued, there is “an interde- presented six challenges for operationalizing and pendent and self-reinforcing relationship” between integrating social sustainability: 1) high expectations; the different social sustainability dimensions. By 2) vague, subjective, and ideological framing; 3) seriously taking into account both the substantive historical roots (sustainability framing is better suited (what) and procedural (how) dimensions, while ac- to environmental than social issues); 4) missing knowledging structural limitations and inherent con- institutional linkage (rather than a missing pillar); 5) tradictions, there could be a strong potential role for global capitalism for sustainable development? 6) the social sustainability projects. He observes, “A strong relation between the procedural (how) and substan- marketing point for social sustainability lies in its tive (what) dimensions of social sustainability. strategic, preventive approach to social issues, ad- This discussion of the challenges has also indi- dressing the ‘causes’ rather than just treating the cated some opportunities. First, both scholars and ‘symptoms.’” policy makers should acknowledge the potential of Third, while the win-win-win framing of the the social sustainability framing for sustainability sustainability concept may lead to unrealistic expec- projects and planning. For example, although tations, it is also fair to say that the frame of social Davidson (2009) expressed concerns about the onto- sustainability has, during the past decade, assisted in logical and epistemological roots of sustainable de- focusing attention on many new issues among aca- velopment, which may end up in a depoliticized no- demics, policy makers, and practitioners. It has trig- tion of the concept (see third challenge in the previ- gered several new debates about the connections, ous section), he still envisioned potential in another including the synergies and tradeoffs, between social version that endorses its political dimension. The and environmental issues. Learning about tradeoffs debate surrounding social sustainability may still in, for example, the use of policy instruments or ac- offer a useful site for politics. Within the question cess to mobility is a first step toward formulating “what type of society do we want to sustain?” resides integrated sustainable transportation policies. latent political potential. The very framing of what Finally, the related frame of “environmental jus- (social) sustainability is should be part of the broadly tice” has resulted in “the environment” being rede-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

12

Boström: A Missing Pillar fined so that “the dominant wilderness, greening and Boström, M. 2001. Miljörörelsens Mångfald (The Diversity of the natural resource focus now includes urban disinvest- Environmental Movement). Lund: Arkiv. Boström, M. 2011. The problematic social dimension of sustaina- ment, racism, homes, jobs, neighborhoods and com- ble development: the case of the Forest Stewardship Council. munities” (Agyeman, 2008). Similarly, initiatives International Journal of Sustainable Development & World such as alternative agrofood networks, fair trade, the Ecology Published Online: July 13. Sustainable Tourism Stewardship Council, and the Boström, M. & Klintman, M. 2008: Eco-Standards, Product La- belling, and Green Consumerism. New York: Palgrave. Forest Stewardship Council provide regulatory Boström, M. & Tamm Hallström, K. 2010. NGO power in global frameworks and organizational and discursive plat- social and environmental standard setting. Global Environ- forms that enable actors to demonstrate alternatives, mental Politics 10(4):36–59. to work hard on the topic of social sustainability, and Brown, D., Dillard, J., & Marshall, S. 2009. Triple bottom line: a business metaphor for a social construct. In J. Dillard, V. to make room for serious debate on the challenges. Dujon, & M. King (Eds.), Understanding the Social Dimen- In closing, I do not think social sustainability is sion of Sustainability. pp. 211–229. New York: Routledge. the best concept for studying all of the complexities Casula Vifell, Å. & Soneryd, L. 2012. Organizing matters: how the in the social-environment relationship, but it certainly “social dimension” gets lost in sustainability projects. Sus- tainable Development 20(1):18–27. has potential as a frame to assist and improve local Casula Vifell, Å. & Thedvall, R. 2012. Organizing for social sus- and transnational sustainability projects. For social tainability: governance through bureaucratization in meta- scientists, it has proven to be easily and fruitfully organizations. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy linked to a number of other social scientific concepts 8(1). Cucca, R. & Tacchi, E. 2012. Trade-offs and tangles between such as social capital, moral economy, identity, work, sustainability dimensions. Case of accessibility as a missing participation, democracy, and civil society. Social pillar of sustainable mobility policies in Italy. Sustainability: sustainability provides social scientists with a prom- Science, Practice, & Policy 8(1). ising channel for communicating more broadly and Cuthill, M. 2009. Strengthening the “social” in sustainable devel- opment: developing a conceptual framework for social sus- playing a constructive part in wider sustainability tainability in a rapid urban growth region in Australia. Sus- debates, both locally and transnationally. The readers tainable Development 18(6):362–373. of this special issue will hopefully find both critical Davidson, M. 2009. Social sustainability: a potential for politics? perspectives and well-founded frameworks useful for Local Environment 14(7):607–619. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. 2011. The understanding, investigating, and assessing sustaina- social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban bility projects and planning. social sustainability. Sustainable Development 19(5):289– 300. Devlin, J. & Tubino, D. 2012. Contention, participation and mobi- lization in EA follow-up: the Itabira experience. Sustainabil- Acknowledgement ity: Science, Practice, & Policy 8(1). Work on this article, as well as my guest editorship of this Dillard, J., V. Dujon, & M. King (Eds.). 2009. Understanding the special issue, was conducted within the research project Social Dimension of Sustainability. New York: Routledge. “The Missing Pillar: Incorporating the Social Dimension in Dobson, A. (Ed.).1999. Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Envi- Transnational Sustainability Projects.” This project was ronmental Sustainability and Social Justice. New York: Ox- funded by the Swedish Research Council Formas and dur- ford University Press. ing 2011 received additional funding from Södertörn Uni- Fitzpatrick, T. (Ed.). 2011a. Understanding the Environment and versity. I am grateful to the numerous people who have Social Policy. Bristol: Policy Press. Fitzpatrick, T. 2011b. Introduction. In T. Fitzpatrick (Ed.), Under- contributed to this special issue and provided constructive standing the Environment and Social Policy. pp. 1–16. Bris- comments regarding this article. tol: Policy Press. Fitzpatrick, T. 2011c. Challenges for social policy. In T. Fitzpatrick (Ed.), Understanding the Environment and Social References Policy. pp. 61–90. Bristol: Policy Press. Fitzpatrick, T. 2011d. Environmental justice: philosophies and Agyeman, J. 2008. Toward a “just” sustainability? Continuum: practices. In T. Fitzpatrick (Ed.), Understanding the Envi- Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 22(6):751–756. ronment and Social Policy. pp. 131–154. Bristol: Policy Agyeman, J., R. Bullard, & B. Evans (Eds.). 2003. Just Sustaina- Press. bilities: Development in an Unequal World. London: Guthman, J. 2009. Unveiling the unveiling: commodity chains, Earthscan. commodity fetishism, and the “value” of voluntary, ethical Agyeman, J. & Evans, B. 2004. Just sustainability: the emerging food labels. In J. Bair (Ed.), Frontiers of Commodity Chain discourse of environmental justice in Britain? The Geo- Research. pp. 190–206. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University graphical Journal 170(2):155–164. Press. Baker, S. 2006. Sustainable Development. New York: Routledge. Hajer, M. 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Eco- Bebbington, J. & Dillard, J. 2009. Social sustainability: an logical Modernization and the Policy Process. New York: organizational-level analysis. In J. Dillard, V. Dujon, & M. Oxford University Press. King (Eds.), Understanding the Social Dimension of Sustain- Hedrén, J. 2009. Shaping sustainability: is there an unreleased ability. pp. 157–173. New York: Routledge. potential in utopian thought? Futures 41(4):220–225. Bluhdorn, I. & Welsh, I. 2007. Eco-politics beyond the paradigm Hiedanpää, J., Jokinen, A., & Jokinen, P. 2012. Making sense of of sustainability: a conceptual framework and research the social: human-nonhuman constellations and the wicked agenda. Environmental Politics 16(2):185–205. road to sustainability. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 8(1).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

13

Boström: A Missing Pillar

Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., & O’Brien, G. 2005. Sustainable devel- Murphy, K. 2012. The social pillar of sustainable development: a opment: mapping different approaches. Sustainable Devel- framework for policy analysis. Sustainability: Science, Prac- opment 13(1):38–52 tice, & Policy 8(1). Jacobs, M. 1999. Sustainable development as a contested concept. Nordström Källström, H. & Ljung, M. 2005. Social sustainability In A. Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Envi- and collaborative learning. Ambio 34(4–5):376–382. ronmental Sustainability and Social Justice. pp. 21–45. New Osti, G. 2012. Green social cooperatives in Italy: a practical way to York: Oxford University Press. cover the three pillars of sustainability? Sustainability: Sci- Jensen, J., Jørgensen, M., Elle, M., & Hagelskjær Lauridsen, E. ence, Practice, & Policy 8(1). 2012. Has social sustainability left the building? The recent Pawlowski, A. 2007. How many dimensions does sustainable conceptualisation of “sustainability” in Danish buildings. development have? Sustainable Development 16(2):81–90. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 8(1). Psarikidou, K. & Szerszynski, B. 2012. Growing the social: alter- Klintman, M. 2012. Handling issues of scale in global accredita- native ago-food networks and social sustainability in the ur- tion of sustainable tourism schemes towards harmonised re- ban ethical foodscape. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & embeddedness? Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy Policy 8(1). 8(1). Schlossberg, M. & Zimmerman, A. 2003. Developing statewide Klooster, D. 2010. Standardizing sustainable development? The indices of environmental, economic, and social sustainability: Forest Stewardship Council’s plantation policy review pro- a look at Oregon and the Oregon benchmarks. Local Envi- cess as neoliberal environmental governance Geoforum ronment 8(6):641–660. 41(1):117–129. Sharma, S. & Ruud, A. 2003. On the path to sustainability: inte- Larsen, L. 2009. An inquiry into the theoretical basis of sustaina- grating social dimensions into the research and practice of bility: ten propositions. In J. Dillard, V. Dujon, & M. King environmental management. Business Strategy and the Envi- (Eds.), Understanding the Social Dimension of Sustainability. ronment 12(4):205–214. pp. 45–82. New York: Routledge. Shaw, B. & Black, I. 2010. Market based political action: a path to Lehtonen, M. 2004. The environmental-social interface of sustain- sustainable development. Sustainable Development able development: capabilities, social capital, institutions. 18(6):385–397. Ecological Economics 49(2):199–214. Shreck, A., Getz, C., & Feenstra, G. 2006. Social sustainability, Littig, B. & Grießler, E. 2005. Social sustainability: a catchword farm labor, and organic agriculture: findings from an explor- between political pragmatism and social theory. International atory analysis. Agriculture & Human Values 23(4):439–449. Journal of Sustainable Development 8(1–2):65–79. Seghezzo, L. 2009. The five dimensions of sustainability. Envi- Magis, K. & Shinn, C. 2009. Emergent principles of social sustain- ronmental Politics 18(4):539–556. ability. In J. Dillard, V. Dujon, & M. King (Eds.), Under- Tamm Hallström, K. & Boström, M. 2010. Transnational Multi- standing the Social Dimension of Sustainability. pp. 15–44. stakeholder Standardization: Organizing Fragile Non-state New York: Routledge. Authority. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Mancini, F., Termorshuizen, A., Jiggins, J., & van Bruggen, A. Taylor, P. 2004. In the market but not of it: fair trade coffee and 2008. Increasing the environmental and social sustainability Forest Stewardship Council certification as market-based so- of cotton farming through farmer education in Andhra Pra- cial change. World Development 33(1):129–147. desh, India. Agricultural Systems 96(1–3):16–25. Marcuse, P. 1998. Sustainability is not enough. Environment and Urbanization 10(2):103–111.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

14

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

The social pillar of sustainable development: a literature review and framework for policy analysis

Kevin Murphy School of Business and Humanities, Institute of Technology Blanchardstown, Blanchardstown Road North, Blanchardstown, Dublin 15 Ireland (email:[email protected])

There is a need to develop a clearer understanding of what the social pillar of sustainable development means and how it relates to the environmental pillar. This article contributes to this process by presenting a conceptual frame- work that identifies four overarching social concepts and links them to environmental imperatives. These concepts are: public awareness, equity, participation, and social cohesion. The framework builds on concepts and policy objec- tives outlined in research on international sustainable development indicators and the social sustainability literature. The social pillar can be expanded to include environmental, international, and intergenerational dimensions. This framework can then be used to examine how states and organizations understand the social pillar and its environ- mental links.

KEYWORDS: social policy, environmental education, public awareness, environmental equity, sustainable development, environmental sociology

Introduction lishing such connections by presenting a conceptual framework for understanding the social pillar and While the concept of sustainable development outlining its environmental implications. A review of (SD) generally refers to achieving a balance among eight bodies of literature related to SD suggests four the environmental, economic, and social pillars of pre-eminent policy concepts (Figure 1). sustainability, the meaning and associated objectives of the social pillar remain vague (Dempsey et al. 2011; Casula Vifell & Soneryd, 2012). Indeed, it has been described as the most conceptually elusive pillar in SD discourse (Thin, 2002). Moreover, the social Figure 1 Four Pre-eminent Concepts of the Social Pillar. dimensions of sustainability have not received the same treatment as the other two pillars (Cuthill, 2009; While the literature highlights the relatively lim- Vavik & Keitsch, 2010) and there are various inter- ited treatment afforded to the social pillar, some work pretations regarding what issues should be addressed has been done. In particular, SDIs and the social sus- (Dixon & Colantonio, 2008). The selection of social tainability literature present us with policy concepts measures in sustainable development indicator sets and objectives specifically identified as “social” and (SDIs) is often a function of power rather than policy represent a significant contribution to how the social coherence, as influential groups are more likely to pillar is conceived. However, I argue that establishing have their concerns included (Littig & Griessler, clearer links with the environmental pillar will further 2005). These indicators reflect different sociocultural enhance this concept, an argument rooted in an un- priorities (Omann & Spangenberg, 2002) and as such derstanding of SD as a concept requiring interpillar are often picked for political rather than scientific linkages. In this respect, the links between the social reasons (Fahey, 1995). For example, preferences for and environmental pillars are particularly underde- neoliberalism or the European social model will re- veloped. It is therefore useful to expand the parame- sult in different social objectives (Colantonio, 2007). ters of the social pillar by connecting it empirically to These ambiguities suggest that a greater under- environmental imperatives. Furthermore, while ex- standing of the social pillar of SD is desirable. The isting approaches tend to present the social pillar in literature also indicates that it is necessary to develop terms of national welfare objectives for current gen- greater linkage between the social and environmental erations, it is useful to broaden the understanding of pillars (Dobson, 2003b; Littig & Griessler, 2005; the social to incorporate international and intergener- Gough et al. 2008). This article contributes to estab- ational dimensions. In so doing, a policy framework

 2012 Murphy Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 15

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

emerges that provides the basis for an alternative set Section 2 summarizes key European policy of social indicators to those specified in international statements on SD. These are particularly useful as SDIs or implied in the social sustainability literature. they give a global northern perspective on the social This approach constitutes a set of policy objectives goals of SD, which may be contrasted with the global that have clear social and environmental dimensions. view taken by the UN.1 The framework may be employed to conduct an em- Section 3 identifies important multilateral SDI pirical analysis of how different states and organiza- sets that specifically allude to social concerns and tions understand the social pillar and to what extent how progress in these policy areas might be meas- they develop social/environmental links. ured. This article is divided into two parts. The first Section 4 highlights literature that specifically part describes the origins of the proposed framework, focuses on the social aspects of SD. explaining the identification of eight key types of Section 5 draws on texts from the social policy SD-related literature that discuss social concepts and literature that specifically seek to establish relation- policy objectives (Table 1). I then explore how de- ships between welfare issues and environmental con- bates to date have presented “the social” in SD. cerns. Drawing on key United Nations (UN) and European Section 6 underscores significant work from the Union (EU) SD policy documents and environmental environmental justice literature, which highlights the policy integration (EPI) literature, the argument then disproportionate burden faced by low income or vul- moves to a justification for linking social and envi- nerable groups regarding the distribution of environ- ronmental imperatives. mental risks (or “bads”). Both intergenerational and The second part of this article presents the four intragenerational equity perspectives are subsumed policy concepts at the heart of the framework, which under this category. are linked to thirteen policy objectives that address Section 7 refers to central texts in the ecological social and environmental concerns simultaneously. modernization literature. While some commentators These conceptual categories and policy objectives argue that theory (EMT) constitute the proposed approach for understanding should not be considered part of SD discourse (e.g., the social pillar of SD and for providing the basis to Langhelle, 2000), the more prevalent view is that it is develop an alternative set of social indicators. It is an expression of “weak” sustainability, as Baker et al. important to note that while some of the social policy (1997) describe.2 The EMT work has become an ex- objectives outlined in the framework may have global tremely influential conceptual approach in environ- application, others are likely only appropriately ap- mental sociology, and while some scholars (e.g., plied in a global northern context. For example, some Dean, 2001) argue that it does not address social is- objectives refer to a redistribution of resources from sues, a careful and systematic review of the relevant North to South, while others refer to reductions in literature reveals that authors writing from an EMT consumption, which is relevant to affluent societies perspective have actually considered important social only. Therefore, the framework should be understood concepts such as equity, awareness for sustainability, primarily in a northern context (with the North/South and participation. dichotomy understood in terms of rich and relatively Section 8 refers to salient research in the EPI lit- poor countries). erature, which is focused on enhancing the compati- bility of sectoral policy objectives with environmen- Constructing a Social Pillar tal objectives. These eight bodies of literature provide the foun- The proposed framework is built from social dations of the conception of the “social pillar” out- concepts and policy objectives derived from the liter- lined in this article. They were selected on the basis ature described in Table 1. This literature was re- viewed to explore how the “social” in SD debates is 1 UN policy documents tend to focus on need satisfaction of a variously understood and, as such, it provides the more fundamental nature than is evident in EU documents. The basis upon which a social pillar of SD is constructed. latter are inclined to reflect the concerns of more affluent groups. While this is not an exhaustive record of all docu- For example, while the EU Sustainable Development Strategy ments reviewed, it identifies primary texts in each (Council of European Union, 2006) refers to the need to promote animal health welfare and tackle obesity, tobacco use, and harmful branch of literature. drinking, the 1996 UN indicator set highlights indicators of a more Section 1 of Table 1 refers to key UN policy fundamental nature, such as “adequate excreta disposal facilities,” statements regarding the meaning of SD and its asso- “access to safe drinking water,” and “the nutritional status of chil- dren” (UNCSD, 1996). ciated policy objectives. These documents enjoy a 2 particularly authoritative status within SD discourse. Some scholars compare ecological modernization and SD strate- gies as a basis to distinguish policy approaches (see, e.g., Baker, 2007; Wright & Kurian, 2009).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

16

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

Table 1 Literature that provides the building blocks of a social pillar of sustainable development.

1. Key United United Nations Environment Program Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment Nations (UNEP) (1972) Sustainable Development International Union for the Conservation of World Conservation Strategy Policy Documents Nature (IUCN) (1980) World Commission on Environment and Our Common Future Development (WCED) (1987) United Nations Conference on Environment Documents from the United Nations Conference on Environment and and Development (UNCED) (1992) Development World Summit on Sustainable Development Documents from the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) (2002) United Nations Economic, Social, and United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2004) (2005–2014) Framework for the International Implementation Scheme 2. Key European European Sustainable Cities and Towns Charter Sustainable Charter (ESCTC) (1994) Development United Nations Economic Commission for Aarhus Convention Policy Documents Europe (UNECE) (1998) Commission of European Communities A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European Union Strategy (CEC) (2001) for Sustainable Development Office of the [UK] Deputy Prime Minister Bristol Accord (ODPM) (2005) Council of the European Union (CEU) (2006) Renewed European Union Sustainable Development Strategy Commission of European Communities Mainstreaming Sustainable Development in EU Policies: 2009 Review (CEC) (2009) of the European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development

3. Key Multilateral United Nations Commission for Sustainable Indicators of Sustainable Development, Framework and Methodology Sustainable Development (UNCSD) (1996) Development United Nations Department of Social and Indicators of Sustainable Development: Framework and Indicators Economic Affairs (UNDESA) Methodologies Documents (2001) Commission of European Communities EU Member State Experiences with Sustainable Development (CEC) (2004) Indicators United Nations Department of Social and Indicators of Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Methodologies Economic Affairs (UNDESA) (2007) Organization for Economic Cooperation and Measuring Sustainable Development: Report on the Joint Development (OECD) (2008b) UNECE/OECD/Eurostat Working Group on Statistics for Sustainable Development Organization for Economic Cooperation and Society at a Glance 2009–OECD Social Indicators Development (OECD) (2009) Eurostat (2005) Measuring Progress Towards a More Sustainable Europe: Sustainable Development Indicators in the European Union Eurostat (2007) Measuring Progress Toward a More Sustainable Europe: 2007 Monitoring Report of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy 4. Social George & Wilding (1999); Barton (2000); Barron & Guantlet (2002); Goodland (2002); Omman & Spangenberg (2002); Sustainability Thin (2002); Thin et al. (2002); Littig & Griessler (2005); Bramley et al. (2006); Turkington & Sangster (2006); Literature Colantonio (2007); Munasinghe (2007) Spangenberg (2007); Chan & Lee (2008); Dixon & Colantonio (2008); Bramley & Power (2009); Cuthill (2009); Vavik & Keitsch (2010); Dempsey et al. (2011); Casula Vifell & Soneryd (2012) 5. Green Social Irvine & Ponton (1988); Cahill (1991); Ferris (1993); George & Wilding (1994); Barry (1998); Fitzpatrick (1998); Huby Policy Literature (1998); Trainer (1998); Cahill (2001); Fitzpatrick & Cahill (2002); Humphrey (2002); Dean (2001); Dryzek (2005; 2008); Dobson (2003b) Meadowcroft (2005; 2008); Gough et al. (2008); Carnegie UK (2009); Davies (2009) 6. Environmental Barry (1993; 1999); Hofrichter (1993); Beckerman (1995; 1999); Bryant (1995); Harvey (1996); Faber (1998); Bullard Justice (1999; 2000); Miller (1999); Norton (1999); Wissenburg (1999); Fitzpatrick (2001); Dobson (2003a; 2007); Faber & Literature McCarthy (2003); Agyeman & Evans (2004); Davies (2006); Gardiner (2006); Karlsson (2009); Singer (2006); Tremmel (2006); Rees (2008) 7. Ecological Hajer (1995); Christoff (1996); Mol (1999; 2000); Frijns et al. (2000); Mol & Spaargaren (2002; 2004); Spaargaren Modernization (2000; 2003; 2006); Spaargaren & van Vliet (2000); Spaargaren & Mol (2008) Literature 8. Environmental Collier (1997); Lenschow (1997; 2002); Liberatore (1997); Lafferty (2002); Lafferty & Hovden (2003); Jordan et al. Policy (2003); Persson (2004); Baker (2007); Jordan (2008); Jordan & Lenschow (2008); Nilsson et al. (2009) Integration (EPI) Literature

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

17

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

that they fulfill one or more of the following criteria: Table 2 Social classifications and objectives in social they are influential texts in SD discourse; they dis- indicator sets. cuss the social objectives of SD; and they examine the relationships between social and environmental Author Social Classification policy. UN Commission for Social “Categories” Sustainable Combating poverty Development Sustainable demographic What is Social? (UNCSD,1996) dynamics Identifying a social pillar presents certain chal- Protecting human health lenges. A myriad of different meanings are attached Promoting human settlement Promoting education, public to the term “social.” The Oxford Concise English awareness, and training Dictionary presents seven definitions referring to UN Commission for Social “Themes” both nouns and adjectives. Littig & Greissler (2005) Sustainable Equity note that the term has both “analytical” and “norma- Development Health (UNDESA, 2001) tive” meanings. There are also difficulties regarding Education the identification of “purely” social issues, as consid- Housing erable overlaps exist across SD’s three pillars. This Security (combating crime) overlap is particularly pronounced with respect to the Population economic and social pillars (Thin, 2002), with many UN Commission for “Themes”2 issues, most notably employment and unemployment, Sustainable Poverty deemed relevant to both dimensions (OECD, 2009). Development Governance (UNDESA, 2007) Despite these circumstances, the literature points to Health certain policy concerns that have been identified as Education “social” within the overall SD framework. These Demographics have been variously described as social categories EU Sustainable “Themes”2 (UNCSD, 1996); social themes (UNDESA, 2001); Development Social inclusion social dimensions (OECD, 2009; Dempsey et al. Indicators (Eurostat, Public health 2007) 2011; Casula Vifell & Soneryd 2012); social indica- Demography tors (UNCSD, 1996; UNDESA, 2001); and the social Good governance realm (Chan & Lee, 2008). Furthermore, the concepts OECD Social Social “Organizing of social sustainability (Goodland, 2002; Turkington Indicators (OECD, Dimension” 2009) & Sangster, 2006; Chan & Lee, 2008) and social SD Economic self-sufficiency (Vavik & Keitsch, 2010) have been discussed. Equity The policy objectives emanating from this liter- Health ature are broadly similar and form the basis of what Social cohesion might be understood by the notion of “social” in the context of SD. These classifications are primarily do not set up a detailed discussion on classifications derived from SDI sets and the social sustainability 3 or policy objectives. The authors already provide a literature. Various “social pillars” emerging from fully comprehensive and detailed exposition of the these literatures are outlined in Tables 2 and 3 and 4 conceptual and policy contours of these social dimen- discussed in tandem below. sions and there is little need to revisit this work. On Table 2 identifies social classifications in SDIs one hand, this literature, and the level of consensus and Table 3 includes both classifications and exam- regarding policy objectives that it suggests, implies ples of social policy objectives. Similar policy con- that there is less mystery surrounding the social pol- cerns feature in UN and EU SD literatures. They are icy objectives of SD than is generally acknowledged. also prominent in the other literatures outlined in On the other hand, considerable ambiguity remains Table 1, albeit to varying degrees. The purpose of with respect to the relationship between the social Tables 2 and 3 is to give a general flavor of the kinds and environmental pillars and it is to this uncertainty of social concepts and policy objectives included in that attention turns. The literature outlined in Tables various discussions of the social pillar. These tables 2 and 3 assists this task by fulfilling two important functions. First, it serves to identify what is generally

3 understood as the “social” in SD discourse. Second, it After the early 2000s it became less fashionable to use explicit “pillar” distinctions. However, other SDIs and the social sustain- provides classifications, or umbrella groupings, under ability literature refer to the themes highlighted here as “social.” which the policy objectives of the social pillar may 4 The policy objectives discussed in SDIs are broadly similar to be usefully subsumed. For example, Chan & Lee those raised in the social sustainability literature.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

18

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

Table 3 Social policy concepts and objectives from the social sustainability literature.

Author Social Classification Description of Policy Objective Littig & Griessler (2005) Basic Needs and Quality of Life Satisfaction of basic material needs and self-fulfillment “Social dimensions of Social Justice Equality of opportunity sustainability” Social Coherence Harmony among different social groups Chan & Lee (2008) Social Infrastructure Physical infrastructure which delivers locally based services and “Factors of social opportunities for social interaction sustainability” Availability of Job Opportunities Employment Accessibility Engaging in essential work and leisure activities should not entail too much travel Townscape Design Townscape design that is aesthetically pleasing, functional, and promotes social interaction Preservation of Local Conserving physical and social/community characteristics Characteristics particular to the locality Ability to Fulfill Psychological Fulfilling the need to feel secure and participate in neighborhood Needs design Cuthill (2009) Social Capital Promoting social networks and a sense of social responsibility “Key factors of social Social Infrastructure Providing facilities which address need and capacity for sustainability” participation Social Justice + Equity Providing equitable access to essential welfare services and employment, especially for vulnerable groups Engaged Governance Promoting bottom-up, participatory democracy Dempsey et al. (2011) Social Equity Reducing inequality in life chances by ensuring local access to “Dimensions of social key services sustainability” Sustainability of Community Encouraging social interaction/social networks in the community Encouraging participation in collective groups in the community Engendering a sense of pride in the local place Ensuring safety and security Vavik & Keitsch (2010) Poverty Promoting “inclusion” by providing basic needs “Three goals of social Illiteracy Promoting access to education sustainable Access Promoting access to participation in decision making development”

(2008) employ six classifications while Dempsey et national dimensions. While international SDI sets and al. (2011) prefer to include all policy concerns under the social sustainability literatures have addressed a the two master classifications of “equity” and “sus- significant gap by fleshing out social policy objec- tainability of community.” Building on such ap- tives at a national level, the international dimensions proaches, and based on a review of the literature out- of SD suggest that the “social” be extended to encap- lined in Table 1, I argue that four pre-eminent social sulate global challenges. For example, while the so- policy concepts, with attendant policy objectives, cial concepts of equity and social cohesion refer to emerge from this literature. These are equity, aware- key national welfare concerns, they also have signifi- ness for sustainability, participation, and social cohe- cant international implications for SD policy. As sion. such, it is appropriate that the international dimen- This framework employs these four conceptual sions of these social concepts feed into SDIs. classifications as “organizing dimensions” (OECD, 2009), generalized policy concepts from which more Developing Links between the Social and specific policy objectives may be derived. Such clas- Environmental Pillars sifications allow a large number of policy objectives to be synthesized into a smaller number, which facil- The novelty and essential contribution of SD as a itates easier communication and comparison (OECD, concept and policy approach resides in its require- 2009). While the selection of these policy concepts ment to develop interpillar links. The Brundtland borrows from SDIs and the social sustainability liter- Report states that the “deepening interconnections” ature, the framework seeks to expand the scope of among the pillars is “the central justification for the such “social pillars” by linking these four social con- establishment of the Commission” (WCED, 1987). cepts to environmental imperatives. The scope of the Jordan & Lenschow (2008) claim that the report’s social pillar may also be expanded to include inter- greatest contribution was to highlight the need for

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

19

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development mutual compatibility among the pillars. The Aalborg SDIs (e.g., UNCSD, 1996; UNDESA, 2001; 2007; Charter states that policy must seek to “integrate Eurostat, 2005; 2007) reveals that while some link- people’s basic social needs as well as healthcare, em- ages are made, these are very weakly developed. In ployment and housing programmes with environ- light of these observations, a strong case exists for mental protection” (ESCTC, 1994). Similarly, the EU presenting a social pillar with clear social/ Sustainable Development Strategy calls for the “inte- environmental links, an approach central to the gration of economic, social and environmental con- framework proposed here. siderations so that they are coherent and mutually reinforce each other” (Council of European Union, A Social/Environmental Framework 2006). In fact, the European Commission argues that the presentation of SD issues without reference to The proposed framework consists of thirteen their interpillar relationships may be described as policy objectives with both social and environmental “bundling,” “artificial,” and “false” (CEC, 2004). dimensions, grouped under the four conceptual clas- Jordan & Lenschow’s (2008) review of EU docu- sifications of equity, awareness for sustainability, ments points to a clear requirement that environmen- participation, and social cohesion. The following tal and social imperatives be integrated. Developing discussion explains the meaning of each objective in these interconnections via policy may be linked to the policy terms, examines the social-environmental concept of EPI and in particular horizontal environ- policy implications, and outlines the justification for mental policy integration (HEPI), which refers to the selection of each objective. What emerges from incorporating environmental concerns into all sectors this treatment is a set of social objectives, linked to of policy, including social policy (Liberatore, 1997; environmental imperatives, which may function as a Lafferty, 2002; Lafferty & Hovden, 2003; Jordan & tool of analysis with which to examine how different Lenschow, 2008). In an influential EPI text, states and organizations understand social policy Liberatore (1997) argues: concepts within the broader SD framework. States and organizations may be analyzed for their relative The relevance of integration for moving to- commitment to the social pillar with respect to the wards sustainable development is straight- other pillars and their commitment to develop inter- forward: if environmental factors are not pillar relationships. While this framework does not taken into consideration in the formulation include a detailed set of indicators, it provides the and implementation of the policies that reg- foundation upon which such a set may be developed. ulate economic activities and other forms of It should be noted that this discussion does not view social organization, a new model of devel- this framework as a replacement for the social pillars opment that can be environmentally and so- outlined in Tables 2 and 3, but seeks instead to aug- cially sustainable in the long term cannot be ment existing approaches. achieved. Table 4 outlines the framework for expanding the social pillar in terms of social/environmental pol- While disciplines such as environmental eco- icy objectives. nomics do link environmental and economic impera- tives, SD is unique in that it adds social aspects into Equity the interdimensional mix (Dryzek, 2005). However, Equity is a key social concept in SD discourse. much of the work done on the social pillar discussed In policy terms, it refers to the distribution of welfare above does not place much focus on environmental goods and life chances on the basis of fairness and it links. For example, environmental factors are not applies to national, international, and intergenera- addressed in George & Wilding’s (1999) conception tional contexts. Equitable redistribution means that of social sustainability. More recently, while the all citizens, regardless of gender, should have an work of Littig & Griessler (2005), Chan & Lee equal opportunity to both survive and fulfill their (2008), Cuthill (2009), and Dempsey et al. (2011) development potentials. This very broad conception provide excellent discussions regarding SD’s social of equity refers to a wide spectrum of policy areas aspects, the links between social and environmental ranging from the provision of clean water, nutrition, goals do not receive much treatment. That said, both employment, education, shelter, essential medicines, Cuthill (2009) and Littig & Griessler (2005) mention and an unpolluted environment to access to social that developing such links would enhance our under- networks. It also includes the promotion of freedom standing of the social pillar. Key EU SDI documents from discrimination on the grounds of gender, reli- often cite the importance of developing “interdimen- gion, or race. Policy objectives related to equity are sional” relevance among pillars (CEC, 2004; articulated in all of the publications identified in Ta- Eurostat, 2007), yet a review of key international

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

20

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

Table 4 A social pillar of sustainable development.

Organizing Policy Area Policy May Be Analyzed For: Dimension Equity The “export of pollution” • Commitment to curb the “export of pollution” Climate change and the development • Commitment to economic transfers to global southern countries needs of global southern countries rather than relying solely on carbon-trading mechanisms Vulnerable groups and the effects of • Commitment to assist vulnerable groups in adapting to the climate change effects of climate change Vulnerable groups and fiscal • Commitment to protect vulnerable groups from fiscal measures measures designed to mitigate climate change Welfare provision to current • Commitment to decarbonize current welfare provision generations and carbon emissions Protecting future generations by • Commitment to protect future generations by reducing reducing consumption levels consumption rather than relying solely on market/technological solutions Awareness for ESD and environmental awareness • Commitment to designing and implementing educational sustainability programs and campaigns programs for SD through the formal and informal education sectors Content of ESD Programs and • The level to which these programs embrace a challenge to the campaigns traditional growth paradigm including nonmaterial conceptions of happiness Participation Broadening the participative base of • The level to which the views and preferences of weaker groups environmental planning processes including future generations are reflected in environmental planning processes Social Cohesion Promoting social cohesion and • Commitment to infrastructural planning which promotes social environmental objectives integration and environmental sustainability simultaneously simultaneously • Commitment to promoting social activities aimed at environmental goals • Commitment to developing “transition towns” or initiatives of that type • Commitment to combating the kinds of environmental conditions which cause civil strife ble 1 and in almost all cases equity is understood as a To develop this relationship theoretically, central component of sustainability.5 Dobson (2003b) calls for empirical examples that Presenting the concept of equity in such broad highlight how both objectives may be simultaneously terms masks myriad conceptual and ideological de- promoted. To this end, I outline five ways in which bates that a rigorous examination of the concept equity has been empirically linked to environmental would expose. However, as previously noted, such issues and articulate these in terms of policy objec- arguments are well-rehearsed elsewhere. The purpose tives. In some cases, these goals refer primarily to the here is to examine how the concept of equity has national level while others are relevant to the interna- been linked to environmental imperatives and what tional sphere. I assess states and organizations with policy implications emerge from these synergies. The regard to their commitment to these objectives. These relationship between equity and environmental ob- policy objectives are considered here in a relatively jectives is steeped in complexity and a simple corre- cursory manner, addressing only the basic contours lation between increased equity and environmentally of the pertinent arguments. Despite such limitations, benign outcomes cannot be assumed (Ferris, 1993; these objectives provide a broad base for discussion Humphrey, 2002; Dobson, 2003b). regarding how the environmental dimensions of eq- uity may be understood and developed into indica- tors. 5 It is noted that in the main, ecological modernization theorists First, evidence suggests that pollution in general, see little connection between the equitable distribution of resources and the effects of climate change in particular, are and environmental ends (see, e.g., Mol & Spaargaren, 2000; 2002). and will be disproportionately felt by the poor, Furthermore, in terms of debates around intergenerational equity, Beckerman (1995; 1999) represents a deviation from the general whether they reside in the global North or South. For consensus in this literature suggesting that current generations have example, Gough et al. (2008) argue that the risks as- obligations to future generations in terms of ecological sociated with climate change are likely to exacerbate sustainability. He argues instead that “[i]ntergenerational egal- inequalities, as lower income groups are more likely itarianism has nothing to recommend it.”

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

21

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

to live in higher risk areas and marginal lands, have mitment to reduce consumption rather than relying fewer resources to cope with harmful environmental solely on market/technological solutions. events, and have much less insurance coverage. In Third, economically developing countries will this context, the fallout from Hurricane Katrina indi- disproportionately feel the effects of climate change, cates that those on low incomes are least able to pro- partly for geographical reasons and partly because tect themselves from extreme weather (Singer, 2006; they have limited resources to engage in mitigation or Dryzek, 2008). Furthermore, fiscal measures such as adaption strategies (Baker, 2006; Stern, 2006). This carbon taxes, designed to combat climate change, can situation reflects the fact that relatively poor place a higher burden on lower income households as countries have contributed least to the problem, yet energy prices increase (Scott, 2007; CPA, 2008). will suffer most from it, which raises the question of Low-income households spend a higher proportion of equity. While some scholars and policy makers their income on domestic energy, live in less energy- advocate for international carbon trading, others have efficient houses, and are more likely to consume cer- suggested that wealthy countries continue to unfairly tain fuels such as peat, coal, and oil that have higher dominate negotiations around these mechanisms in carbon content. Fiscal measures may therefore exac- ways favorable to their own interests (Backstrand & erbate the effects of poverty and increase fuel pov- Lovbrand, 2006; Liverman, 2009). Alternative or erty. Gough et al. (2008) also argue that budgets stronger approaches tend to focus on the idea of con- aimed at welfare provision may be diverted to ad- siderable wealth transfers from North to South to dress the negative consequences of climate change, assist mitigation and adaptation policies in southern placing greater strains on low-income groups (Gough countries. In this context, a commitment to equity et al. 2008). In this context, policy approaches based may be assessed in terms of resolve for economic and on a commitment to equity may be understood in technological transfers to southern countries rather terms of 1) commitment to assist vulnerable groups than relying solely on carbon-trading mechanisms. adapting to the effects of climate change, and 2) Fourth, policy should seek to ensure that inter- commitment to protect vulnerable groups from fiscal generational and intragenerational equity are made measures designed to mitigate climate change. compatible (Pearce et al. 1989; Redclift, 1993; Second, Stern (2006), among others, argues that Fitzpatrick & Cahill, 2002). This means that in pro- future generations will face serious environmental tecting future generations via environmental policies, risks as a result of climate change that has been attention and funds must not be diverted away from linked to economic growth (OECD, 2008b). This addressing the needs of today’s poor. At the same issue raises the question of intergenerational equity. time, policy must ensure that the provision of welfare While some commentators claim that market mecha- for the presently disadvantaged is carried out without nisms and technological developments may be har- diverting attention or funds away from addressing the nessed to combat climate change,6 others argue that needs of future generations. The HEPI attempts to such approaches will be insufficient (Andersen & overcome this dilemma by requiring all policy goals, Massa, 2000; Backstrand & Lovbrand, 2006; Grist, including social policy, to be compatible with envi- 2008). Continuing increases in global greenhouse ronmental objectives. Certain policies exist that ap- gas-emission levels provide empirical support for pear to reflect this ethos, for example, green social such skepticism (Hansen, 2006; CEC, 2009; WMO, economy initiatives (Davies, 2009) or the energy 2009). Furthermore, evidence suggests that since the retrofitting of social housing (Gough et al. 2008). On 1990s most affluent countries have not decoupled a broader level, the application of HEPI would re- their carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse-gas quire agencies responsible for the provision of essen- emissions from growth in gross domestic product tial welfare services (e.g., health, housing, education, (GDP) (OECD, 2008b). Alternative approaches to the social security) to develop and implement plans to question of intergenerational equity embrace the idea substantially reduce the carbon emissions associated that it entails reductions in consumption by current with the delivery of these services. In this way, policy generations (Barry, 1993; Dobson, 2003a; Rees, seeks to simultaneously meet the needs of today’s 2008). In this context, pursuing intergenerational poor and future generations. Gough et al. (2008) pro- equity may be viewed in terms of strength of com- vide a good overview of policy debates related to such issues. In this context, policy imbued with the spirit of equity may be viewed in terms of commit- 6 Market mechanisms include , carbon offsetting, ment to decouple welfare provision from carbon and forest sequestration, while technological interventions include emissions. carbon storage/sequestration, deflection of heat away from the Finally, it has been noted by writers such as earth’s surface with solar shields or satellites with movable reflec- Rowley & Holmberg (1995), Moffat (1996), and tors, and ocean fertilization using iron or similar inputs to increase Purvis & Grainger (2004) that pollution is inequitably plankton production (and CO2 absorption).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

22

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

distributed on a global level. A combination of de- treatment in the social sustainability literature, though mand for certain goods in the North and poverty in education as an end in itself is often seen as a key the South forces economically developing countries objective. For example, Vavik & Keitsch (2010) cite to eschew strict environmental legislation for eco- “access to education” as one of three important pol- nomic survival. This asymmetry effectively leads to icy goals for social sustainability. Similarly, while the “export of pollution” to poorer countries, a dy- education for its own sake is presented as a key social namic that is manifest in different ways around the indicator in international SDIs, these sets do not in- world. There is an abundance of evidence that indus- clude gauges to measure commitment to ESD or en- tries in rich countries relocate to poorer nations vironmental awareness. This focus represents a sig- where cheaper and dirtier production processes are nificant weakness, as all contributors to SD debates tolerated (Faber, 1993; Faber & McCarthy, 2003). articulate the need for awareness. Including indica- Greenpeace (2002) notes that export credit agencies tors related to ESD in SDI sets would more effec- (ECAs) in developed countries have, in recent years, tively embrace the spirit of linking social- substantially increased their financing of fossil-fuel environmental objectives. power in developing countries. The organization goes An important distinction between UN documents on to note that, while the UK continues to fund the and the ecological modernization literature warrants export of dirty coal technologies to poorer nations, attention. While UN materials embrace a more radi- the last coal-powered station built in the UK was in cal position on awareness, the ecological moderniza- 1972. The increased export of electrical and elec- tion position does not move too far from traditional tronic equipment waste from Western countries to Western development norms. For example, the Asia due to “cheaper labor” and “lack of environ- Brundtland Report argues that western consumption mental standards” has also been documented (Puckett levels are ecologically unsustainable and that atti- et al. 2002). Furthermore, Webber et al. (2008) found tudes must be changed to arrest such trends (WCED, that while Chinese CO2 emissions have increased 1987). In addition, states that awareness dramatically in recent years, approximately one third programs should stimulate ethical consciousness, of these releases are due to the production of exports, address socioeconomic issues, and encourage spir- primarily targeted at the developed world.7 In this itual development (UNCED, 1992). These programs context, policy imbued with the spirit of equity may should be “integrated into all disciplines” and a be viewed in terms of commitment to curb the “ex- “thorough review of curricula” is called for. port of pollution.” UNESCO (2004) furthermore argues that ESD must be informed by a “sensitivity to the limits and poten- Awareness for Sustainability tial of economic growth and their impact on society Awareness for sustainability is a key social con- and the environment” and by a concern for social cept in SD discourse. The associated policy objec- justice. To promote these objectives, the UN tives refer to raising public awareness of sustain- launched the Decade of Education for Sustainable ability issues with a view to encouraging alternative, Development, 2005–2014. patterns. Policies typically In contrast, the ecological modernization ap- include “green” advertising campaigns, ecolabelling, proach is more politically modest. Most comprehen- awareness-raising events, environmental education sively and coherently expressed in Spaargaren’s the- programs, and education for sustainable development ory of consumption (Spaargaren, 2000; 2003; 2006; (ESD) programs. These initiatives and campaigns Spaargaren & van Vliet, 2000; Spaargaren & Mol, encourage consumers to engage in more environ- 2008), this understanding places great faith in a com- mentally benign behavior and to accept the legiti- bination of environmental awareness and market macy of coercive environmental legislation. This mechanisms to deliver sustainability. As a result of objective is clearly articulated in key UN documents greater environmental awareness and a sense of ethi- (WCED, 1987; UNCED, 1992; WSSD, 2002; cal responsibility, consumers will seek opportunities UNESCO, 2004), EU communications (CEC, 2001; to “green” their lifestyles and domestic routines. In 2004; Council of European Union, 2006), green so- particular, proponents of ecological modernization cial policy materials (Gough et al. 2008; claim that environmental innovations introduced Meadowcroft, 2008), and ecological modernization during the 1990s, such as organic food products, literature (Spaargaren, 2000; 2003; 2006; Spaargaren green electricity schemes, or greywater-management & van Vliet, 2000; Spaargaren & Mol, 2008). systems were a direct result of environmentally aware Awareness for sustainability receives relatively less consumer demand (see, e.g., Spaargaren & van Vliet, 2000). In short, “green” consumption backed up by

7 awareness campaigns, rather than reductions in ab- According to Weber et al. (2008), Chinese emission levels dou- bled from 2002 to 2007.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

23

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

solute consumption levels, is viewed as central to support environmental reform. Therefore, increasing thwarting environmental threats.8 participation is often presented in terms of creating Ecological modernization does not challenge the legitimacy. Such forms of engagement are said to traditional growth model in the same way as the UN allow societies to build consensus about the legiti- documents. The latter includes calls for significant macy of collective political choices such as reducing reductions in consumption, encouragement of spir- consumption and accepting ecotaxes (Baker, 2006) itual development, critique of socioeconomic norms, and allow a wide range of groups to resolve potential concern for social justice, and engagement with the developmental conflicts (Toke et al. 2008). idea of “limits to growth.” Furthermore, while a key However, the link between increased participa- UN document, the Aalborg Charter, suggests that tion and environmentally benign outcomes can be quality of life should be decoupled from “maximizing problematic (Jordan, 2008). Certain participating consumption,” the literature on ecological moderni- groups have more power than others and may domi- zation does not generally embrace the promotion of nate policy-making processes to promote their own nonmaterial conceptions of happiness. Therefore, the ends in ways that undermine environmental goals ecomodernist approach is far less radical. In this (Meadowcroft & Lafferty, 1996; Baker, 2006). context, policy approaches may be examined to as- Countless examples from the literature illustrate how sess 1) a commitment to designing and implementing business groups, frequently supported by the state, programs of ESD through the formal and informal often use their considerable resources to thwart envi- education sectors, and 2) the extent to which ESD ronmental goals (Keohane, 1998; Benton, 2002). programs challenge the traditional growth paradigm, Furthermore, correlations between diffusing power to including the promotion of nonmaterial conceptions the local level and achieving environmental goals are of happiness. also problematic. For example, Toke et al. (2008) point to evidence that regional/local planning systems Participation that allow for citizen participation have in some cases Participation is a critical concept in SD dis- hindered the development of wind power in the UK. course. In terms of policy, it refers to the goal of in- On the basis of such outcomes, some observers con- cluding as many social groups as possible in tend that “equally strong arguments can be made decision-making processes. This approach is justified against widespread public involvement” in environ- on the basis that benefits accrue to both citizen and mental planning decisions (see, e.g., Connelly, 2007). state. By joining in participatory processes, individu- In light of such qualifications, contemporary per- als and groups can enhance their social inclusion. In spectives tend to advocate for a “smart mix” of a addition, the participation of more social groups in- strong state and stakeholder participation (Baker, creases the likelihood that civil society will deem 2009). For stakeholders to operate on a level playing government policy legitimate. By including a range field, funding must be made available to less power- of voices, increased public engagement promotes ful groups to ensure they have a genuine capacity to social cohesion and social sustainability (Goodland, participate fully, not merely in a “token” way 2002; Chan & Lee, 2008; Cuthill, 2009; Dempsey et (Connaughton et al. 2008; Amajirionwu & Barlett, al. 2011). Numerous observers also view participa- 2009). Environmental decision-making processes tion as important for promoting environmental goals; need to incorporate mechanisms that require planning furthermore, policy objectives in international docu- to meaningfully reflect the needs of future genera- ments point to the need for governments to engage tions. Accordingly, policy approaches should be ex- with civil society to achieve environmental sustain- amined to assess the extent to which views and pref- ability (WCED, 1987; UNCED, 1992; ESCTC, 1994; erences of weaker groups, including future genera- WSSD, 2002; ODPM, 2005; CEU, 2006). The eco- tions, are reflected in ultimate decisions. logical modernization literature also widely articu- lates the need for broadening the participatory base Social Cohesion (Mol, 2000; Mol & Spaargaren, 2002), although Social cohesion is a salient concept in social some proponents of this approach are viewed as policy discourse and debates; that the OECD (2009) “stronger” than others (Hajer, 1995; Christoff, 1996; lists it as one of four key themes in its social indicator Dryzek, 2005; Howes et al. 2009). set of 2009 indicates its centrality. Within SD dis- The underlying premise here is that if people are course, the promotion of social cohesion as a policy involved in decision making, they are more likely to objective appears to occupy a particularly important place in the social sustainability literature and EU SD

8 policy. It receives less treatment in UN documents While Mol & Spaargaren (2004) dispute this point, it is generally and is ignored in ecological modernization literature. held that ecological modernization is hostile to strategies that entail reductions in consumption. The meaning of social cohesion is variously defined.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

24

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

It has been linked to such policy objectives as pro- gories. First, policies and initiatives exist which sim- moting happiness/well-being; minimizing social ultaneously promote social cohesion and environ- strife; reducing crime; promoting interpersonal trust; mental objectives (win-win). For example, infra- and combating suicide, bullying, and antisocial be- structure may be designed to place essential welfare havior (OECD, 2009). The concept of social cohesion and leisure services in local areas (Dempsey et al. has become central to EU policy in general and EU 2011). The reduction of commuting distances to work SD policy in particular (Eurostat, 2005; 2007; reduces CO2 emissions and frees up time for more ODPM, 2005; CEU, 2006). In fact, the term “social community participation (Putnam, 2000; Schor, cohesion” in EU SD documents appears to be a sur- 2010). Initiatives such as “Tidy Towns” competitions rogate for the social pillar. That is, these reports tend and “community cleanups” increase opportunities for to refer to the three pillars of SD in terms of eco- social interaction while simultaneously promoting nomic growth, environmental protection, and social environmental integrity (Department of Environment, cohesion (see, e.g., Eurostat, 2007). However, none Heritage, and Local Government, 2007). In addition, of the EU SD documents reviewed for this article “transition towns” initiatives involve local commu- provide a definition of social cohesion and no EU SD nities coming together to design programs that seek indicators are directly linked to it. In general, EU SD to protect them from the ill effects of climate change documents establish few clear policy objectives re- and , thus promoting social interaction and lated to social cohesion. An exception is the Bristol environmental objectives simultaneously (Brangwyn Accord which links social cohesion to policy by & Hopkins, 2008). Community groups have a major urging local authorities “to promote a mix of popula- role to play in locally based climate change adapta- tions, non-segregated areas, accessibility and safety, tion strategies, such as responses to flooding and the and the development of opportunity, and facilitate the formulation and implementation of heat plans integration of distressed urban areas” (ODPM, (Murphy et al. 2012). 2005).9 Second, environmental factors pose threats to so- According to several commentators, social cohe- cial cohesion. For example, considerable scope exists sion is central to the concept of social sustainability for conflict over access to food, water, and fuel as a (Jörissen et al. 1999; Goodland, 2002; Omann & result of climate change and fossil-fuel depletion Spangenberg, 2002; Munasinghe, 2007; Chan & Lee, (see, e.g., Sanchez, 2000; Brown et al. 2007). UNEP 2008; Cuthill, 2009; Dempsey et al. 2011). This liter- (2007) cites the conflict in Darfur as empirical evi- ature represents a welcome improvement on EU SD dence in support of this link. The predicted influx of documents in that it suggests clearer policy objectives climate refugees into Europe from Africa (Brown et and links social cohesion to the need to foster civic al. 2007; Carnegie UK, 2009) or from Central and participation in public affairs (Omann & South America (Schwartz & Randall, 2003) also pre- Spangenberg, 2002); to strengthen community net- sents challenges to social cohesion. The diversion of works and reduce conflicts (Munasinghe, 2007); to resources away from welfare provision to combat the promote tolerance, solidarity, and integration effects of climate change may also cause considera- (Jörissen et al. 1999); to foster a shared sense of so- ble social tensions (Gough et al. 2008). Policy objec- cial purpose (Baker, 2006); and to combat cultural tives therefore refer to initiatives that combat the intolerance (Cuthill, 2009). Dempsey et al. (2011) kinds of environmental conditions that promote so- link social cohesion to the concept of “sustainability cial disharmony or upheaval. As such, policy ap- of community” and outline five interrelated and proaches may be assessed on the basis of four com- measurable dimensions: social interaction/social net- mitments: 1) to infrastructure planning that concur- works in the community, participation in collective rently promotes social integration and environmental groups and networks in the community, community sustainability, 2) to the promotion of social activities stability, pride/sense of place, and safety and secu- that have an environmental focus, 3) to the develop- rity. Policy objectives related to social cohesion ment of “transition towns” or initiatives of a similar therefore appear to be focused on creating opportuni- nature, and 4) to combating the kinds of environ- ties that promote harmonious coexistence or, at least, mental conditions that cause civic strife. combat the potential for civic strife. Of the four concepts in this framework, social Conclusion cohesion is most weakly connected to environmental imperatives. The links that do exist fall into two cate- While the social pillar of SD is relatively unex- plored territory, some of the work highlighted above

9 suggests that a broad understanding is emerging re- The Bristol Accord is an EU document that outlines what mem- garding key concepts and policy objectives. This ber states deem to be the chief characteristics of sustainable com- munities. awareness is rooted in social policy discourse and has

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

25

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development been transposed onto the social sustainability dis- ropean Society for Ecological Economics. June 29–July 2, course, work that represents a major contribution to Ljubljana. Baker, S., Kousis, M., Richardson, D., & Young, S. 1997. The our appreciation of the social pillar. Politics of Sustainable Development: Theory, Policy and This article argues that these social pillars may Practice within the European Union. New York: Routledge. be expanded to incorporate a stronger emphasis on Barron, L. & Gauntlett, E. 2002. Housing and Sustainable Com- environmental, international, and intergenerational munities Indicators Report: Project Stage 1 Report Model of Social Sustainability. Perth: Western Australian Council of dimensions and that this enlargement would also Social Service. extend to SDIs. This contention is based on an under- Barry, B. 1993. Intergenerational justice in energy policy. In M. standing of SD as a holistic concept requiring simul- Fisk (Ed.), Justice. pp. 223–237. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: taneous recognition of these dimensions. Existing Humanities Press. Barry, B. 1999. Sustainability and intergenerational justice. In A. social pillars focus on promoting welfare at national Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environ- levels and the environmental implications of such mental Sustainability and Social Justice. pp. 93–117. New provision need to be clearly articulated. York: Oxford University Press. While the social sustainability literature appears Barry, J. 1998. Social policy and social movements: ecology and social policy. In N. Ellison & C. Pierson (Eds.), Develop- to have broadly answered the question of “what is the ments in British Social Policy. pp. 218–233. New York: social pillar of SD,” a host of supplementary ques- Macmillan. tions emerge under the remittance of the social pillar. Barton, H. 2000. Conflicting perceptions of neighbourhood. In H. These questions form the basis of the social pillar Barton (Ed.), Sustainable Communities: The Potential for Eco-Neighbourhoods. pp. 3–18. London: Earthscan. framework proposed in this article. For example, how Beckerman, W. 1995. Small is Stupid: Blowing the Whistle on the can the environmental impact of current welfare pro- Greens. London: Duckworth. vision be minimized? How might the goal of global Beckerman, W. 1999. Sustainable development and our obligations equity be made compatible with environmental ob- to future generations. In A. Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and Fu- turity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social jectives? How might education systems be altered to Justice. pp. 71–92. New York: Oxford University Press. resocialize citizens for sustainability? How might Benton, T. 2002. Social theory and ecological politics: reflexive participative mechanisms incorporate the aspirations modernisation or green socialism? In R. Dunlap, F. Buttel, P. of vulnerable groups, current and future? The an- Dickens, & A. Gijswijt (Eds.), Sociological Theory and the Environment: Classical Foundations, Contemporary In- swers to these questions can form the basis of an sights. pp. 252–273. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. alternative set of social indicators that could serve to Brangwyn, B. & Hopkins, R. 2008. Transition Initiatives Primer: supplement existing “social pillars” in ways that em- Becoming a Transition Town, City, District, Village, Com- brace environmental, international, and intergenera- munity, or Even Island. Devon, UK: Transitions Network. http://www.transitionnetwork.org/sites/default/files/Transitio tional dimensions. This framework could be used to nInitiativesPrimer%283%29.pdf. analyze how different states and organizations con- Bramley, G., Dempsey, N., Power, S., & Brown, C. 2006. What is ceive of the social pillar and the extent to which so- “Social Sustainability” and How Do Our Existing Urban cial and environmental dynamics have been linked. Forms Perform in Nurturing It? Planning Research Conference. April 5–7, Bartlett School of Planning, University College London. Bramley, G. & Power, S. 2009. Urban form and social sustain- References ability: the role of density and house type. Environment and Planning B 36(1):30–48. Agyeman, J. & Evans, B. 2004. “Just sustainability:” the emerging Brown, O., Hammill, A., & McCleman, R. 2007. Climate change discourse of environmental justice in Britain? The Geo- as the “new” security threat: implications for Africa. Interna- graphical Journal 170(2):155–164. tional Affairs 83(6):1141–1154. Amajirionwu, M. & Barlett, J. 2009. Sub-national Sustainable Bryant, B. (Ed.). 1995. Environmental Justice: Issues, Policies, Development Indicators. Briefing paper prepared for Comhar and Solutions. Covelo, CA: Island Press. SDC. Dublin: Comhar Sustainable Development Council. Bullard, R. 1999. Dismantling environmental racism in the USA. Andersen, M. & Massa, I. 2000. Ecological modernisation: origins, Local Environment 4(1):5–19. dilemmas and future directions. Journal of Environmental Bullard, R. 2000. Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class and Environ- Planning and Policy 2(4):337–345. mental Quality. 3rd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Backstrand, K. & Lovbrand, E. 2006. Climate governance beyond Cahill, M. 1991. The greening of social policy? In N. Manning 2010: competing discourses of green governmentality, eco- (Ed.), Social Policy Review 1990–91. New York: Longman. logical modernisation and civic . In M. Cahill, M. 2001. The Environment and Social Policy. London: Pettenger (Ed.), The Social Construction of Climate Change: Routledge. Power, Knowledge, Norms, Discourse. pp. 123–148. Alder- Carnegie UK. 2009. Climate Change and Resource Scarcity: A shot: Ashgate Discussion Paper for Non-environmental Civil Society Baker, S. 2006. Sustainable Development. New York: Routledge. Groups. Fife, UK: Carnegie UK Trust. Baker, S. 2007. Sustainable development as symbolic commit- Casula Vifell, A. & Soneryd, L. 2012. Organizing matters: how ment: declaratory politics and the seductive appeal of eco- “the social dimension” gets lost in sustainability projects. logical modernisation in the European Union. Environmental Sustainable Development 20(1):18–27. Politics 16(2):297–317. Chan, E. & Lee, K. 2008. Critical factors for improving social Baker, S. 2009. In Pursuit of Sustainable Development: A Govern- sustainability of urban renewal projects. Social Indicators ance Perspective. Eighth International Conference of the Eu- Research 85(2):243–256.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

26

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

Christoff, P. 1996. Ecological modernisation, ecological moderni- Dryzek, J. 2008. The ecological crisis of the welfare state. Journal ties. Environmental Politics 5(3):476–500. of European Social Policy 18(4):325–344. Colantonio, A. 2007. Social Sustainability: An Exploratory Analy- Eurostat. 2005. Measuring Progress Towards a More Sustainable sis of its Definition, Assessment Methods, Metrics and Tools: Europe: Sustainable Development Indicators in the Euro- Best Practice from Urban Renewal in the EU. Oxford: Ox- pean Union. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of ford Brooks University. the European Communities. Collier, U. 1997. Energy and Environment in the European Union. Eurostat. 2007. Measuring Progress Towards a More Sustainable Aldershot: Ashgate. Europe: 2007 Monitoring Report of the EU Sustainable De- Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 2001. A Sus- velopment Strategy. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publi- tainable Europe for a Better World: A European Union cations of the European Communities. Strategy for Sustainable Development. Brussels: CEC. European Sustainable Cities and Towns Charter (ESCTC). 1994. Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 2004. EU The Aalborg Charter. Aalborg, Denmark. http://ec.europa.eu/ Member State Experiences with Sustainable Development In- environment/urban/pdf/aalborg_charter.pdf. dicators. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the Faber, D. 1993. Environment Under Fire: Imperialism and the European Communities. Ecological Crisis in Central America. New York: Monthly Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 2009. Main- Review Press. streaming Sustainable Development in EU Policies: 2009 Faber, D. (Ed.) 1998. The Struggle for Ecological Democracy: Review of the European Union Strategy for Sustainable De- Environmental Justice Movements in the United States. New velopment. Brussels: CEC. York: Guildford Press. Combat Poverty Agency (CPA). 2008. Submission to the Commis- Faber, D. & McCarthy, D. 2003. Neo-liberalism, globalization and sion on Taxation: Proposal for Recycling of Revenue from a the struggle for ecological democracy: linking sustainability to Combat Fuel Poverty. Dublin: CPA. and environmental justice. In J. Agyeman, R. Bullard, & B. Connaughton, B., Quinn, B., & Rees, N. 2008. Rhetoric or reality? Evans (Eds.), Just Sustainabilities: Development in an Une- Responding to the challenge of sustainable development and qual World. pp. 39–63. London: Earthscan. new governance patterns in Ireland. In S. Baker & K. Fahey, T. 1995. Role of social indicators. In F. Convery & J. Eckerberg (Eds.), In Pursuit of Sustainable Development: Feehan (Eds.), Assessing Sustainability in Ireland. pp. 33–38. New Governance Practices at the Sub-national Level in Eu- Dublin: The Environmental Institute UCD. rope. pp. 145–169. New York: Routledge. Ferris, J. 1993. Ecological versus social rationality: can there be Connelly, S. 2007. Mapping sustainable development as a con- green social policies? In A. Dobson & P. Loucardie (Eds.), tested concept. Local Environment 12(3):259–278. The Politics of Nature. pp. 145–60. London: Routledge. Council of European Union (CEU). 2006. Renewed European Fitzpatrick, T. 1998. The implications of ecological thought for Union Sustainable Development Strategy. Brussels: Euro- social welfare. Critical Social Policy 18(54):5–26. pean Council. Fitzpatrick, T. 2001. Making welfare for future generations. Social Cuthill M. 2009. Strengthening the social in sustainable develop- Policy and Administration 35(5):506–520. ment: developing a conceptual framework for social sustain- Fitzpatrick, T. & Cahill, M. 2002. Environment and Welfare: To- ability in a rapid urban growth region in Australia. Sustain- wards a Green Social Policy. New York: Palgrave Macmil- able Development 18(6):362–373. lan. Davies, A. 2006. Environmental justice as subtext or omission: Frijns, J., Phoung, P., & Mol, A. 2000. Ecological modernisation examining discourses of anti-incineration campaigning in theory and industrialising economies: the case of Vietnam. Ireland. Geoforum 37(5):708–724. Environmental Politics 9(1):257–292. Davies, A. 2009. Does sustainability count? Environmental policy, Gardiner, S. 2006. A perfect moral storm: climate change, inter- sustainable development and the governance of grassroots generational ethics and the problem of moral corruption. En- sustainability enterprise in Ireland. Sustainable Development vironmental Values 15(3):397–413. 17(3):174–182. George, V. & Wilding, P. 1994. Welfare and Ideology. London: Dean, H. 2001. Green citizenship. Social Policy and Administra- Harvester Wheatsheaf. tion 35(5):490–503. George, V. & Wilding, P. 1999. British Society and Social Wel- Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Powers, S., & Brown, C. 2011. The fare: Towards a Sustainable Society. New York: St. Martin’s social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban Press. social sustainability. Sustainable Development 19(5):289– Goodland, R. 2002. Sustainability: human, social, economic and 300. environmental. In T. Munn (Ed), Encyclopedia of Global En- Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government. vironmental Change. pp. 488–489. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. 2005. Sustainable Rural Housing: Guidelines for Planning Gough, I., Meadowcroft, J., Dryzek, J., Gerhards, J., Lengfeld, H., Authorities. Dublin: Stationery Office. http://www.irish Marandya, A., & Ortiz, R. 2008. JESP symposium: climate spatialstrategy.ie/Rural%20Planning%20Guidelines%201350 change and social policy. Journal of European Social Policy 5.pdf. 18(4):325–344. Dixon, T. & Colantonio, A. 2008. Submission to EIB Consultation Greenpeace. 2002. Exporting Pollution: Double Standards in UK on the Draft EIB Statement of Environmental and Social Energy Exports. London: Greenpeace. Principles and Standards. Oxford: Oxford Institute for Sus- Grist, N. 2008. Positioning climate change in sustainable develop- tainable Development. ment discourse. Journal of International Development 20(6): Dobson, A. 2003a. Social justice and environmental sustainability: 783–803. ne’er the twain shall meet. In J. Agyeman, R. Bullard, & B. Hajer, M. 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Eco- Evans (Eds.), Just Sustainabilities: Development in an Une- logical Modernisation and the Policy Process. New York: qual World. pp. 83–95. London: Earthscan. Clarendon Press. Dobson, A. 2003b. Citizenship and the Environment. New York: Hansen, J. 2006. Can We Still Avoid Dangerous Human-made Oxford University Press. Climate Change? Presentation February 10, New School Dobson, A. 2007. Environmental citizenship: towards sustainable University, New York. http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2006/ development. Sustainable Development 15(6):276–285. NewSchool_20060210.pdf. Dryzek, J. 2005. The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Dis- Harvey, D. 1996. Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. courses. New York: Oxford University Press. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

27

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

Hofrichter, R. (Ed.). 1993. Toxic Struggles: The Theory and Prac- Meadowcroft, J. & Lafferty, W. 1996. Democracy and the Envi- tice of Environmental Justice. Philadelphia: New Society ronment: Problems and Prospects. Northampton, MA: Publishers. Edward Elgar. Howes, M., McKenzie, M., Gleeson, B., Gray, R., Burns, J., & Miller, D. 1999. Social justice and environmental goods. In A. Daniels, P. 2009. A Preliminary Assessment of the Potential Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environ- to Adapt Ecological Modernisation to the Australian Context. mental Sustainability and Social Justice. pp. 151–172. New Brisbane: Griffith University. York: Oxford University Press. Huby, M. 1998. Social Policy and the Environment. Buckingham: Moffat, I. 1996. Sustainable Development: Principles, Analysis Open University Press. and Policies. New York: Parthenon. Humphrey, M. 2002. The ideologies of green welfare. In T. Mol, A. 1999. Ecological modernisation and the environmental Fitzpatrick & M. Cahill (Eds.), Environment and Welfare: transformation of Europe: between national variations and Towards a Green Social Policy. pp. 43–60. New York: Pal- common denominators. Journal of Environmental Policy and grave McMillan. Planning 1(2):167–181. Irvine, S. & Ponton, A. 1988. A Green Manifesto: Policies for a Mol, A. 2000. The environmental movement in an era of ecologi- Green Future. London: MacDonald. cal modernisation. Geoforum 31(1):45–56. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 1980. Mol, A. & Spaargaren, G. 2000. Ecological modernisation theory World Conservation Strategy. New York: United Nations. in debate: a review. Environmental Politics 9(1):17–49. Jordan, A. 2008. The governance of sustainable development: Mol, A. & Spaargaren, G. 2002. Ecological modernisation and the taking stock and looking forward. Environment and Planning modern state. In A. Mol & F. Buttel (Eds.), The Environmen- C 26(1):17–33. tal State Under Pressure. pp. 33–52. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Jordan, A. & Lenschow, A. 2008. Integrating the environment for Mol, A. & Spaargaren, G. 2004. Ecological modernisation and sustainable development: an introduction. In A. Jordan & A. consumption: a reply. Society and Natural Resources Lenschow (Eds.), Innovation in Environmental Policy? Inte- 17(3):261–265. grating the Environment for Sustainability. pp. 3–23. North- Munasinghe, M. 2007. Sustainable Development Triangle. http:// ampton, MA: Edward Elgar. www.eoearth.org/article/Sustainable_development_triangle. Jordan, A., Wurzel, R., Zito, A., & Brückner, L. 2003. Policy December 2, 2012. innovation or muddling through? New environmental policy Murphy, K., Irwin, A., & O’Mahony, T. 2012. Towards Climate instruments in the UK. Environmental Politics 12(1):179– Justice: A Strategy Guide for the Community Sector in Re- 200. sponding to Climate Change. EPA Climate Change Research Jörissen, J., Kopfmüller, J., Brandl, V., & Paetau, M. 1999. An Programme 2007–2013. Wexford: Environmental Protection Integrated Concept for Efficient Development. Karlsruhe: FZ Agency. Karlsruhe Research Reports. Nilsson, M., Pallemaerts, M., & Von Homeyer, I. 2009. Interna- Karlsson, R. 2009. Individual Guilt or Collective Progressive tional regimes and environmental policy integration: intro- Action? Challenging the Strategic Potential of Environmen- ducing the special issue. International Environmental tal Citizenship Theory. International Studies Association. Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 9(4):337–350. February 15–18, New York. Norton, B. 1999. Ecology and opportunity: intergenerational equity Keohane, K. 1998. Reflexive modernisation or systematically and sustainable options. In A. Dobson (Ed.), Fairness and distorted communications: an analysis of an environmental Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social protection hearing. Irish Journal of Sociology 8(1):71–92. Justice. pp. 118–150. New York: Oxford University Press. Lafferty, W. 2002. Adapting Government Practice to the Goals of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Sustainable Development: Improving Governance for Sus- (OECD). 2008a. Key Environmental Indicators. Paris: OECD tainable Development. Paris: Organization for Economic Co- Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development operation and Development. (OECD). 2008b. Measuring Sustainable Development: Re- Lafferty, W. & Hovden, E. 2003. Environmental policy integra- port on the Joint UNECE/OECD/Eurostat Working Group on tion: towards an analytical framework. Environmental Poli- Statistics for Sustainable Development. New York: United tics 12(3):1–22. Nations. Langhelle, O. 2000. Why ecological modernisation and sustainable Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development development should not be conflated. Journal of Environ- (OECD). 2009. Society at a Glance 2009–OECD Social Indi- mental Policy and Planning 2(4):303–322. cators. http://www.oecd.org/els/social/indicators/SAG. Feb- Lenschow, A. 1997. Variation in EC environmental policy inte- ruary 14, 2010. gration: agency push within complex institutional structures. Office of the [UK] Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM). 2005. Bristol Journal of European Public Policy 4(1):109–127. Accord: Conclusions of Ministerial Informal on Sustainable Lenschow, A. (Ed.). 2002. Environmental Policy Integration: Communities in Europe UK Presidency. London: ODPM. Greening Sectoral Policies in Europe. London: Earthscan. http://www.eib.org/attachments/jessica_bristol_accord_sustai Liberatore, A. 1997. Sustainable development and EU policy nable_communities.pdf. making. In S. Baker, M. Kousis, D. Richardson, & S. Young Omann, I. & Spangenberg, J. 2002. Assessing Social Sustain- (Eds.), The Politics of Sustainable Development: Theory, ability: The Social Dimension of Sustainability in a Socio- Policy and Practice Within the European Union. pp. 107– Economic Scenario. Seventh Biennial Conference of the In- 126. New York: Routledge. ternational Society for Ecological Economics. March 6–9, Littig, B. & Griessler, E. 2005. Social sustainability: a catchword Sousse, Tunisia. between political pragmatism and social theory. International Pearce, D., Markandya, A., & Barbier, E. 1989. Blueprint for a Journal of Sustainable Development 8(1–2):65–79. Green Economy. London: Earthscan. Liverman, D. 2009. Conventions of climate change: constructions Persson, A. 2004. Environmental Policy Integration: An Introduc- of danger and the dispossession of the atmosphere. Journal of tion. Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute. Historical Geography 35(2):279–296. Puckett, J., Byster, L., Westervelt, S., Gutierrez, R., Davis, S., Meadowcroft, J. 2005. From welfare state to ecostate. In J. Barry Hussain, A., & Dutta, M. 2002. Exporting Harm: The High- & R. Eckersley (Eds.), The State and the Global Ecological Tech Trashing of Asia. Seattle/San Jose: Basil Action Net- Crisis. pp. 3–24. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. work/Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition. Meadowcroft, J. 2008. From welfare state to environmental state. Purvis, M. & Grainger, A. 2004. Exploring Sustainable Develop- Journal of European Social Policy 18(4):325–344. ment: Geographical Perspectives. London: Earthscan.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

28

Murphy: Social Pillar of Sustainable Development

Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of Turkington, R. & Sangster, K. 2006. From housing to social mix: American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster. housing’s contribution to social sustainability. Town and Redclift, M. 1993. Sustainable development: needs, values, rights. Country Planning 75(6):184–185. Environmental Values 2(1):3–20. Tremmel, J. (Ed.). 2006. Handbook of Intergenerational Justice. Rees, W. 2008. Human nature, eco-footprints and environmental Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. injustice. Local Environment 13(8):685–701. United Nations Commission for Sustainable Development Rowley, J. & Holmberg, J. 1995. Stabilizing population: the big- (UNCSD). 1996. Indicators for Sustainable Development, gest challenge. In J. Kirby, P. O’Keefe, & L. Timberlake Framework and Methodology. http://esl.jrc.it/envind/un_ (Eds.), The Earthscan Reader in Sustainable Development. meths/UN_ME_c.htm. January 29, 2012. pp. 115–124. London: Earthscan. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development Sanchez, P. 2000. Linking climate change research with food secu- (UNCED). 1992. Documents of the Rio Conference on Envi- rity and poverty reduction in the tropics. Ecosystems & Envi- ronment and Development. New York: United Nations. ronment 82(1–3):371–383. United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs Schwartz, P. & Randall, D. 2003. An Abrupt Climate Change (UNDESA) 2001. Indicators of Sustainable Development: Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Se- Framework and Methodologies. New York: United Nations. curity. San Francisco, CA: Global Business Network. United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs http://www.gbn.com/consulting/article_details.php?id=53. (UNDESA) 2007. Indicators of Sustainable Development: Schor, J. 2010. Plentitude: The New Economics of True Wealth. Guidelines and Methodologies. New York: United Nations. New York: Penguin Press. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Scott, S. 2007. Submission on the Report of the Department of 1998. The Aarhus Convention. http://ec.europa.eu/ Environment, Heritage and Local Government: Ireland’s environment/aarhus/. January 29, 2012. Pathway to Kyoto Compliance—A Review of the National United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Climate Change Strategy. Dublin: Economic and Social Re- (UNESCO). 2004. United Nations Decade for Sustainable search Institute. Development 2005–2014 Draft International Implementation Singer, P. 2006. Ethics and climate change: a commentary on Scheme. Paris: UNESCO. MacCracken, Toman and Gardiner. Environmental Values 15 United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 1972. The Stock- (3):415–422. holm Conference on the Human Environment. Spaargaren, G. 2000. Ecological modernisation theory and domes- http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?D tic consumption. Journal of Environmental Policy and Plan- ocumentID=97. January 29, 2012. ning 2(4):323–325. United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 2007. Sudan: Post- Spaargaren, G. 2003. Sustainable consumption: a theoretical and Conflict Environmental Assessment. Nairobi: UNEP. environmental policy perspective. Society and Natural Re- Vavik, T. & Keitsch, M. 2010. Exploring relationships between sources 16(8):687–701. universal design and social sustainable development: some Spaargaren, G. 2006. The Ecological Modernisation of Social methodological aspects to the debate on the sciences of sus- Practices at the Consumption Junction. Sustainable Con- tainability. Sustainable Development 18(5):295–305. sumption and Society International Working Conference. Weber, C., Peters, G., Guan, D., & Hubacek, K. 2008. The contri- June 2–3, Madison, Wisconsin. bution of Chinese exports to climate change. Energy Policy Spangenberg, J. 2007. Towards an Integrated Concept of Sustain- 36(9):3572–3577. ability. Sustainable Development Planning Conference. No- Wissenburg, M. 1999. An extension of the Rawlsian savings prin- vember 30, Goethe Institute, Riga. ciple of liberal theories of justice in general. In A. Dobson Spaargaren, G. & Mol, A. 2008. Greening global consumption: (Ed.), Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sus- redefining politics and authority. Global Environmental tainability and Social Justice. pp. 173–198. New York: Ox- Change 18(3):350–359. ford University Press. Spaargaren, G. & van Vliet, B. 2000. Lifestyles, consumption and World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). the environment: the ecological modernisation of domestic 1987. Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University consumption. Environmental Politics 9(1):50–76. Press. Stern, N. 2006. Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change, World Meteorological Organisation (WMO). 2009. Greenhouse Executive Summary. New York: Cambridge University Press. Gas Bulletin: The State of Greenhouse Gases in the Atmos- Thin, N. 2002. Social Progress and Sustainable Development. phere Using Global Observations Through 2008. Geneva: London: ITDG Publishing. WMO. Thin, N., Lockhart, C., & Yaron, G. 2002. Conceptualising So- World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). 2002. Doc- cially Sustainable Development. London: Department for In- uments from the World Summit on Sustainable Develop- ternational Development and World Bank. ment. http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/WSSD_POI Trainer, F. 1998. The significance of the limits to growth for the _PD/English/POI_PD.htm. January 29, 2012. discussion of social policy. International Journal of Sociol- Wright, J. & Kurian, J. 2009. Ecological modernization versus ogy and Social Policy 18(11–12):21–46. sustainable development: the case of genetic modification Toke, D., Bruekers, S., & Wolsink, M. 2008. Wind power deploy- regulation in New Zealand. Sustainable Development 18(6): ment outcomes: how can we account for the differences? Re- 398–412. newable and Review 12(4):1129–1147.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

29

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Growing the social: alternative agrofood networks and social sustainability in the urban ethical foodscape

Katerina Psarikidou & Bronislaw Szerszynski Department of Sociology, ESRC Centre for the Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics, Lancaster University, Bowland North, Lancaster LA1 4YT United Kingdom (email: [email protected]; [email protected])

Agrofood practices have been an obvious domain in which to implement sustainability. Yet, despite the fact that food carries a dense set of social meanings and functions, sustainability’s social dimension has been relatively neglected in studies of sustainable food initiatives. In this article, we draw on research carried out for the European project “Fa- cilitating Alternative Agro-food Networks” (FAAN), and describe various ways in which alternative agrofood networks in the city of Manchester manifest aspects of social sustainability and the “moral economy,” including relations of soli- darity and justice with proximate and distant others, concern for land and for the global environment, social inclusion of the disadvantaged, and the reskilling of everyday life. However, we also argue for a different way of conceiving social sustainability, which involves not simply adding another “pillar” to the dominating dyad of the economic and the environmental, but subjecting the whole notion of sustainability to a sociomaterial turn—one that questions the onto- logical separation of economy, environment, and society. We show how this approach involves conceiving the urban “ethical foodscape” as a “moral taskscape” in which people dwell and move, interacting with soil, food, and each other through situated practices involving skill and judgment.

KEYWORDS: sustainable development, urban agriculture, food, metropolitan areas, social values,

Introduction health inequalities as measured by geography and social class. Since the Brundtland Report (WCED, 1987) Against this background, diverse organizations brought to prominence the notion of sustainable de- and actors from different backgrounds and interests velopment, agrofood practices have been an obvious, in the agrofood sector have advanced, frequently in a if challenging, domain for implementing sustain- prefigurative way, their own visions of an alternative ability. The “semantic plasticity” of the concept has sustainable agrofood model. Alternative agrofood allowed it to be adopted by diverse actors, from networks (AAFNs) is a broad term used to describe community supported agriculture initiatives to multi- initiatives that embody alternatives to the conven- national corporations (Kloppenburg et al. 2000). tional industrialized, global agrofood system However, most of these attempts and practices aim, (Murdoch et al. 2000; Renting et al. 2003). Concepts at best, to balance the economic and environmental such as relocalization, respatialization, resocializa- dimensions of sustainability, and only to do so as tion, and reconnection have described the different conceived in a narrow way. Thus, their goal might, qualities of the possible alternative agrofood para- for example, be an agriculture that does not deplete digm that such networks might prefigure (Renting et finite resources or disrupt natural biological pro- al. 2003). Yet, AAFNs appear to enact alternatives cesses, while at the same time offering competitive not only to unsustainable agrofood practices, but also advantage. to the dominant understanding of sustainable agro- In this way, despite the fact that food carries a food practices. They thus further demonstrate sus- dense set of social meanings and functions, the social tainability’s interpretive flexibility, by offering a dif- dimension of sustainability has been relatively ne- ferent approach to sustainable agrofood practices, one glected in the mainstream understanding of sustain- that avoids narrow, desocialized understandings of able food initiatives. This neglect has not helped to ecological and economic value (Feenstra, 2002). counter the dominance of industrialized agrofood A number of studies have examined the sustain- system and governance patterns, which have impeded ability potential of AAFNs, such as those involved in social sustainability goals by providing few opportu- organic and (e.g., Marsden et al. 1999; nities for meaningful public involvement in food Ilbery & Maye, 2005; Iles, 2005; Pretty et al. 2005; production and policy making and by exacerbating Seyfang, 2006). However, this work tends to focus on

 2012 Psarikidou & Szerszynski Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 30

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

the potential of AAFNs for ecological sustainability, ing dyad of the ecological and the economic, but re- for example, by measuring “food miles,” carbon in- quires subjecting the whole notion of sustainability to puts, and so forth, while others criticize the inade- a sociomaterial turn that takes us beyond an ontologi- quacy of the AAFNs to “take care of the social as- cal separation of economy, environment, and society. pects of sustainability” (Allen et al. 1991), to move beyond power asymmetries and socioeconomic ine- Sustainability, Social Sustainability and qualities, and to integrate social justice and broad- Agrofood Practices based equity considerations (Allen et al. 1991; Allen & Wilson, 2008; Brown & Getz, 2008; Getz et al. The Brundtland Commission’s report, Our 2008). Moreover, most of the studies prioritize Common Future, challenged the traditional under- producer-led rural agrofood networks and the social standing of development by insisting on the need to issues that primarily affect rural actors and residents. take account of the effects of economic development In so doing, the work neglects ways in which sustain- on the ability of society and nature to reproduce able agrofood networks go beyond rural settings to themselves. Sustainability has been criticized as affect and involve urban populations and metropoli- vague and underspecified, but nevertheless has pro- tan regions where the growing commodification and vided a discursive terrain for the formulation of im- globalization of the dominant agrofood system is aginaries that connect previously separated spheres of increasingly responsible for producing a deskilling human activity. The dominant way of conceiving the and alienation in relation to food production and multidimensional nature of sustainability has in- preparation, or even food insecurity (Koc et al. 1999; volved describing it as consisting of three independ- Wrigley, 2002). ent, but necessary, “pillars”: environmental, eco- In this article, we draw on research carried out nomic, and social. This depiction of sustainability for the European Facilitating Alternative Agro-food received an institutional endorsement at the World Networks Project (EU FAAN Project) and identify Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen in ways in which AAFNs can help to deliver social, as 1995, and was more recently underlined by the well as economic and ecological, sustainability. Our United Nations 2005 World Summit, whose Outcome analysis is primarily based in an urban setting and Document referred to the “three components of sus- highlights the social dimensions of AAFNs beyond tainable development—economic development, so- farm-level practices. We look into the ways that cial development and environmental protection—as AAFNs constitute new “ethical foodscapes,” built interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars” around the practicalities and routines of everyday (United Nations, 2005). urban life, which transform food into not only a ma- However, social sustainability has generally terial component of the food chain, but also “an ex- been seen as the weakest of the three pillars—the one pression of cumulative moral sentiment” (Little et al. which is hardest to implement and easiest to neglect. 2010). In the academic literature, it has been conceptualized Our research relies on semistructured interviews in diverse ways, underlining the theoretical difficul- with key actors in the alternative agrofood sector in ties in analytically comprehending, framing, and de- Manchester, supplemented by ethnographic observa- fining the term in a way applicable to wider sustain- tion, publicly available documents, press releases, ability projects and agendas. Ballet et al. (2003) de- and Internet sources on food relocalization and agro- fine it as “the improvement of the capabilities of food initiatives in the city. We look at a diversity of well-being (economic, social or environmental) for municipal, charitable, and grassroots initiatives, in- all, through the aspiration of equity on the one cluding small-scale retailers and producers, workers’ hand…and the transmission across the generations on cooperatives, market gardens, mobile grocers, food the other hand.” Social justice, with a special refer- and health programs, community garden projects, ence to environmental justice, is central to Agyeman organic agriculture, and schemes. We & Evans’ (2004) use of the term “just sustainability” show how alternative food systems not only carry to describe the importance of intra- and inter- economic and environmental benefits, but can also generational equity in democratic participatory pro- meet many of the criteria that have been enumerated cesses. Magis & Shinn (2009) suggest that integral to for social sustainability. Our discussion uses the po- “the social dimension of sustainability” are the four litical and economic discourse of the “moral econ- principles of human well-being, equity, democratic omy” to further understand and investigate the social government, and democratic civil society. Particu- sustainability potential of agrofood practices (Sayer, larly in an urban context, social sustainability has 2000). But we also argue that understanding social been conceived as requiring the development of sus- sustainability as a lived reality involves not simply tainable community (Dempsey et al. 2011), involving adding another, social pillar to the familiar dominat- concepts and principles such as social capital, social

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

31

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

cohesion, and social inclusion. Boström (2010) fol- biological and ecological processes (see also Allen et lows Agyeman & Evans (2004) in arguing that all the al. 1991). above descriptions of social sustainability can Douglass’s preferred third philosophy of sustain- broadly be summarized under the two dimensions of ability, which he variously describes as community, the substantive and the procedural: the social goals of holistic, or social, presents social sustainability not as sustainable development such as health, equity, and a new pillar to be added to the economic and the social cohesion, and the means to achieve those ecological, but as a whole new paradigm within goals, such as participation, empowerment, and ac- which to think about the linking of sustainability to countability. However, the lack of agreement about the ecological, the economic, and the social. He the nature of social sustainability as a separate pillar identifies two important dimensions of social sustain- has hampered its translation into policy and imple- ability, which correspond with Agyeman & Evans’ mentation (Littig & Griessler, 2005; Davidson, (2004) notions of the substantive and procedural as- 2009). Sustainable development has thus mainly been pects of social sustainability respectively. The first perceived as an environmental issue, one that in- includes justice or fairness in the relationships be- volves the integration of environmental concerns into tween community members, food sufficiency, inter- economic decision making (Lehtonen, 2004). and intragenerational equity, and protection of the The conceptual openness of sustainability as a rights of future generations to derive benefits from principle is also evident in attempts to apply it to resources (Yunlong & Smit, 1994). The second in- agriculture (Kloppenburg et al. 2000). Francis (1988) volves participation in decision making as part of a describes sustainable agriculture as a “management greater democratization of agrofood sociopolitical strategy” whose goal is to reduce input costs, mini- processes. mize environmental damage, and provide production Like Douglass, we argue for a conceptualization and profit over time. In a similar vein, Smit & of social sustainability not as a separate set of re- Smithers (1993) define the concept as referring to the quirements but as a different way of thinking about use of resources to produce food and fiber in such a sustainability as a whole—one that does not relegate way that the natural resource base is not damaged, social questions to a separate sphere. In our case, and that the basic needs of producers and consumers however, we want to argue that the very conception can be met over the long term. Others emphasize the of the social as a third “pillar” or “leg” of sustain- importance of social goods by applying the three- ability performs a problematic conceptual split be- pillar model to their definitions of sustainable agri- tween the social, the economic, and the environmen- culture. John Ikerd (1993) insists that “sustainable tal, one that encourages narrow and reductionist un- agriculture must be ecologically sound, economically derstandings of both ecology and economics. viable, and socially responsible,” while for Feenstra (1997), “sustainable agriculture refers to a system Toward a Sociomaterial Analysis of that integrates environmental health, economic prof- Sustainability itability and social and economic equity.” However, as Allen et al. (1991) comment, most of the time, In this article, we argue that the very conception sustainable agriculture initiatives succeed in chal- of the social as a third “pillar” or “leg” of sustain- lenging only “some but not all the assumptions that ability is problematic, and leads to narrow, desocial- underlie agriculture’s non-sustainable aspects, gener- ized conceptions of nature and the economy. For ex- ally neglecting questions of social justice” (see also ample, treating environmental issues as belonging to Altieri, 1988). a separate ontological realm from the social—the Taking a slightly different approach, Gordon former to be defined by the natural sciences, the latter Douglass (1984) identified three different conceptu- by the social sciences—leads to neglect of the cru- alizations of sustainability in agriculture, namely cial, yet often hidden, political work involved in de- resource sufficiency, ecological sustainability, and fining what belongs to our common world (Latour, social sustainability. While seeming to map onto the 2004). This engenders a situation where, as Davidson idea of the three pillars, Douglass’s typology identi- (2009) points out, sustainability discourse is largely fies not different dimensions of sustainability but dominated by an idea of nature that emphasizes different schools or philosophies. In his description, “equilibrium” and “stability,” which can in turn en- Douglass underlines the narrow technocratic framing courage a politics predicated on ideas of balance and of the first two models of sustainability, since the stasis rather than a radical openness to new possibili- initial one is primarily concerned with sustained yield ties (see also Marcuse, 1998). It also obscures the and long-term benefits to agricultural producers and ways in which environmental problems and their the second with the need not to violate or disrupt vital definitions are entangled with problems of social structure, such as social injustice, exclusion, and

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

32

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

gender inequality, and in ways that make problematic of which the three independent “pillars” are artificial any attempt clearly to separate them (Becker et al. abstractions. 1999). To do so, we use the idea of the “ethical food- Similarly, the separation between the economic scape,” a term suggested by Goodman et al. (2010), and the social encourages the perpetuation of the “as a way of conceptualizing and engaging critically “economism” and “productivism” of modern eco- with the processes, politics, spaces, and places of the nomic rationality (Lehtonen, 2004), so that what is praxis of ethical relationalities embedded and pro- “sustained” is typically what Karl Polanyi (1957) duced in and through the provisioning of food.” Cul- identified as the social disembeddedness of economic tural geographers have long argued that the provi- relations from social relations, and the inequalities of sioning of food in the city is amenable to spatial power and affluence that follow (Marcuse, 1998). It analysis (e.g., Bell & Valentine, 1997); the notion of can encourage a “capitalocentric” view of the econ- the ethical foodscape extends this analysis by at- omy, where capitalism is presented as a unified sys- tending to the normative dimensions of spatially situ- tem capable of colonizing the entire social space and ated practices and to relations of local and distant of subsuming economic forms and practices that care. could otherwise be scattered over a diverse economic The particular way that we use this term gives it landscape. In other words, the separation of the eco- a more sociomaterial interpretation by drawing on the nomic and the social can encourage the shrinkage of notion of the “taskscape” developed by the anthro- the economy into a singular space dominated by cap- pologist Tim Ingold to describe a spatial arrangement italist relations of production and excessively formal of practical operations conducted by skilled agents in and monetized forms of provisioning and exchange an environment. For Ingold (2000), “[e]very task (Gibson-Graham, 1996; 2006). Along these lines, the takes its meaning from its position in an ensemble of actual practice of sustainable development can also tasks, performed in series or in parallel, and usually reinforce a narrow “sustainability” imaginary, one by many people working together,” and such tasks which erases crucial aspects of its social dimensions are typically arranged spatially, like features in a and serves to reinforce capitalism’s hegemonic landscape. Each taskscape also has its own temporal- dominance. ity, its own pattern of rhythms and flows as it is pro- We thus argue that the difficulty in conceptual- gressively built up within “the current of sociality” izing and implementing social sustainability origi- (Ingold, 2000). In our analysis, the ethical foodscape nates in part from its very identification as a separate of urban local food networks is also a “moral pillar. Instead, we suggest that an understanding of taskscape” in which their members dwell and move, social sustainability requires not the notion of a third interacting with soil, food, and each other. pillar, but a sociomaterial turn in the whole way that This way of thinking about social sustainability we think about sustainability. Such a turn would be involves not adding a separate set of social issues, but social in the sense of attending to social relations, expanding how we think about both economy and practices, cultural meanings, and normative judg- nature in order to recognize their inseparability from ments, but also material in terms of recognizing that the social. It implies that the economy has to be con- social life is conducted by embodied beings in con- ceived in a broader sense than that recognized by stant exchange with their physical environment. neoclassical economics, as including a range of for- Thus, rather than understanding the social as some- mal and informal economic activities involving re- thing that needs to be traded off against the economy production, production, distribution, exchange, and or the environment, our approach sees both as always consumption (Sayer, 2004), and as extending beyond already entangled in the social. We draw on Sarah the cash economy into a wider set of sociomaterial Whatmore’s (2002) idea of “hybrid geography,” processes including labor, work, material flow, ener- which she uses to resist the ontological separation of getic exchange, and value creation. And it means nature and society. Following Bruno Latour (1993), conceptualizing the environment not just in narrowly Whatmore uses “hybridity” to signify not the bring- technical terms of cause and effect, but in a way that ing together of two or more things that existed in a recognizes the inherent multiplicity of human rela- pure form prior to their combination, but the recogni- tions—semiotic, material, and affectual—with non- tion of the heterogeneous entanglements between human nature. The next section illustrates this move social life and matter. So, rather than regarding sus- through an analysis of AAFNs in Manchester. tainability as being produced by joining together three ontological domains, we explore sustainability in alternative urban food networks as a heterogeneous set of sociomaterial practices, against the background

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

33

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

Social Sustainability and AAFNs in Manchester (Manchester Food Futures, 2007). But many of Man- chester’s specific challenges relate directly or indi- The Background rectly to the contemporary agrofood system, and as Over the last couple of decades, UK food pro- we shall see, a number of initiatives have emerged ducers and consumers have shown increasing interest that in different ways use food as a focus in their in generating or supporting alternatives to conven- responses to these urban challenges. tional agrofood chains. Stimulus for this development came from food safety issues—the 1996 “mad cow” The Network scandal, the late 1990s controversy over genetically In Manchester, the threat to the viability and modified food, and the 2001 foot-and-mouth epi- well-being of local communities and economies demic—which enhanced public anxiety and demands posed by factors such as poverty, unequal access to for more trustworthy food sources. With expanding goods and services, social exclusion, and health in- urban populations in many parts of the world, a equalities has prompted the emergence of a loose growing concern about food insecurity, poverty, and network of alternative food initiatives operating in a malnutrition has also stimulated alternative agrofood diverse range of spaces across the city. The network strategies in and around many other cities (FAO, under investigation consists of urban food producers 2007). In relatively affluent settings like the UK, and retailers, cooperatives and family businesses, growing concern about the environmental impacts of citizen-led initiatives, and charitable and nonprofit industrial agriculture and the global trade in food- organizations, which variously use or support alter- stuffs has helped to stimulate interest in alternative native methods of production such as organic culti- systems of food production and distribution. AAFNs vation and permaculture, and/or alternative methods have, moreover, benefited from a cultural reaction in of distribution. These initiatives enact their members’ parts of society against the way that the conventional aspirations for a more environmentally excises the direct experience and under- agrofood system to mitigate climate change, peak oil, standing of food origin, quality, and preparation—a food miles, and food insecurity. But they also collec- manifestation of modernity’s wider tendency toward tively perform the space of the city in different ways, the deskilling of everyday life and the “sequestration through moralized and embodied interactions with of experience” in relation to external nature food, with the land, and with humans both proximate (Giddens, 1991). and distant. Our analysis, based on research carried out in Manchester Food Futures (MFF) is a local au- 2008–2009, focuses on the city of Manchester. Ac- thority strategic partnership with a central role in cording to national statistics from 2009, Manchester coordinating and supporting the sustainable agrofood is one of the UK’s largest cities, with a population of initiatives under discussion. Following its community 483,800 people. It is a metropolitan borough of strategy of “making Manchester more sustainable” by Greater Manchester, currently the third most popu- 2015, MFF is providing and supporting opportunities lous county of England with 2.6 million people. His- for residents and local organizations to get involved torically, Manchester grew rapidly during the nine- in projects, training, activities, and events pertaining teenth century due to the expansion of the textile to sustainable food. A wider network of local food industry, and related manufacturing and trade. This initiatives directly or indirectly involved with MFF traditional economic dependence on industrialization, has coalesced around the project of creating a more as well as the wet weather conditions and the hilly relocalized food system in Manchester. In this article topography, has significantly slowed agricultural we focus on a selection of these projects: development in the region. More recently, the gradual postwar decline in in- • The Herbie Van, a mobile greengrocery set up by dustrial activity and consequent depopulation of the independent charity Manchester Environ- Manchester have significantly changed its economic mental Resource Centre (MERCi) and funded by landscape; the city council’s economic strategy has MFF that provides affordable, fresh produce in shifted toward finance, the knowledge economy, and areas of Manchester with low levels of social and the creative industries, although many areas of the physical mobility or access to fresh food, as well city still have not recovered from the loss of manu- as to local schools, sheltered housing, churches, facturing employment. As for the agrofood sector, health clinics, and residents groups (MERCi, very few residents of Manchester are currently em- 2012; Subject One/MB, 2009). ployed in agriculture; food retailing prevails as the • The Healthy Eating Local Food Partnership most important part of the food chain in the Man- (HeLF), a social enterprise initiated by the com- chester economy, and many residents are also em- munity voluntary sector and funded by MFF that ployed by large food-manufacturing companies engages mental-health service users, young peo-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

34

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

ple, and the community in healthy local food The Moral Taskscape of Local Food in growing, cooking, and retailing activities and Manchester thus provides work-based learning opportunities The network sketched above constitutes a micro- and “moving-on” services, which help people to cosm of Manchester’s ethical foodscape; in this sec- join mainstream society (Subject Two/RP, tion we bring out a few key characteristics of this 2008). foodscape, largely using examples drawn from the • Valuing Older People (VOP), a local partnership initiatives discussed. First, the ethical foodscape con- initiative launched in 2003 by the Manchester sists of a diverse range of spaces with very different City Council, National Health Service (NHS) social characteristics, such as shops, cafes and restau- Manchester, and community and voluntary or- rants, farmers markets, allotments, guerrilla-gardened ganizations for targeting and engaging Man- public spaces, community gardens, therapeutic land- chester’s elder population in sustainable food scapes, home-based food-buying coops, gardens, and activities. window boxes. These function as “utopic spaces,” • Unicorn Grocery, a workers’ cooperative that spaces that have “social centrality” for certain social sells local, organic, and fair-trade food and do- groups and in which ideas of the good society are put nates 5% of its turnover to projects consistent into practice (Hetherington, 1998). The ethical food- with its principles. scape, as we suggested above, is thus also a moral • The Glebelands Market Garden, a small co- taskscape—not simply an arrangement of space but operative run by former Unicorn workers that also an array of practices, of performances involving provides fresh, local produce to local businesses skill and judgment. This configuration is held to- such as Unicorn and Dig Food. gether through complex movements of food, people, • Dig Food, a family-based organic noncertified knowledge, and ideas between these utopic spaces. box scheme specializing in good-quality, locally- However, as well as movements, the foodscape is sourced organic produce. also crisscrossed by a wide range of other kinds of interconnection, as practices close the felt distance Beyond its work for an alternative supply sys- between local producers, small-scale retailers, and tem, MFF has also been active in supporting a num- consumers, and between sites of production and con- ber of community food-growing projects, many of sumption. Some spaces are also sites for more pas- which are directly aimed at realizing social benefits. sionate and sensuous engagement with food and soil For this reason, they developed Growing Manchester, (Degen et al. 2010); some initiatives, such as Herbie, a program currently supporting fifteen food-growing HeLF, and VOP, expand Manchester’s “ethical food- projects. In these projects, citizen-led initiatives have scape” beyond the natural habitats of affluent con- been an essential part of the network. For example: sumers, engaging with people from disadvantaged or isolated sections of the population in housing estates, • The Manchester Permaculture Network, a grass- cafés, hospital day centers, community gardens, and roots initiative set up by local community mem- allotments (Subject Two/RP, 2008). bers interested in principles of permaculture that Second, as well as its distinctive spatiality, the supports several community food-growing pro- ethical foodscape has its own temporalities. New grams. developments in urban studies approach the contem- • Action for , a charitable or- porary city as a space constituted through the coex- ganization, and the Sustainable Neighborhoods istence of multiple publics, cultures, and histories Action Group, a pool of individuals and network (Sandercock, 2003). As well as a material infrastruc- groups in the community, both promoting sus- ture, cities also have a temporal infrastructure, a fab- tainable living including local food and food ric made of flows and rhythms of different scales, as growing (Subject Three/HSK, 2008; Subject people, matter, energy, and signs move around the Four/MT, 2009). city (Amin & Thrift, 2002). Such rhythms cohere the • The Association for Manchester Allotments wider city as a living entity, and equally they hold Societies (AMAS), which supports the city’s lo- together the ethical foodscape as people engage in cal allotment societies—which in turn allocate temporally and spatially specific practices in relation allotments of land to individuals for the growing to food as part of the city’s social metabolism of food—and its horticultural societies. (Fischer-Kowlaski & Haberl, 2007). The foodscape pulses to a complex overlay of rhythms at daily, weekly, annual, or other timescales, and is grounded in the internal temporalities of work, free time, do- mestic provisioning, biological growth, and seasonal change.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

35

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

Third, in the ethical foodscape the economy is ployed” or “economically inactive” parts of the pop- re-embedded in the social. Even in retail spaces, ulation (Gibson-Graham, 2006). Both producers and customers typically get involved in a diversity of consumers in the AAFNs are also engaged in pro- relations and practices that go beyond the narrow ducing and reproducing sign value by attaching ethi- understanding of the economic. They thus contribute cal meanings and narratives to the objects, spaces, to the reconfiguration of the marketplace as a diverse and practices of the ethical foodscape (Goodman, economic space embedded in multiple social rela- 2004). tions and interactions. In a sense, the marketplace is Fifth, the practices of the ethical foodscape re- returned to the idea of the Greek agora, the situated verse the tendency in high modernity toward de- market, which is simultaneously a space for diverse skilling and alienation in relation to food practices forms of sociality—personal relations, the reproduc- and other areas of everyday life (Giddens, 1990). As tion of community, the exchange of knowledge and an aspect of their practical “dwelling” in the moral opinion—and for political action. More widely, so- taskscape around food, producers and consumers cial relations across Manchester’s ethical foodscape engage in an array of practical operations and tasks. are characterized by high levels of social cooperation, They draw on, extend, and share their knowledge solidarity, and trust, and often have characteristics of about the practicalities, ethics, and politics of agro- a “gift” economy, in which goods or services are food production, distribution, and consumption in regularly given without expectation of reward. Vol- resistance to the knowledge-expropriating mecha- untary labor is a common feature across the ethical nisms of the conventional food system. In many cases foodscape, ranging from “WWOOFers”1 working as (e.g., Herbie, HeLF, Unicorn, community food- volunteers on organic farms or smallholdings, to growing projects), consumers develop growing and mental health service users working on allotments cooking skills as an outcome of everyday encounters and in kitchens and restaurants. In narrow economic with nature; they discuss personal experiences and terms, the dependency of many AAFNs on voluntary exchange knowledge about species and varieties of work renders them economically unsustainable, since plants, fruits and vegetables, and techniques of food their income does not cover the cost of the necessary preparation. In this way, they uncover lost knowledge labor. However, viewed as part of an economy that is and skills, which can best be understood as “not an re-embedded in social life, these initiatives achieve a attribute of an individual body in isolation but of the different kind of sustainability due to their role in the whole system of relations” constituted by their pres- reproduction of social life itself (Gibson-Graham, ence in these environments (Ingold, 2000). These 2006). skills not only express the concern to construct and Fourth, the practices of the ethical foodscape control one’s own body that is so characteristic of produce diverse forms of “value,” above and beyond late modernity, but also enact a “life politics” that narrow economic measures (Graeber, 2001). They do involves an ethic of solidarity and care in relation to not simply reproduce social relations, but also exhibit proximal and distant human and nonhuman others a normative surplus in their relation to the desire for a (Giddens, 1991). just and sustainable food system. This is evident in the interactions between workers, with many initia- Conclusion tives organized through democratic forms of common ownership and management, and high levels of soli- The study of urban AFFNs, we suggest, can pro- darity and cooperation between initiatives. It is also vide useful clues about how to think about sustain- manifest in the relationships between producers and ability in a social way. The first step in this argument consumers, with personalized exchange relations is the claim that AAFNs exhibit social sustainability between the retailers and consumers, and commodi- to a significant extent, and we have tried to show that ties often sold at nonmarket “just prices” to disad- this is the case in Manchester’s ethical foodscape. vantaged populations (as in Thompson, 1971). Ideas The alternative agrofood initiatives that we focused of justice are also embedded in the purchasing prac- on manifested various combinations of the following: tices of individuals and organizations—which bal- relations of solidarity and justice with proximate and ance concern to support local producers and reduce distant others, regard for land and for the global envi- “food miles” and also to engage in fair trade with the ronment, concern for social inclusion, interest in the global South (Morgan, 2010)—and in the role that well-being of the disadvantaged, and the reskilling of many initiatives play in the inclusion of “unem- everyday life—which encourage us to speak in the language of the “moral economy.” Of course, it is

1 important not to overstate the extent to which “actu- WWOOF (World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms) is an ally existing” AAFNs can deliver all aspects of social organization that gives individuals the opportunity to volunteer on organic farms and smallholdings. sustainability as described in the literature discussed

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

36

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

above. These initiatives are often dominated by the ronment has to be opened up to the wide range of new middle class, and serve little more than a niche ideas and practices through which nature, spaces, and market. The new networks are still relatively weak landscapes are experienced, used, and understood and suffer from a policy bias toward the conventional (Macnaghten & Urry, 1998; Franklin, 2001; agrofood system. The AAFNs also have their own Szerszynski, 2005), and to start to think of society as socioeconomic inequalities and problematic power a living, metabolic phenomenon, one that involves relations, especially in rural areas and the developing the exchange of energy and matter between humans world, with examples of unequal distribution and and their environment. Then, sustainability would be inequitable access to quality food, poor working con- revealed as nothing other than the self-reproductive ditions for farm laborers, and exclusion from power of the social itself, properly conceived. decision-making processes (see Allen et al. 1991; Allen & Wilson, 2008; Brown & Getz, 2008; Getz et al. 2008). However, as we have tried to show, urban Acknowledgement AAFNs do have a potential to deliver social sustain- This article draws on work done as part of the research ability in many different ways, in settings that are project Facilitating Alternative Agro-Food Networks: often very challenging. Stakeholder Perspectives on Research Needs (FAAN), which was funded by the European Community’s Seventh We have also argued that the social sustainability Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant of AFFNs becomes most clear when it is not under- agreement #217280. The UK case studies were carried out stood as a separate, third pillar. We proposed a socio- by Helen Wallace and Becky Price from GeneWatch UK, material turn in the study of sustainability, one that Les Levidow from the Open University, and the current understands “the economic” as embedded in social authors. For more information, see http://www.faanweb.eu. relations, and “the social” as including relations be- We are grateful to the rest of the UK FAAN team for per- tween humans and the material world, and that dis- mission to use findings from the Manchester case study, to solves any hard boundaries between the economic, all our FAAN associates for stimulating discussions about the environmental, and the social. Such a move, we local food networks, and to the three anonymous referees for useful and constructive feedback. suggest, implies that understanding the social char- acter of sustainability does not involve isolating a distinct aspect, a domain of disembodied social rela- References tions and norms, but instead requires us to approach sustainability as a whole in a different way—as a Agyeman, J. & Evans, B. 2004. Just sustainability: the emerging lived, embodied form of life, with its own spatial discourse of environmental justice in Britain? The Geo- graphical Journal 170(2):155–164. organization and temporal rhythms. Applied to the Allen, P., Van Dusen, D., Lundy, J., & Gliessman, S. 1991. Inte- study of AFFNs in Manchester, this approach reveals grating social, environmental, and economic issues in sus- a heterogeneous set of sociomaterial practices com- tainable agriculture. American Journal of Alternative Agri- bining diverse skills and moral judgments around culture 6(1):34–39. Allen, P. & Wilson, A. 2008. Agri-food inequalities: globalization contemporary agrofood processes, organized in spa- and localization. Development 51(4):534–540. tially situated performances across the urban ethical Altieri, M. 1988. Beyond agroecology: making sustainable agri- foodscape, and involving a complex set of move- culture part of a political agenda. American Journal of Alter- ments of food, people, knowledge, and ideas across native Agriculture 3(4):142–143. Amin, A. & Thrift, N. 2002. Cities: Re-imagining the Urban. the city. Cambridge: Polity. This kind of approach, we would suggest, has Ballet, J., Dubois, J.-L., & Mahieu, F.-R. 2003. Le Développement wider implications for the study of social sustainabil- Socialement Durable: Un Moyen D’intégrer Capacités et ity. It implies that sustainability should be conceived Durabilité. [Socially Sustainable Development: A Means of Integrating Capabilities and Sustainability]. Paper Presented in relation to a far more diverse economic landscape at the Third Conference on the Capability Approach. Sep- (Gibson-Graham, 1996; 2006), where the meanings tember 6–9, University of Pavia, Italy (in French). of practices of production, exchange, and consump- Becker, E., Jahn, T., & Stiess, I. 1999. Exploring uncommon tion are not exhausted by the formal language of eco- ground: sustainability and the social sciences. In E. Becker & T. Jahn (Eds.), Sustainability and the Social Sciences: A nomics, and where other economies are possible, Cross-Disciplinary Approach Integrating Environmental embedded in a wider range of social relations and Considerations into Theoretical Reorientation. pp. 1–22. At- wider conceptions of value than those of the market lantic Highlands, NJ: Zed Books. (Polanyi, 1957; Laclau, 1990). To put it another way, Bell, D. & Valentine, G. 1997. Consuming Geographies: We Are Where We Eat. New York: Routledge. we have to place sustainability back into the “current Boström, M. 2010. A Missing Pillar? A Literature Review on the of sociality,” so that we can appreciate the way that Concept of Social Sustainability. Paper resented at the Inter- sustainability initiatives, such as urban AFFNs, both national Symposium on Environmental Sociology and Sus- sustain the social and are sustained by it. Similarly, tainable Development. July 10–11, Göteborg, Sweden. our approach implies that thinking about the envi-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

37

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

Brown, S. & Getz, C. 2008. Towards domestic fair trade? Farm fining the attributes of an alternative food system with com- labor, food localism, and the “family scale” farm. GeoJour- petent, ordinary people. Human Organization 59(2):177–186. nal 73(1):1–22. Koc, M., MacRae, R., Mougeot, L., & Welsh, J. 1999. For Hun- Davidson, M. 2009. Social sustainability: a potential for politics? ger-Proof Cities: Sustainable Urban Food Systems. Ottawa: Local Environment 14(7):607–619. International Development Research Centre. Degen, M., Hinchliffe, S., Whatmore, S., & Kearnes, M. 2010. The Latour, B. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: urban green: passionate involvements with urban natures. In Harvard University Press. M. Miles & M. Degen (Eds.), Culture & Agency: Contempo- Latour, B. 2004. Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into rary Culture and Urban Change. pp. 58–75. Plymouth: Uni- Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. versity of Plymouth Press. Laclau, E. 1990. New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. 2011. The London: Verso. social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban Lehtonen, M. 2004. The environmental-social interface of sustain- social sustainability. Sustainable Development 19(5):289– able development: capabilities, social capital, institutions. 300. Ecological Economics 49(2):199–214. Douglass, G. 1984. The meanings of agricultural sustainability. In Littig, B. & Griessler, E. 2005. Social sustainability: a catchword G. Douglass (Ed.), Agricultural Sustainability in a Changing between political pragmatism and social theory. International World Order. pp. 3–29. Boulder: Westview Press. Journal of Sustainable Development 8(1–2):65–79. Feenstra, G. 1997. What is Sustainable Agriculture? http://www. Little, R., Maye, D., & Ilbery, B. 2010. Collective purchase: mov- sarep.ucdavis.edu/concept.htm. January 10, 2012. ing local and organic foods beyond the niche market. Envi- Feenstra, G. 2002 Creating space for sustainable food systems: ronment and Planning A 42(8):1797–1813. lessons from the field. Agriculture and Human Values Macnaghten, P. & Urry, J. 1998. Contested Natures. Thousand 19(2):99–106. Oaks, CA: Sage. Fischer-Kowalski, M. & H. Haberl (Eds.). 2007. Socioecological Magis, K. & Shinn, C. 2009. Emergent principles of social sustain- Transitions and Global Change: Trajectories of Social Me- ability. In J. Dillard, V. Dujon, & M. King (Eds.), Under- tabolism and Land Use. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. standing the Social Dimension of Sustainability. pp. 15–44. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). New York: Routledge. 2007. Profitability and Sustainability of Urban and Peri- Manchester Food Futures. 2007. Foodfutures: A Food Strategy for urban Agriculture. Agricultural Management, Marketing and Manchester. Manchester: Food Futures Partnership. Finance Occasional Paper. Rome, Italy: FAO. ftp://ftp.fao. http://www.foodfutures.info/site/images/stories/food%20futu org/docrep/fao/010/a1471e/a1471e00.pdf. res%20strategy%202007.pdf. Francis, C. 1988. Research and extension agenda for sustainable Marcuse, P. 1998. Sustainability is not enough. Environment and agriculture. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 3(2– Urbanization 10(2):103–111. 3):123–126. Marsden, T., Murdoch, J., & Morgan, K. 1999. Sustainable agri- Franklin, A. 2001. Nature and Social Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: culture, food supply chains and regional development: edito- Sage. rial introduction. International Planning Studies 4(3):295– Getz, C., Brown, S., & Shreck, A. 2008. Class politics and agri- 301. cultural exceptionalism in California’s organic agriculture MERCi. 2012. About Us. Manchester Environmental Resource movement. Politics & Society 36(4):478–507. Centre Initiative. http://www.merci.org.uk/drupal/node/2520. Gibson-Graham, J. 1996. The End of Capitalism (as We Knew It): January 10, 2012. A Feminist Critique of Political Economy. Cambridge, MA: Morgan K. 2010. Local and green, global and fair: the ethical Blackwell. foodscape and the politics of care. Environment and Planning Gibson-Graham, J. 2006. A Postcapitalist Politics. Minneapolis: A 42(8):1852–1867. University of Minnesota Press. Murdoch, J., Marsden, T., & Banks, J. 2000. Quality, nature and Giddens, A. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, CA: embeddedness: some theoretical considerations in the context Stanford University Press. of the food sector. Economic Geography 76(2):107–125. Giddens, A. 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in Polanyi, K. 1957 The Great Transformation: The Social and Eco- the Late Modern Age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University nomic Origins of Our Time. Boston: Beacon Press. Press. Pretty, J., Ball, A., Lang, T., & Morison, J. 2005. Farm costs and Goodman, M. 2004. Reading fair trade: political ecological imagi- food miles: an assessment of the full cost of the weekly UK nary and moral economy of fair trade foods. Political Geog- food basket. Food Policy 30(1):1–19. raphy 23(7):891–915. Renting, H., Marsden, T., & Banks, J. 2003. Understanding alter- Goodman, M., Maye, D., & Holloway, L. 2010. Ethical food- native food networks: exploring the role of short food supply scapes? Premises, promises, and possibilities. Environment chains in rural development. Environment and Planning A and Planning A 42(8):1782–1796. 35(3):393–411. Graeber, D. 2001. Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value. Sandercock, L. 2003. Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities in the 21st New York: Palgrave. Century. London: Continuum. Hetherington, K. 1998. Expressions of Identity: Space, Perfor- Sayer, A. 2000. Moral economy and political economy. Studies in mance, Politics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Political Economy 61:79–104. Ikerd, J. 1993. Two related but distinctly different concepts: or- Sayer, A. 2004. Moral Economy. Lancaster: Lancaster University. ganic farming and sustainable agriculture. Small Farm Today http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/papers/sayer-moral- 10(1):30–31. economy.pdf. Ilbery, B. & Maye, D. 2005. Food supply chains and sustainability: Seyfang, G. 2006. Ecological citizenship and sustainable con- evidence from specialist food producers in Scottish/English sumption: examining local organic food networks. Journal of borders. Land Use Policy 22(4):331–344. Rural Studies 22(4):383–395. Iles, A. 2005. Learning in sustainable agriculture: food miles and Smit, B. & Smithers, J. 1993. Sustainable agriculture: interpreta- missing objects. Environmental Values 14(2):63–183. tions, analyses and prospects. Canadian Journal of Regional Ingold, T. 2000. The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Science 16(3):499–524. Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. New York: Routledge. Subject Four/MT. 2009. Personal Communication. MERCi, Man- Kloppenburg, J., Lezberg, S., De Master, K., Stevenson, G., & chester. January 16. Hendrickson, J. 2000. Tasting food, tasting sustainability: de-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

38

Psarikidou & Szerszynski: Alternative Agro-Food Networks

Subject One/MB. 2009. Personal Communication. MERCi, Man- World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). chester. January 16. 1987. Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University Subject Three/HSK. 2008. Personal Communication. KRO, Man- Press. chester. September 2. Wrigley, N. 2002. ‘Food deserts’ in British cities: policy context Subject Two/RP. 2008. Personal Communication. HARP, Zion and research priorities. Urban Studies 39(11):2029–2040. CHRC, Manchester. August 19. Yunlong, C. & Smit, B. 1994. Sustainability in agriculture: a gen- Szerszynski, B. 2005. Nature, Technology and the Sacred. Oxford: eral review. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment Blackwell. 49(3):299–307. Thompson, E. 1971. The moral economy of the English crowd in the 18th century. Past and Present 50(1):76–136. United Nations. 2005. 2005 World Summit Outcome. A/RES/60/1. New York: United Nations. Whatmore, S. 2002. Hybrid Geographies: Natures Cultures Spaces. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

39

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Making sense of the social: human-nonhuman constellations and the wicked road to sustainability

Juha Hiedanpää1, Ari Jokinen2, & Pekka Jokinen3 1 Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute, Itäinen Pitkäkatu 3, Turku FI-20520 Finland (email: [email protected]) 2 School of Management, University of Tampere, Tampere FI-33014 Finland (email: [email protected]) 3 Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, University of Eastern Finland/Finnish Environment Institute, PO Box 111, Joensuu 80101 Finland (email: [email protected])

Social questions become especially tangible in the context of human-nonhuman interrelations. This article focuses on coexistential practices in the context of management, protection, and production and it clarifies how the social in par- ticular empirical cases is enacted. The work is based on three empirical case studies. We explore the conflicts in for- estry and urban planning caused by the Siberian flying squirrel; the increased presence of the grey wolf; and the par- adox of the domestic pig—a clever animal that is treated harshly by factory-farming practices. As our cases indicate, the social is not a group of people living in a certain setting according to certain norms and traditions. The social is a contingent, activated constellation of interagentivities that emerges together with a shared concern that particular customs and habits are not serving the purpose they are expected to serve. The cases challenge efforts to adopt a human-centered view of the social as the basis for developing the concept of sustainability. They also indicate that there is no one social sustainability, but rather many articulations of the concept.

KEYWORDS: human-environment relationship, environmental sociology, conflict resolution, animal welfare, wildlife management, case studies

Introduction relationship between humans and animals underwent a profound set of transformations (Macnaghten, The notion of sustainable development is usually 2004). The move has been from the categorical dis- divided into the economic, environmental, and social tinction between humans and animals toward new pillars, implying that a practice cannot be fully sus- forms of empathy and codwelling. This move covers tainable until all these three dimensions are fulfilled cats, dogs, horses, and other pets, but also, and per- (Littig & Grieβler, 2005; Casula Vifell & Soneryd, haps in more radical ways, particular cases of wild 2010). Social sustainability covers broad societal animals and production animals. Currently, social issues, such as democracy, social justice, welfare, and scientific studies aim to address the animal question cultural identity. It is often defined through the un- even though animals still remain largely invisible in derlying questions of what sustainable societal goals social science texts (Barron 2003; Tovey, 2003; are and whether they are socially acceptable or not. Hobson, 2007). As Hobson-West (2007) has noted, Further, from the communal viewpoint, social sus- boundary-drawing as an activity of making sense of tainability has been defined as the ability of society the world goes far beyond the human-animal dichot- itself, or its manifestation as a local community, to omy. It can be found in institutional rules that allow sustain and reproduce itself at an acceptable level certain activities and prohibit others, in dichotomies (Dempsey et al. 2011). such as nature/culture and, say, binaries of good and The question concerning the social becomes es- bad taste. However, a partial deconstruction of the pecially tangible in the context of human-nonhuman cultural boundary between human and animal may be interrelations.1 Humans and nonhumans encounter seen as a part of the broader postmodern (re)blurring each other in complex ways in certain environments of dichotomies. and everyday practices. Animals are the most promi- Hobson (2007) has pointed out that most often nent nonhumans. During the twentieth century, the when animals do become visible in social scientific studies, it is as objects in a struggle for resources.

1 Yet, research that conceptualizes animals as part of On basic societal understandings of human-nonhuman interrela- specific political configurations—as subjects, not tions, see, for instance, Knight, 2000; Philo & Wilber, 2000; Franklin & White, 2001; Alger & Alger, 2003; Buller & Morris, objects—enables a broader conceptualization of how 2003; Tovey, 2003; and Shapiro & DeMello, 2010. the “political” is constituted in human-animal rela-

 2012 Hiedanpää et al. Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 40

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social

tions. In fact, animals are already subjects of, and The Social in the Context of Human-Nonhuman subject to, social and political practices, since they Interrelations intersect human daily lives, for instance, as food, pets, amusement, game, wildlife, and helpers, and What is the Social? thus constitute a pivotal part of socialities and politi- We explore the social from the viewpoint of so- cal economies (Hobson, 2007). Animals should thus cioecological systems. We build our ontological con- be brought into theorizations of how specific political ception of such systems on ecological and cognitive spaces are constructed, relying not on contentious views. The key feature of the social according to the ideas of humanness and rights, but simply through an ecological conception becomes clear in an excerpt appreciation that agency is a dynamic but contin- from the dictionary of the Stockholm Resilience gently stable relation between an organism and its Centre (2010). Social-ecological systems are: environment (Hobson, 2007; see also Light, 2004; Hobson-West, 2007; Johnston, 2008). [L]inked systems of people and nature. The The view that our encounters with animals are term emphasizes that humans must be seen intrinsically social poses the question of how we as a part of, not apart from, nature—that the should live with them. People are accustomed to delineation between social and ecological seeking normative recipes for these encounters. Yet, systems is artificial and arbitrary. Scholars normative rules or basic categories of human-animal have also used concepts like “coupled encounters are not enough. They reveal some of the human-environment systems,” “ecosocial diversity and new choices of living together, but they systems,” and “socioecological systems” to do not make explicit enough that the nonhuman illustrate the interplay between social and world has no fixed ontological properties. To explore ecological systems. the social from the ontological point of view, we continue pragmatic reasoning regarding animals as The Resilience Centre (e.g., Berkes & Folke, constituents of social and political life and their rela- 2000; Berkes et al. 2003; Folke, 2006) holds that tive agency in emerging social and political spaces. humans (authorities or environmental managers) The purpose of our article is to explore how the so- must understand humans as part of nature. This ob- cial in particular empirical cases is enacted. Our ap- servation suggests that it may well be that humans are proach is normative in the ethical sense as we study not part of nature or, at least, they are not part of it the interactions through which the social and its the same way as the rest of nature is. Nevertheless, functioning—sustainable or not—are created, main- humans have an obligation to act as if they were part tained, and altered. The main question is: How is the of nature. We see that even though the relationship social in human-nonhuman interrelations constituted? between the ecological and the social is explicitly We present three empirical case studies from ethical, the understanding about the functioning of Finland that illustrate the interest in human- social-ecological systems is primarily grounded in nonhuman coexistence and development. These cases ecology and secondarily in the social. It is a task of analyze the conflicts in forestry and urban planning science—systems theory and modeling—to unfold caused by the Siberian flying squirrel; the increased the gap or the interplay between social and ecological presence of the grey wolf; and the paradox of the systems for the sake of providing better tools for domestic pig—a clever animal that is treated harshly sustainable environmental and resource policy and by factory-farming practices. In all cases, the empiri- management (e.g., Berkes & Folke, 2000; Folke, cal data and analyses are qualitative by nature. In the 2006; Ernstson et al. 2008; Galaz et al. 2008). cases of the flying squirrel and the wolf, the empiri- The cognitive view of the social-ecological ex- cal material has been gathered by participant obser- pands the above conception. For example, Hukkinen vation and thematic interviews, whereas the case (2008; 2010) uses the theory of embodied cognition 2 study on swine welfare is based on newspaper data. to explain how humans and their environments are interconnected. For Hukkinen (2008), social- 2 Material in the case of the wolf is derived from 21 thematic inter- ecological systems are always constituted by the un- views with stakeholders conducted during 2009–2010, seven field derlying ecosystem and the resources derived from it interviews with local residents living around wolf attack areas in according to needs guided and controlled by the fea- 2009, and formal documents of the Infringement Proceedings tures of the social system, such as resource users and between the European Commission and the Finnish government on Finnish wolf policy in 2005–2007. The case of the flying squirrel (see Haila et al. 2007; Jokinen et al. 2009) is based on a long-term views, dialogue workshops and seminars, and ethnographic obser- interdisciplinary research project in the Tampere city region vation of conservation and knowledge practices. The case of the (300,000 inhabitants) carried out between 2004 and 2010 using the pig is predicated on news and articles in Helsingin Sanomat be- action research approach and multisource data gathered from plan- tween December 2007 and December 2009. The primary analysis ning documents, decision-making material, media material, inter- is based on 46 news reports and articles.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

41

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social

their traditions, rules of the game, and physical infra- engaged in relations with others, and the process of structure. This view of social-ecological systems, growth produces new forms of life. which builds on the work of Ostrom (1990), Lakoff This pragmatically oriented socioecological view & Johnson (1999), and Fauconnier & Turner (2002), helps us to understand that the social is not a separate is multifaceted and expands the understanding of the realm beyond the individual, the public, and envi- social compared to the ecological model. Hukkinen ronmental settings, but that the social emerges and (2008) identifies two sets of the social: while one is disappears contingently in dynamic habit-custom-law local, lived, and traditional, constituting community transactions. Therefore, research must focus on how life, the other is public, bureaucratic, and calculated. people (individuals and groups) habitually and delib- Hukkinen (2008) further suggests that social sustain- erately live with and encounter animals in their envi- ability calls for a new kind of understanding about ronments, and on what kind of productive and man- the interplay of the two dimensions of the social and agerial practices are created when humans and non- the production of knowledge within particular social- humans interact. The proper unit of analysis is then ecological systems. shared bodies of practical knowledge and embodied We continue in the same general field of re- understanding that constitute particular customs and search, but take a stronger position and argue that habits (i.e., social practices) (e.g., Wallace, 2009). there are no gaps or interplays between the social and Law (2004) and Law & Urry (2004) have extended the ecological because there are no such separate this view with their version of ontological politics. systems in the first place. According to our ontologi- Their important addition is that the social sciences cal view, customs and habits constitute not only the are interactive: sciences in general, but social sci- social of the socioecological but the socioecological ences in particular, do not examine the social that is itself. For this concept, we lean on John Dewey out there, but rather participate in its constitution. (1988), who states this point succinctly: “But to a larger extent customs persist because individuals Three Case Studies on Human-Nonhuman form their personal habits under conditions set by Interrelations prior customs.” He continues, “Habits incorporate an environment within themselves. They are adjust- Siberian Flying Squirrels in Forestry and Urban ments of the environment, not merely to it” (emphasis Planning in the original). This environment as a fabric of cus- Since its origin in the 1980s, the notion of biodi- toms habitually and deliberately undergone and en- versity has described the multitude of biospheric life. acted by human and nonhuman animals is what we In political discourse, biodiversity is often used as a call the social. Human and nonhuman animals de- concept that tries to catch the contextual conditions velop and change habits in continuous organism- of human life and its dependence on living nature, environment transactions. In particularly problematic thus implicitly including the vitally important human- situations, these adjustments tie humans and nonhu- nonhuman relationships. Intensive efforts of biodi- mans together (see, e.g., McKenna, 2004; Johnson, versity conservation make these relationships visible 2010). and create new relationships resulting from specific Ingold (1997) has elaborated this further, using practices of conservation. One of the most compre- the term “interagentivity” to describe the sphere of hensive efforts of biodiversity preservation is the the social, asking whether there is “some region be- European Union’s (EU) Habitats Directive of 1992 - yond the edge of nature, in which human beings live a conservation system with many similarities to the distinctively social lives.” He calls such a position an Endangered Species Act of 1973 in the United States. illusion. Through habits and customs, humans have The Habitats Directive has given rise to severe imple- continuous social interaction with the rest of nature. mentation problems all over Europe both on local and If there is life in nature, there are also human- national levels. This is because translating the nonhuman interactions. The human-nonhuman social general-level normative principle of conservation into life is not only interaction but covers a vast array of practical governance procedures is a highly compli- reciprocal relationships and different forms of life. cated matter (Haila et al. 2007; see also Durant et al. Cultural variations of gardening and keeping domes- 2004; Jokinen et al. 2009). The Directive interferes tic animals are well-known examples. Both humans with short-term economic interests, local cultural and nonhumans can create and maintain social rela- values, as well as understandings of ecological sus- tions, and the differences between them in this regard tainability. Consequently, the conflicts triggered by are not absolute but relative. As Ingold (1997) the Directive are unpredictable and vary from case to claims, whatever we do to others is embedded in the case. It is hard to anticipate what kind of sociocul- context of our relationships with them. Life is being tural consequences conservation decisions will have (Hiedanpää, 2002; Haila et al. 2007).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

42

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social

Conservation conflicts with the Siberian flying from master planning and building projects to the squirrel (Pteromys volans) began in Finland in the management of green areas, including lay-expert late 1990s after it was included among the most tensions in planning and civic mobilization against strictly protected species of the Habitats Directive. building projects. The presence of the flying squirrel The Directive prohibits deterioration and destruction may lead to significant economic consequences both of any of the flying squirrel’s breeding sites or resting for public and private building projects. Public confi- places, with the aim of reaching the normative goal dence in institutions has diminished due to govern- formulated as “favorable conservation status.” Land- ance problems; and planners, organizations of land use conflicts have been problematic for years, but owners, forestry lobbyists, and leading politicians particularly so in growing urban areas where flying have requested that the flying squirrel be removed squirrels have cancelled development projects and from the Habitats Directive, but without success. slowed down planning. While having an extremely Third, the Directive created an urgent need in ur- high conservation status resulting from the dimin- ban planning to inventory flying squirrels. There was ishing population trend due to forestry activities, the no such profession as flying squirrel surveyor, but flying squirrel is fairly common in many areas in some skillful citizens emerged from the forest to take southern and central Finland (Hanski, 2006). The the job. They were amateur ecologists with long ex- animal is nocturnal and only a few people have seen perience observing hawks and owls, and, as a by- it in the forest. Flying squirrels can be detected only product, flying squirrels. on the basis of their droppings in spring time. They Finally, putting nest boxes for birds in the forest can be found under big trees in mature spruce- has been a common Finnish activity for at least a dominated forests. In urban areas, flying squirrels century, originating in an early national awakening of inhabit parks, forested recreation areas, and even nature conservation in the late nineteenth century. private gardens as part of their home range, as long as This civic virtue has now been contested because the habitat as a whole is large enough. As flying flying squirrels have inhabited nest boxes in areas squirrels are entangled with many human activities in under development, making nest boxes mediators complicated ways (Jokinen et al. 2007), the case pro- between developers and civil society. Also, flying vides an excellent opportunity to study how the squirrel droppings have become mediating artifacts, human-nonhuman aspect of the social becomes visi- because the animal itself is not generally visible. ble through conservation efforts. The social emerges As a result of strict conservation, the flying as interagentivities (Ingold, 1997) in which humans squirrel has been embedded very broadly and tightly and flying squirrels become inherent constituents of in the practices of land use and forest management, new practices and constantly determine each other’s and also in the everyday life of citizens. As the de- positions in new ways. scriptions above show, the human-squirrel relation- First, flying squirrels dwell in the same forests ship was not in fact completely new—flying squirrels used by people. Their response to landscape changes have lived together with humans for a long period of indicates adaptation to forest management, but the time. The point is that strict conservation rulings problem in conservation is the quality and size of made the human-nonhuman relations apparent and habitats in commercial and urban forests. Young reorganized them into new practices among urban flying squirrels searching for an empty habitat settle dwellers, amateur ecologists, planners, nature sur- only in mature forests close to final felling, which veyors, and forestry experts. This has happened under today entails “squirrel rotation” in forest manage- conditions where top-down policy implementation ment, meaning that professionals and forest owners works together with local policy formulation. New cannot avoid the possibility of squirrel presence but human-squirrel ecologies with particular influence on must be conscious of it. The invisibility of the flying the socioecological system were born as a result of squirrel—actually its simultaneous presence and the reorganization. Human-squirrel interaction also absence—has been problematic for professionals and has improvisational dimensions, which is an im- has raised conflicts in forest management. Illegal portant feature of the social. For instance, many indi- cuttings in flying squirrel habitats have triggered vidual flying squirrels have adopted urban environ- police interrogations, but guidelines by the responsi- ments, nest boxes, and even buildings for nesting ble ministries have diminished the conflicts. places. In conservation the tension remains: there are Second, the old image of the flying squirrel as an anxieties about restrictions resulting from conserva- animal of remote wilderness areas has faded. The tion but also about the survival of the flying squirrel flying squirrel has become a player in urban devel- population. opment and a nightmare for planners. Due to their movements across urban landscapes, flying squirrels have intermingled with the whole planning process,

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

43

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social

Wolf Attacks in Southwestern Finland by the Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute The grey wolf (Canis lupus) is strictly protected (FGFRI) were lower, but strict numbers could not be by the EU’s Habitats Directive. Since Finland joined provided. Concerned, insecure, and afraid, people the EU, the Finnish wolf population has increased adjusted their habits, walking less in the forests and and spread from the eastern to the western part of the keeping their dogs indoors overnight. Sheep farmers country. 3 However, the process of recovery has been did not use dangerous grazing fields, key pastures so slow that the European Commission initiated first were electrically fenced, and children were driven to infringement proceedings in 2001 and then called the school by taxis. Four characteristics show the ad- case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 2005. justments in the face of the sudden reappearance of The Commission claimed that: (1) the wolf’s conser- wolves: (1) people were surprised and afraid; (2) the vation status in Finland was not favorable; (2) Fin- presence of the wolves was bodily experienced, that land had not honored the principle of strict protec- is, it affected everyday activities; (3) the effects of tion; and (3) Finland had not adequately explored the wolf presence were felt collectively: surprise, feasible alternatives for wolf predation to reduce fear, and consequent adjustments were shared with losses to livestock. Following an investigation into community members; and (4) in a time of adjust- the allegations, the ECJ rendered its judgment in June ments, primary emotions (of surprise and fear) joined 2007. Finland was found to be at fault on the second with social emotions (of, say, anger and frustration) charge, but not on the other first or third. The ECJ and contributed to an emotional landscape hostile to ordered the government of Finland to rectify its fail- wolves. ure to offer strict protection to wolves. In practice, From the communal perspective, it is interesting the ECJ judged that the issuance of the killing li- that in 2009 only one or two wolf sightings occurred, censes must be based on robust, Directive-based rea- while in the previous year, continuous observations sons. were made. There were no wolf attacks on sheep or Already at the beginning of the infringement other domestic animals. The wolves were gone. Ac- proceedings, Finland sought to situate the wolf in the cording to FGFRI, there were no biological reasons context of Finnish society and culture, particularly for their disappearance: the roe deer and moose pop- with respect to livelihoods and public safety in the ulations were sufficiently dense and there were no country’s rural regions. The government’s position signs of lethal diseases. Apparently, wolves were was that the people of Finland have a contentious illegally poached. It seems that local people and relationship with the wolf, since the species repre- communities in Köyliö and its surrounding areas sents a historic threat to perceptions of safety in rural “fixed” the “wolf problem.” Communities showed parts of the country. The Finnish government argued vigor and resilience, that is, social sustainability.5 But that the Commission is obligated to acknowledge the this social sustainability was not the ecologically pertinence of social, economic, and cultural aspects helpful kind that the Commission or Finnish national of this particular biodiversity challenge and let Fin- authorities promote. land practice its wolf policy in a way suited to na- Consequently, the Commission initiated an in- tional conditions and needs. The Commission as- formal discussion on illegal hunting with Finnish serted that it is “normal for wolves to avoid people” authorities in late 2009. The Commission interpreted and that Article 3 of the Habitats Directive—calling the situation as the case of ill-fitted enforcement of attention to the importance of “social, economic, and the Habitats Directive. Finland agreed and acted ac- cultural aspects to biodiversity”—could not be used cordingly. It continued tightening the institutional to justify derogation from strict protection setup of large carnivore protection. This process had (Hiedanpää & Bromley, 2011).4 been ongoing since Finland’s accession to the EU in In August 2008, wolves attacked sheep on four 1995, but especially after the EJC judgment. As a pastures in the town of Köyliö in southwestern Fin- response to the immediate wolf situation, Finland land and caused the death of 65 animals. Rumors centralized decision making concerning the dero- spread that also the communities of neighboring gation from strict protection to the Finnish Wildlife southern Pyhäjärvi region were surrounded by around Agency in March, 2011. The purpose was to separate 25 wolves. Local hunters organized a census, which wildlife politics from authoritative decision making. verified the number. The official estimates provided The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry has initiated two other legal adjustments: to increase the nominal 3 There are several critical studies of Finnish wolf policy. See, for value of large carnivores and to introduce a new example, Bisi et al. (2007) and Ratamäki (2008). criminal category, “severe hunting crime.” The latter 4 Finland referred to Article 2§3 of the Habitats Directive. The Commission referred to an ECJ ruling (C-247/85 Commission vs. 5 Belgium), according to which, Article 2§3 of the Habitats Di- The same acts of resilience seemed to take place elsewhere in rective could not override an obligation to strict protection. Finland (Anon., 2009).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

44

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social came into force in April, 2011. According to the re- jured animals, and dead animals in the sties. In 2007, newed law, the telemonitoring of suspects by the the Finnish Minister of Agriculture and Forestry and police is allowed, and a conviction leads to a prison the Farmers’ Union denied the existence of any ani- term of four months to four years. One of the pur- mal welfare problems. Instead, they claimed that the poses of the adjustments is to communicate to the pictures were not from Finnish farms at all (i.e., the Commission that the Finnish government takes de- activists’ campaign was labeled a con). The Minister clining wolf numbers seriously. further declared that if any problems did exist, the From the perspective of rural communities, will situation would immediately be improved. Two years people really find these regulatory measures reasona- later, video clips taken secretly by the same organi- ble as a way to come to terms with the wolf pres- zation indicated again the mistreatment of pigs. This ence? With regard to the reactions in Köyliö, the time the problems were not denied and, for instance, workability of the plans put forth by the EU and the the Farmers’ Union, condemned animal welfare vio- Finnish government concerning how to mitigate the lations. Yet, both times, the agricultural policy play- wolf-related socioecological problems seems highly ers argued that animal welfare problems are related questionable, especially from the point of view of the only to individual farms, not to the food system or the social. Do these measures alleviate the concerns? Do industrial mode of animal farming. they return the feeling of security, or help people to Contrary to what the central agricultural policy live with the wolf presence? Perhaps not. These players may have expected, the action of the animal measures focus on mechanical causes behind the wolf rights organization spurred public debate on animal decline and not on purposes and emotions particular welfare. The films revealed serious weaknesses in the to cherished habits and customs. The measures taken operational conditions of Finnish pig farms, and the will probably also widen the gap between the social public seemed no longer convinced that animal wel- and the public, working contrary to intentions. fare was adequately addressed. In official terms, the maneuvers resulted in police enquiries; the farmers The Politicization of Swine Welfare were suspected of violating the animal welfare legis- Finnish farm-animal production has recently un- lation and the animal rights activists were suspected dergone profound structural changes. During 1995- of intrusions into farmers’ homes (as the pig-rearing 2008, the number of animal farms was halved, with facilities are considered part of the family farm). the number of pig farms falling from 6,250 to 2,300, Some cases also led to the consideration of charges. but the number of pigs (and the production of pork) The public debate also had policy consequences. For have not decreased (Tike, 2009). Rather, the average instance, the state introduced new forms of agricul- unit size has expanded rapidly as Finland has turned tural subsidies, such as animal welfare payments and increasingly to industrial-scale pig farming. Under financial support for farm investments promoting these circumstances, Finnish consumers are becom- animal welfare. ing more distanced from meat production and their Superficially, the politicization of swine welfare personal relations to farming are unavoidably be- seems a veterinary and an economic issue. However, coming reduced (Jokinen et al. 2011). when examined more closely, it also appears, for The drastic change in animal farming brings up several reasons, to be a social issue. In public discus- the issue of the welfare of farm animals. In basic sion, the agricultural policy players explained the terms, animal welfare is a normative principle related violations of the animal welfare legislation by the to what animals need to have a good life. Attempts to heavy workload in farming and the bureaucratic improve animal welfare have commonly centered on practices of agricultural policy which are exhausting three broad objectives: to ensure good physical health farmers. The mistreatment of pigs was also justified and functioning of animals; to minimize unpleasant by the strenuous competition and weak profitability affective states, such as pain and fear, and allow ani- associated with current farming practices. Pigs were mals normal pleasures; and to let animals develop thus labeled as the victims of the global market and and live in ways that are natural for the species the agricultural treadmill. Further, it was noted that (Fraser, 2008). However, in public discussion animal farmers lack adequate social support networks to help welfare is a contested concept loaded with disagree- them manage the economic pressure that they face. ments, for instance, on the moral value of animals Interestingly, this lack of assistance is actually a con- and on the justification of animal farming. sequence of the industrialization of animal farming: In November, 2007 and again in December, the business is increasingly hidden away in large 2009, a Finnish animal rights organization, Oikeutta factory farms that operate with a smaller and smaller Eläimille (Rights for Animals), publicized films shot workforce. Consumers, rural inhabitants, and even secretly in pig farms across the country. The films fellow farmers, are becoming distanced from animal reported, for instance, on dirty pigsties, sick and in- farming, which means that the countryside is steadily

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

45

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social

becoming disconnected from agricultural production. (Boogaard et al. 2010). We call this process a cultural The case of Finnish swine suggests that farm animal gap. To understand how images of animal farming— welfare is tightly bound to the welfare of farmers. and the gap between the picture of rural idyll and the This seems to corroborate Hobson’s (2007) view that reality of factory farming—are constructed, it is im- (animal) political spaces are constructed through re- portant to consider the embeddedness of people’s lational agency. experience and the social context in which their be- liefs and expectations are formed. Most people today How is the Social Constituted in these Cases? have little personal knowledge or experience of farming and are therefore regarded as lay persons: the As our cases indicate, the social is not a group of customs and habits they live by are very different people living in certain settings according to prede- from what had traditionally been the case. Yet, ani- termined norms and traditions. The social is a contin- mal farming is a strong example of such sociotech- gent, activated constellation of interagentivities that nical controversies where public debate would be emerges together with a shared concern that particu- highly instructive. lar customs and habits are not serving their expected Flying squirrel conservation is an exemplar of purposes. In our cases, expectations are disturbed by socioecological potentials. Much more adaptive ac- concerns over the habits and livelihoods of the flying tivities were ongoing during the implementation than squirrel, wolf, and pig. Ontologically, the social is could be expected on the basis of the formal rules of mediated and mediating. But what is this social, and, conservation. A complex constellation of actors and more importantly, what does it do and why? interactions were at play, and this emerging social First, the social as a contingent, activated, and activation cannot be explained by cultural memory or emergent constellation of interagentivities shows that cultural gap. Instead, there were latent skills, capaci- understanding human-nonhuman temporalities and ties, and practices of living with flying squirrels, and their emergent nature is essential in defining social these had been developed gradually among amateur sustainability. We argue that without recognizing the ecologists since the 1960s. Such readiness among critical temporalities in a given socioecological sys- forestry and planning professionals did not develop tem, it is not possible to understand the social. The until several years after the legal rules of conserva- temporal features of our various case studies are very tion had come into force, and even then it was not different. The current reappearance of wolves in well internalized. However, the professionals’ expe- southwestern Finland reveals that for a hundred years rience and practical working habits in local environ- wolves were nonexistent there due to hunting. Their ments helped them adopt the new practices. The case reappearance has activated the cultural memory of indicates that the judicial implementation of nature the wolf’s presence. Sentiments associated with old conservation does not work properly without a reor- agrarian lifestyles have been brought forth; people ganization of the social among local actors and their are aware of the stories that wolves allegedly kill environments. Reorganization happens within socio- sheep, and reportedly threaten human babies. It ecological systems and customary livelihoods seems that the disturbed agricultural customs trigger therein, and local residents may be a critical resource. stories and sentiments, even though productive prac- Second, and related to our first point concerning tices are now very different from the earlier era. The temporalities, when the social is activated and under governmental bodies are blind to the underlying cus- reorganization, it affects social order by making cer- toms and the socioecological fabric that sustain ex- tain socioecological properties visible and hiding pectations and give reasons for action. This causes others. In the case of swine welfare, for instance, the social restlessness despite the impressive efforts of activists tried to make the problems in animal farm- developing adaptive wolf management. ing apparent to the public. The films shot secretly in A kind of temporal dislocation helps us recog- the pig farms clearly showed malpractices that indi- nize the social in pig farming. As the structural cated problems in broader practices of meat produc- change of Finnish agriculture has been extremely tion and gave swine a critical public existence. In rapid, the prevailing public image of domestic food contrast, even though the activists aimed at polarizing production does not necessarily correspond to reality. the population’s attitudes, public confidence in the The idyllic image of family farming is not up-to-date, system of Finnish food production and agrarian rou- since factory farming is distancing itself both from tines has remained surprisingly strong so far (e.g., consumers and local communities. The family farm is Jokinen et al. 2011). a social and cultural institution believed to be sus- In the wolf case, the wolf activated the commu- tainable: the farm is the farmer’s home, not a factory. nity. Almost all human constituents of the social, it Contrary to reality, people seem willing to ignore the seems, became active in trying to make the presence production side of farming in favor of the idyll of the wolf visible by, for instance, revealing some

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

46

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social

critical features of its life patterns and habits. Hunters the habits of the people are not. The life of the wolf is counted the number of wolves from the tracks, local secured by law, and unlike some legal prohibitions, people reported wolf sightings, sheep farmers built this one is tightly enforced. Hence, the wolf does not stronger fences, local newspapers wrote extensively respect human privacy, but rural people must respect about the wolf, civil servants and authorities across the privacy of the wolf. Many people consider these multiple scales of governance were alarmed and con- EU-compelled relations unfair. As such, the presence cerned, and, also, wolf researchers appeared in com- of the wolf is grudgingly accepted but people believe munities and tried either to put radio collars on the that wolves should stay where they naturally belong, animals or interview local people. The presence of in wilderness. Rural people feel that their basic rights the wolf became almost like a carnival and spectacle. have been violated and, therefore, it seems, the social The wolf became visible for part of the community as operates against this particular feature of communal people reacted to its presence in various ways. Local environment, the wolf. wolf activists (nature conservationists) tried to under- In a similar way, serious conflicts about the state or tone down the discussion concerning the sig- privileging of flying squirrel conservation over eco- nificance of the increasing presence of the wolf. nomically significant private and public development The emergence of new forms of human-squirrel projects have given rise to rumors of flying squirrels life eroded the whole idea of nature conservation. being spotted here and there, somebody planting The conventional practice of conservation until then squirrel droppings in sites under development, or was to delineate areas for plants and animals to keep some dubious profiteers bagging droppings to sell to them outside human disturbance. This does not work those who need. These are not only anecdotes in the with flying squirrels. Here, the essence of conserva- customary sense but an important part of collective tion is that flying squirrels are entangled in human sense-making in a situation where authorities, profes- activities. The burning question for several years was sionals, and citizens do not know how to proceed. how to conserve an animal constantly living in the Sense-making is needed for collective awareness, close vicinity of humans and intermingling with all preparedness, and action, and it is the social which productive practices related to modification of the makes it possible. In the case of swine, the animal forest. The Prime Minister of Finland then claimed activists, more or less purposefully, redefined the that the EU was on the wrong track since there are boundary between the private and public space. Yet, flying squirrels behind the Russian border, thus the strong cultural support for family farming entirely questioning the national responsibility for conserva- maintains farming in the private space, which, once tion. On one hand, the current conservation standard again, can be seen as a partial failure in making con- followed in forestry fits the squirrel presence and sumers more attentive to meat production and animal makes public representations of the sites. On the rights. other hand, it is known that forest-machine drivers make spontaneous overnight observations of flying Conclusion squirrels against the light when working, but nobody knows how dutifully they save the sites from cutting. Social sustainability is often defined as a wide- These examples show that the social is constituted by ranging multidimensional concept. Our case studies very diverse human-squirrel ecologies, discourses, have sought to provide new perspectives to coex- and encounters, and therefore only part of it is pub- istential practices in the context of management, licly shared and visible at a time. protection, and production. The cases challenge ef- Third, the social also works to produce and re- forts to adopt a human-centered view of the social as produce boundaries between an organism and its the basis for developing the concept of sustainability. environment. This characteristic of the social has The one-sidedly human view of the social is unreal- several manifestations. Basically, it is about how istic and unfair, and it tends to lead to atemporal positions, agencies, and powers are created, shifted, definitions of social sustainability in contested politi- assigned, and removed. It goes beyond the above- cal processes. Even though the examples that we pre- mentioned historical sensitivity by bringing items sent indicated perpetuity, cultural continuity, nostal- into discourse or foreclosing them from it. For in- gia, and cultural or political inertia in the social stance, the special feature of the wolf’s presence is sphere, they were also dominated by rapid changes that the wolf comes very close. The wolf penetrates and reorganization of the social, suggesting the im- the sphere of the private: it comes for the dog or portance of resilience and capacities to adopt sheep, makes children feel anxious on their way to changes. school, and makes people fear it. It is not only a These cases have also emphasized the embodied matter of feeling. The wolf, in fact, is superior to nature of the social and how the social gains commu- rural people. The wolf’s habits are protected while nicative significance and force when under disturb-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

47

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social ance. The societal change—diverging customs and Bisi, J., Kurki. S., Svensberg, M., & Liukkonen, T. 2007. Human practices—has challenged the traditional human- dimensions on wolf (Canis lupus) conflicts in Finland. Euro- pean Journal of Wildlife Research 53(4):304–314. animal bonds even though politicians seem to dwell Boogaard B., Bock, B., Oosting, S., & Krogh, E. 2010. Visiting a on the nostalgia of agrarian practical virtues in le- farm: an exploratory study of the social construction of ani- gitimating industrial animal farming, principles of mal farming in Norway and the Netherlands based on sensory wolf management, or cohabitating the forests with perception. International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food 17(1):24–50. flying squirrels. As our cases indicate, there is no one Buller, H. & Morris, C. 2003. Farm animal welfare: a new reper- social sustainability, but many—at least as many as toire of nature-society relations or modernism re-embedded? there are significant contesting customs in relation to Sociologia Ruralis 43(3):216–237. the disturbance practices and images to which the Casula Vifell, Å. & Soneryd, L. 2010. Organizing matters: how “the social dimension” gets lost in sustainability projects. contestation gives rise. What follows is a potent Sustainable Development Published Online April 20. question: how should we define sustainability from Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. 2011. The the social perspective if there are no ethically sus- social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban tainable human-nonhuman relations left? social sustainability. Sustainable Development 19(5):289– 300. If the social contingently emerges with disturbed Dewey, J. 1988 [1922]. The Middle Works of John Dewey, Volume socioecological settings, or environments, as Dewey 14. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. would put it, and if disturbances of various kinds are Durant, R., Fiorino, D., & O’Leary, R. (Eds.). 2004. Environmen- perpetual, then the challenge of social sustainability tal Governance Reconsidered. Challenges, Choices and Op- portunities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. is how human-nonhuman constellations allow and Ernstson, H., Sörlin, S., & Elmqvist, T. 2008. Social movements enable disturbed customs and habits to revive and and ecosystem services–the role of social network structure renew themselves. Our flying squirrel entanglements, in protecting and managing urban green areas in Stockholm. wolf packs, and swine activists are like nomadic Ecology and Society 13(2):39. Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. 2002. The Way We Think: Concep- movements that activate the social. This contingent tual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. New constellation calls for agonistic respect for one an- York: Basic Books. other in the changing context of interagentivity. Folke, C. 2006. Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16(3):253–267. Franklin, A. & White, R. 2001. Animals and modernity: changing Acknowledgement human-animal relations, 1949–98. Journal of Sociology We would like to thank three anonymous referees and the 37(3):219–238. editors for their helpful comments and suggestions. We Fraser, D. 2008. Understanding Animal Welfare: The Science in its also thank the Academy of Finland for financial support for Cultural Context. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. the projects Of Wolf, Moose and Man: Ecosystem Services, Galaz, V., Olsson, P., Hahn, T., Folke, C., & Svedin, U. 2008. The Institutions, and Creative Governance (#122255); Protec- problem of fit among biophysical systems, environmental and resource regimes, and broader governance systems: in- tion of Nature, Politics of Nature: Setting Priorities sights and emerging challenges. In O. Young, L. King, & H. through Public Deliberation in the Era of Comprehensive Schröder (Eds.), Institutions and Environmental Change: Conservation (#122306); and Politicised Animals: The Principal Findings, Applications, and Research Frontiers. Consumer and Farm Animals (#128122) that enabled us to pp. 147–182. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. gather the material for this research. Haila, Y., Kousis, M., Jokinen, A., Nygren, N., & Psarikidou, K. 2007. Building Trust through Public Participation: Learning from Conflicts over the Implementation of the Habitats Di- rective. PAGANINI Work-package 4. Participatory Govern- References ance and Institutional Innovation. http://www.univie.ac.at/ LSG/paganini/finals_pdf/WP4_FinalReport.pdf. Alger, J. & Alger, S. 2003. Drawing the line between humans and Hanski, I. 2006. Liito-oravan Pteromys volans Suomen kannan animals: an examination of introductory sociology textbooks. koon arviointi (Estimation of the Finnish Population of the International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy Siberian Flying Squirrel). Loppuraportti, Helsinki: 23(3):69–93. Ympäristöministeriö (in Finnish). Anon. 2009. Suurpetojen laiton tappaminen: ei kenenkään etu Hiedanpää, J. 2002. European-wide conservation vs. local well- (Illegal killing of large carnivores: of nobody’s interest). being: the reception of Natura 2000 reserve network in Kar- http://mmm.multiedition.fi/sarvi/sarvet/4_2009/fi/1.php. Au- via, SW-Finland. Landscape and Urban Planning 61(2– gust 12, 2010 (in Finnish). 4):113–123. Barron, C. (Ed.). 2003. A strong distinction between humans and Hiedanpää, J. & Bromley, D. 2011. The harmonization game: non-humans is no longer required for research purposes: a reason and rules in European wolf policy. Environmental debate between Bruno Latour and Steve Fuller. History of the Policy and Governance 21:99–111. Human Sciences 16(2):77–99. Hobson, K. 2007. Political animals? On animals as subjects in an Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (Eds.). 2003. Navigating enlarged political geography. Political Geography 26(3): Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complex- 250–267. ity and Change. New York: Cambridge University Press. Hobson-West, P. 2007. Beasts and boundaries: an introduction to Berkes, F. & Folke, C. (Eds.). 2000. Linking Social and Ecological animals in sociology, science and society. Qualitative Sociol- Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for ogy Review 3(1):23–41. Building Resilience. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

48

Hiedanpää et al.: Making Sense of the Social

Hukkinen, J. 2008. Sustainability Networks: Cognitive Tools for Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Expert Collaboration in Social-Ecological Systems. New Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Routledge. York: Basic Books. Hukkinen, J. 2010. Fit in the Body: Matching Embodied Cognition Law, J. 2004. After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. with Socio-Ecological Systems. Albrecht Daniel Thaer Kol- New York: Routledge. loquium. November 18–19, Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, Berlin, Law, J. & Urry, J. 2004. Enacting the social. Economy and Society Germany. 33(3):390–410. Information Centre of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Light, A. 2004. Methodological pragmatism, animal welfare and (Tike). 2009. Yearbook of Farm Statistics 2009. Helsinki: Of- hunting. In E. McKenna & A. Light (Eds.), Animal Pragma- ficial Statistics of Finland. http://www.maataloustilastot.fi/ tism: Rethinking Human-Nonhuman Relationships. pp. 119– sites/default/files/maatilatilastollinen_vuosikirja_2009.pdf. 139. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Ingold, T. 1997. Life beyond the edge of nature? Or, the mirage of Littig, B. & Grießler, E. 2005. Social sustainability: a catchword society. In J. Greenwood (Ed.), The Mark of the Social. pp. between political pragmatism and social theory. International 231–252. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Journal of Sustainable Development 8(1–2):65–79. Johnson, M. 2010. Cognitive science and Dewey’s theory of mind, Macnaghten, P. 2004. Animals in their nature: a case study on thought, and language. In M. Cochran (Ed.), Cambridge public attitudes to animals, genetic modification and “na- Companion to Dewey. pp. 123–165. New York: Cambridge ture.” Sociology 38(3):533–551. University Press. McKenna, E. 2004. Pragmatism and the production of livestock. In Johnston, C. 2008. Beyond the clearing: towards a dwelt animal E. McKenna & A. Light (Eds.), Animal Pragmatism: Re- geography. Progress in Human Geography 32(5):633–649. thinking Human-Nonhuman Relationships. pp. 160–175. Jokinen A., Haila, Y., & Nygren, N. 2009. Liito-oravan suojelu Bloomington: Indiana University Press. poliittisena prosessina ja yhteistoimintahankkeena Tam- Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of In- pereen kaupunkiseudulla. (Co-operative conservation of the stitutions for Collective Action. New York: Cambridge Uni- Siberian flying squirrel as a political process in the Tampere versity Press. City Region, SW Finland) Ympäristöoikeuden ja -politiikan Philo, C. & Wilbert, C. 2000. Animal Spaces, Beastly Places: New vuosikirja 3:7–68 (in Finnish). Geographies of Human-Animal Relations. New York: Jokinen, A., Nygren, N., Haila, Y., & Schrader, M. 2007. Yhteise- Routledge. loa liito-oravan kanssa. Liito-oravan suojelun ja kasvavan Ratamäki, O. 2008. Finland’s wolf policy and new governance. kaupunkiseudun maankäytön tarpeiden yhteensovittaminen. Journal of Environment & Development 17(3):316–339. (Living Together with the Flying Squirrel: Integrating the Shapiro, K. & DeMello, M. 2010. The state of human-animal Protection of the Flying Squirrel with Land-Use Needs in an studies. Society and Animals 18(3):307–318. Expanding City Region) Suomen ympäristö 20/2007. Tam- Stockholm Resilience Centre. 2010. Resilience Dictionary. http:// pere: Pirkanmaan ympäristökeskus. http://www.ymparisto.fi/ www.stockholmresilience.org/research/whatisresilience/resili download.asp?contentid=68031&lan=fi (in Finnish). encedictionary.4.aeea46911a3127427980004355.html. Jokinen, P., Kupsala, S., & Vinnari, M. 2011. Consumer trust in August 31, 2010. animal-farming practices: exploring the high trust of Finnish Tovey, H. 2003. Theorising nature and society in sociology: the consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies Pub- invisibility of animals. Sociologia Ruralis 43(3):196–215. lished Online February 18. Wallace, J. 2009. Norms and Practices. Ithaca: Cornell University Knight, J. (Ed.). 2000. Natural Enemies: People-Wildlife Conflicts Press. in Anthropological Perspective. New York: Routledge.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

49

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Organizing for social sustainability: governance through bureaucratization in meta-organizations

Åsa Casula Vifell1 & Renita Thedvall2 1 Department of Political Science, Stockholm University and Institute of Contemporary History, Södertörn University, Huddinge 14189 Sweden (email: [email protected]) 2 Stockholm Centre for Organizational Research (Score), Stockholm University, Stockholm 10691 Sweden (email: [email protected])

The difficulties nation states face when attempting to use traditional legal means to cope with transnational phenom- ena such as environmental degradation, international labor conditions, and global trade have created an opportunity for the emergence of new types of regulations. These rules are often issued by organizations that produce voluntary measures such as standards and action plans to influence the behavior of individuals and institutions. These are in many cases meta-organizations that have other organizations rather than individuals as members. They are im- portant links in the process of creating and diffusing dominant definitions in the “ideoscape” of influential policy con- cepts such as sustainable development. This article explores how two meta-organizations, Fairtrade International (FLO) and Organic Forum, shape the concepts of fair trade and organic food by providing ideas and content to the ideoscape of sustainable development. We argue that this process takes place by governance through bureaucrati- zation in which fair trade and organic food become formalized, precisely defined, and made visible. This in turn de- termines how—or even if—the social dimension of sustainability can be made into policy. Furthermore, we find ex- planations in these processes as to why the social dimension of sustainability tends to be the most underdeveloped. We conclude that bureaucratization is also a form of politics, although not one that is as easily recognizable as an open power struggle.

KEYWORDS: sustainable development, globalization, standardization, organizations, food industry, bureaucracy, social conditions

Introduction often the most difficult to incorporate into actual projects and policies (Dillard et al. 2009; Casula The difficulties nation states face when attempt- Vifell & Soneryd, 2010). The social dimension gen- ing to use traditional legal means to cope with trans- erally includes human welfare, quality of life, social national phenomena such as environmental degrada- justice, social cohesion, cultural diversity, democratic tion, international labor conditions, and global trade rights, gender issues, workers’ rights, broad partici- have created opportunities for new types of regula- pation, social capital development, and individual tions (Brunsson & Jacobsson, 2000). Most often, capabilities (Boström, 2010). An explanation for the organizations issue these measures as voluntary or difficulties might be found in the way that the con- soft rules such as standards, action plans, rankings, cept is filled with meaning and disseminated. and indicators to influence the behavior of individu- It is therefore vital to study meta-organizations als and institutions. These organizations are often because they are important links in the process of meta-organizations that have other organizations producing powerful definitions in the “ideoscape” of rather than individuals as members (Ahrne & sustainable development, in particular social sustain- Brunsson, 2008). Even though they do not have much ability (Appadurai, 1996). The notion of an ideoscape formal authority over their members, meta- suggests that ideas and policies transcend national organizations are crucial for understanding the mech- borders. Traditionally, political and ideological anisms through which globalization occurs (Ahrne & boundaries have been confined to nation states and Brunsson, 2008). Among other things, they play an intergovernmental organizations such as the United active role in giving meaning to powerful concepts Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU). In the that shape organizations’ (as well as individuals’) new landscape, competing political and ideological reality and activities (Meyer et al. 1997). communities become more important. Many of the One such concept is sustainable development actors involved in shaping the ideoscape of sustain- and its three dimensions: economic, ecological, and able development are meta-organizations that per- social. Of these three facets, the social dimension is form meta-governance, which we understand as gov-

 2012 Casula Vifell & Thedvall Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 50

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability

ernance of self-regulatory networks (Sørensen & work on policies that are closely linked with sustain- Torfing, 2007). Such a perspective recognizes that able development. FLO develops policies that estab- some actors are more powerful in defining and con- lish fair trade as a way to create sustainable market trolling the ideoscape. interactions (see, for example, Young & Utting, Studies of meta-governance have investigated 2005) while Organic Forum works on policies that the role of state actors as meta-governors (O’Toole, promote organic food as a means to achieve more 2008). Our approach to the study of meta- sustainable production and consumption. The two organizations and meta-governance is somewhat dif- cases focus on topics highly relevant for understand- ferent—as are the particular consequences that follow ing how the social dimension of sustainability is de- from it. As states are not the only ones trying to gov- fined and subsequently used by other organizations. ern networks, we argue that meta-organizations carry Our empirical analysis contributes to an understand- out particular types of meta-governance practices that ing of how meta-organizations influence the defini- we call “governance through bureaucratization.” tion of social sustainability. Even though the content of a certain policies might We speak of bureaucratization in the Weberian be soft (in the sense of not being legally binding), sense: policy processes are guided by formal rules, meta-organizations are able to exercise authority over clearly defined policies, and decision-making hierar- their members by effectively forcing them to comply chies, and produce archived, written documents with certain established processes. Some actors are (Weber, 1958). Furthermore, a central feature of bu- also better at coping with certain types of informal reaucratization is that it generates predictability in procedures than others (Bryer, 2010). Temporal dis- decision making within organizations (Ahrne, 1989). ciplining and process governance have been identi- We divide governance through bureaucratization into fied as important tools for controlling the activities of three analytical dimensions. First, we have formali- participating organizations (Jacobsson, 2004). Hav- zation, when an increasing number of organizational ing them perform the same type of tasks at a specific procedures—for example meetings—become rou- time and establishing common deadlines are two tinized and scripted by formal structures. Second, examples of governance through bureaucratization. precision involves ongoing efforts to clarify and re- We argue that such governance in meta- fine the definition of a particular concept. Finally, organizations affects strong policy concepts such as visibility entails making the policy apparent through social sustainability. Governance through bureau- published action plans and standards. It is thus possi- cratization is an often neglected area of policy re- ble to argue that governance through bureaucratiza- search, which tends to focus on open negotiations and tion pushes the idea of social sustainability through a bargaining between actors (see Johansson & filter of procedures that package it accordingly into Tallberg, 2010). In this article, we examine how two different categories (cf., Handelman, 2004). meta-organizations, Fairtrade International (FLO)1 Before turning to the analytical section of this and Organic Forum (Ekologiskt Forum), a Swedish article, we describe the organizations that we investi- platform organization for organic food production, gated. FLO is a meta-organization that was born out shape the social dimension of sustainability, infusing of the fair-trade movement which has been active the concept with ideas and content via governance since the 1940s. However, it was not until 1988 that through bureaucratization.2 FLO and Organic Forum the first fair-trade label, Max Havelaar, was devel- oped in the Netherlands.3 In the intervening two dec-

1 ades, a number of fair-trade labels were established. Formerly known as the Fairtrade Labelling Organisations Many of these organizations began to cooperate, an International (FLO). 2 arrangement ultimately formalized as FLO in 1997 The data have been collected through participant observation, interviews, and document studies. We have followed FLO’s work (see, e.g., Renard, 2003; Raynolds et al. 2007; in determining its standards and criteria for fair trade since 2006 Reinecke, 2008; Thedvall, 2010). In 2002, FLO de- through interviews and document studies. In the case of Organic veloped its own label that most national labeling ini- Forum, we studied the development of its Action Plan 2010 for tiatives now use. Standards have been developed to increased organic production and consumption in 2008–2009. In the FLO case, eleven interviews were conducted with members of which products must adhere to keep the FLO label. the FLO Board of Directors and the FLO Standards Committee. The process of organizing FLO’s work and develop- Interviews have also been carried out with Rättvisemärkt (the ing the standard defines and makes the notion of fair Swedish representative in FLO) in Sweden as well as FLO’s trade more precise. FLO’s ambition is to take into certification organization, FLO-Cert. The changes of the standards and the organization of FLO have also been investigated through extensive document studies. In the Organic Forum case, ten interviews were conducted with members of the steering group as organized by Organic Forum related to implementing the plan. In well as with representatives from other organizations taking part in total, four participant observations were conducted during such the process. Participant observations were carried out during activities, which usually lasted 2–4 hours. 3 presentation of the finalized plan and during hearings and activities For a historical overview, see Raynolds et al. (2007).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

51

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability

account all the dimensions of sustainable develop- organizations to encompassing fair-trade producers.4 ment, with a focus on social sustainability. FLO’s growth has resulted in the need to define spe- Organic Forum is, as most meta-organizations, cialized tasks, including the creation of several com- national. Established in 2002, it functions as a meet- mittees that assist the board of directors. The FLO ing place for actors interested in developing organic website lists the Standards Committee, the Nomina- production. In addition, it brings together organiza- tion Committee, and the Finance Committee in its tions interested in shaping Sweden’s position in the organizational chart. The board is now also assisted EU concerning these issues. The organization is by a Governance Committee that deals with terms of partly financed by the Swedish Board of Agriculture reference, voting procedures, and so forth and an (Jordbruksverket) and housed within the Royal Swe- Audit Committee that monitors the organization’s fi- dish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry (Kungliga nances. Furthermore, a specific group known as the Skogs- och Lantbruksakademien–KSLA). Organic Leadership Team was established in 2009/2010 to food production has steadily increased in Sweden handle future opportunities and problems in promot- over the last two decades, but supply shortages were ing fair trade. still seen as a persistent problem. To increase pro- The process of developing the FLO standards duction and consumption of organic food, Organic has subsequently been formalized, in turn affecting Forum enlisted stakeholders to help develop an action the division of tasks among the participants. Another plan. The participating organizations were producers example given by one member in the Standards and consumers, labeling organizations, environmen- Committee is that the group used to be more involved talists, and public authorities (Ekologiskt Forum, in the details of standard setting, but has recently 2007). The action plan aimed to increase overall pro- begun to delegate an increasing share of this work to duction by 25% and for 20% of cultivated land to be the standards unit (which itself has grown in size). farmed sustainably by 2010. The targets were politi- Furthermore, in 2004, the organization was divided cal goals determined by the Swedish government and into FLO e.V and FLO-Cert. This split was partly parliament (Jordbruksdepartementet, 2006). prompted by the fact that FLO-Cert received ISO 65 accreditation (from the International Standards Or- Governance through Bureaucratization in FLO ganization) and this status does not allow the and Organic Forum standard-setting activities to be carried out by certi- fying organizations. Accordingly, FLO-Cert is an Formalization of the Process independent profit-making organization that certifies The formalization of activities leads to the adop- producers and traders according to the FLO e.V tion of certain types of structures, procedures, and standards. working methods, while others become inappropriate These changes have resulted in increased for- (Røvik, 2000). Formalization is understood as the malization in the processes of defining, as well as establishment of hierarchical decision-making struc- determining, which companies and what products can tures and institutionalized rules, as well as speciali- 4 zation and division of labor so as to create predicta- Labeling Initiatives full members (as of March 2012): Fairtrade bility—a central bureaucratic value (Simon, 1957). Austria, Max Havelaar Belgium, Fairtrade Canada, Fairtrade mar- We view required participation in the actual formali- ket Denmark, Fairtrade Estonia, Fairtrade Finland, Max Havelaar France, Fairtrade Deutschland Germany, Fairtrade Mark Ireland, zation of activities, such as establishing committees FairtradeTransFair Italy, Fairtrade Label Japan, Fairtrade Latvia, that meet regularly and in developing document tem- Fairtrade Lithuania, FairtradeLetzebuerg Luxembourg, Stichting plates, as a governance tool. This is an example of Max Havelaar Netherlands, Fairtrade Australia & New Zealand, governance through bureaucratization, which in this Fairtrade Max Havelaar Norway, Fairtrade Label South Africa, Asociaciónpara el Sello de Comercio Justo Spain, Fairtrade Swe- case consists of processes and structures that gently den, Max HavelaarStiftung Switzerland, Fairtrade Foundation UK, force the participating organizations to develop inter- Fairtrade Canada USA. nal policies and ideas that match the goals of the Fairtrade Marketing Organizations are the Czech Fair Trade As- meta-organization. sociation Czech Republic, Europe Korea Foundation Korea. Asso- ciate members are Comercio Justo Mexico. There are ongoing efforts within FLO to divide Producer Networks are organizations that Fairtrade Certified and categorize the various units and departments, as Producer Organizations may join and which FLO recognizes as the well as their associated tasks and roles. During its representative body of farmers, workers, and others belonging to fourteen years of existence, the organization’s Fairtrade Certified Producer Organizations. There are currently three producer networks on three continents (Africa, Asia, and governance structure has expanded both vertically South America) where Fairtrade Certified Producers Organizations and horizontally. The membership has changed dra- are located: FairtradeAfrica founded in 2004, Coordinadora matically, from including only the national labeling Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Comercio Justo (CLAC) founded in 1996, and the Network of Asian Producers (NAP) founded in 2005 (see http://www.fairtrade.net).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

52

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability

use the fair-trade label. The more formal forums and the formal governing bodies. Furthermore, because decision-making hierarchies that the definition of fair the first steering group was unable to complete its trade passes through, the less room for maneuver task due to divergent opinions about the content of there is for the various actors to interpret the concept the plan, a new steering group, with even narrower in accordance with their own interests (see also representation, was subsequently appointed by the Thedvall, 2006). In the formalization process, com- first steering group. Several interviewees from this promises and agreements occur that are difficult to group stated that they expected the discussions to overlook and defy. Governance through bureaucrati- become easier if those actors guided by strong man- zation affects what fair trade, and in turn what the dates and ideologically biased arguments were ex- ideoscape of sustainable development, might include. cluded. That the group was reorganized to meet the The action plan for increased organic food pro- deadline illustrates the importance of governance duction and consumption was developed as a tempo- through bureaucratization. As the first steering group rary project which, as is often the case, took place appointed to deal with the plan failed to reach agree- within the framework of a more permanent organiza- ment, the original deadline was breached and a re- tion, Organic Forum (Sahlin-Andersson & quest for an extension was submitted to, and granted Söderholm, 2002). This proved important in how the by, the Ministry of Agriculture. However, this delay project was formalized in terms of developing spe- meant that once the draft plan was complete, there cialized tasks. was no time to circulate it for comments from inter- First, according to the Organic Forum leadership, ested parties. organizations included in the steering and the synthe- The formalization process meant that actors sis groups were found in their preexisting network of dealing with social aspects of organic food were nei- actors.5 These tended to be organizations dealing ther represented in the steering groups nor invited to primarily with agriculture and nature conservation, take part in the hearings, as no such organizations notably the Organic Farmers, the Federation of Swe- belonged to the Organic Forum network. Since the dish Farmers, KRAV (the national labeling organiza- plan was not circulated after it was finalized, no other tion for organic food products), and the Swedish So- mechanisms existed to bring social issues to the table. ciety for Nature Conservation. This configuration of The formalization took on specific traits due to the organizations was mainly concerned with the eco- particular model of collective action (e.g., deadlines, logical and economic dimensions of sustainability steering groups, synthesis groups) that was adopted. and issues pertaining to social sustainability were The process of governance through bureaucratization excluded from the plan at the outset although nothing limited the representation of stakeholders, and in the mandate required this particular orientation thereby potentially also the plan’s policy impact, as (Jordbruksdepartementet, 2006). Other issues that not all concerned with organic food were inclined to could have been included in the action plan but were assume responsibility for implementation. left unaddressed were ecological aquaculture and organic fish products. These items were clearly re- Precision of Scope lated to organic food production and consumption, Precision entails the process of defining the but Organic Forum mainly included organizations scope of fair trade and organic food. Processes of that worked specifically on organic farming rather precision are central features of bureaucracies as they than food products in general. aim to organize activities in a rational and stable Second, the format for developing the action manner (Weber, 1958; Barnett & Finnemore, 2004; plan purposefully entailed the establishment of short Handelman, 2004). Governance through bureaucrati- deadlines and this meant that members of already zation takes the form of classifying individuals, established networks were recruited to serve within things, and ideas into categories, which shape the objects of policy making by providing definitions of

5 what is desirable, possible, and thinkable in the ide- The organizations represented in the first steering group were the oscape of sustainable development. They affect the Swedish Association for Daily Commodities (Svensk Dagligvaruhandel), the Swedish Board of Agriculture, the Centre way that policies are formulated and, in turn, what for Sustainable Agriculture/Swedish University for Agricultural can be seen as fair trade and organic food. The fol- Sciences (CUL/SLU), the Federation of Swedish Farmers, the lowing section shows how the scope of fair trade and Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, the Organic Farmers organic food has become more precisely defined and (Ekologiska Lantburkarna), KRAV, KSLA, and the Swedish Cooperative Union (COOP/KF). The final steering group that restricted through the creation and definition of spe- presented the action plan consisted of representatives from the City cific categories, such as research and development or of Göteborg (Göteborgs Stad), Milko, the Swedish Board of nondiscrimination. This process determined the ac- Agriculture, the Swedish Cooperative Union (KF), the Federation ceptable meanings of social sustainability. It is visi- of Swedish Farmers, and the consultant firm Goodpoint (which spearheaded the project). ble in our two cases, FLO and Organic Forum.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

53

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability

FLO aims to promote sustainable development a bank account. Another example is nondiscrimina- by improving working and trading conditions for tion. The previous version states: disadvantaged producers, according to the FLO web- site, in this case producers in the global south (FLO, The organization does not discriminate 2008). To meet this vision, the organization has de- against members or restrict new membership veloped a fair-trade label that is governed by a set of on the basis of race, colour, sex, sexual ori- standards. Standards are in themselves bureaucratic entation, disability, marital status, age, reli- because they have to be defined to form objective and gion, political opinion, language, property, stable categories that can be used in a variety of con- nationality, ethnicity or social origin. Fur- texts. Built into the bureaucratic processes is the on- thermore, there must be no discrimination going, but ultimately unattainable, pursuit of the regarding participation, voting rights, the “best” and most rational standards. Such circum- right to be elected, access to markets, or ac- stances create a need to continually improve the ex- cess to training, technical support or any isting standards, and this is what has happened in the other benefit of membership. case of FLO. Even though on the surface they appear to have remained the same since the larger categories The current version elaborates by defining dis- have been relatively stable, the FLO standards have crimination: been in constant flux as their definitions and struc- tures have been redrafted to be more precise. Discrimination is making an unfair distinc- As an example (see also Thedvall, 2010), the tion in the treatment of one person over an- previous version of the Generic Fairtrade Standards other on grounds that are not related to abil- for Small Producer Organizations (valid from De- ity or merit. Where particular forms of dis- cember 17, 2007) and the current version (valid from crimination exist within an economic sector August 15, 2009) both have the following rubrics or geographical region, the organization is under the heading “Social Development”: Fairtrade expected to show progress towards remov- adds Development Potential, Members are Small ing them. Who may become a member of an Producers, Democracy, Participation and Transpar- organization, and the process for joining, ency, and finally Nondiscrimination. While similar to must be made explicit in the constitution the previous version, however, the current standards and/or the statutes. These may not include are much more detailed. One example is the mini- restrictions that discriminate against partic- mum requirements for Democracy, Participation, and ular social groups on the grounds listed in Transparency (see Appendix). The previous version the standard. stated: As part of governance through bureaucratization, An organizational structure is in place which FLO begins to prioritize the wordings and definitions enables effective control by the members. in the standards to make its intentions more precise There is a General Assembly with direct or and less open to interpretation. In the case of FLO, delegated voting rights for all members as this process defines the scope of fair trade within the the supreme decision-taking body, and an ideoscape of sustainable development, in the process elected Board. The staff answers to the Gen- determining what social sustainability might entail. In eral Assembly via the Board. The organiza- these examples, social sustainability is democracy, tion holds a General Assembly at least once participation and transparency, and nondiscrimina- a year. The Annual report and accounts are tion, but the scope of these ideas has been restricted presented to and approved by the General by adding more precise definitions of what, for ex- Assembly. Administration is in place. ample, discrimination means. By governance through bureaucratization, the standards, on one hand, expand While the previous document describes the gov- what may be standardized while, on the other hand, erning bodies and respective responsibilities in gen- they make the standards more precise for determining eral, the newer standards are more detailed in outlin- what may be governed. ing how tasks should be carried out and by whom. In the case of Organic Forum, the aforemen- The current page-long version specifies, for example, tioned formalization process affected the precision of that the meetings of the General Assembly must be scope since actors representing social issues were properly minuted and signed by the president of the absent from the governing bodies and could not help board, that at least one person is responsible for man- set the agenda. The consequence was that the preci- aging the organizational administration and sion centered on already agreed upon definitions. bookkeeping and that the organization needs to have This process was reinforced by formal deadlines that

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

54

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability

limited time for reflection and more extensive discus- Visibility of Policy Output sions on the meaning of particular concepts. Visibility of policy output is the third dimension The Swedish government and parliament issued of governance through bureaucratization that shapes the formal mandate for the action plan, but the the ideoscape of sustainable development. We under- formulations were vague and left considerable room stand this as part of Weber’s (1958) notion of the for interpretation. The plan explicitly identified importance of the written document as a record of sustainable development and sustainable resource decisions in terms of increasing stability and predict- management as primary goals, but defined neither the ability. In this case, the published fair-trade standards concept as a whole nor its various dimensions and the action plan for organic food are outputs that (Jordbruksdepartementet, 2006). make policy decisions visible and possible to circu- For example, the synthesis groups were tasked late. When policies become visible, actors are con- with different topics related to the plan and asked to strained and enabled in their understanding and usage produce reports for the steering group. Joint of, in this case, the concepts of fair trade and organic knowledge production is often described as an im- food. Hence, it becomes difficult to develop policies portant part of meta-governance and as affecting the without referring to the ones published as standards content of interaction within a network (Ehrmann & and action plans. This dimension is especially im- Stinson, 1999; Klijn & Edelenbos, 2008). Joint portant in meta-organizations using soft governance, knowledge production is an important locus for the since part of their influence is decided via “regulation definition of concepts and interpretation of data, and by publication” (Snyder, 1994). may accordingly become decisive for shaping the In the case of FLO, the standards are published ideoscape of sustainable development. The synthesis and distributed through its website and FLO-Cert. groups covered six areas: primary production, Standard setting makes producers, traders, and retail- knowledge and competence building, industry sec- ers aware of what criteria they need to fulfill to use tors, private consumption, large-scale households and the fair-trade label. As part of the process of making restaurants, and commerce and markets. While eco- certain standards more visible, related documents logical and economic issues were well represented in need to clearly express the meaning and intent of the these groups, none of them dealt directly with the label. The visibility of the process consequently be- social aspects of sustainability. For instance, comes an important mechanism for requiring mem- knowledge and competence building focused on dis- bers to comply with the meta-organization’s goals. In seminating national resource- management research, the process of making policy visible through standard training in compliance with norms of organic agri- setting, all sorts of complementary documents— culture, and so forth, but not with issues concerning explanatory texts, policies, training manuals, standard research on the social aspects of converting to or- operating procedures, and so forth—are written to ganic farming. Several groups drifted from their facilitate interpretation of the standards as intended original mandates, but this was in the end considered by the meta-organization. On the FLO website, the a positive development as it revealed issues that the number of such documents about the organization steering group had not initially seen as important. and the concept of fair trade has grown significantly However, no group moved outside the boundaries of over time. the ecological and economic dimensions, of including FLO has also sought to increase its visibility as more topics on the agenda or widening the definitions an organization. This has included documenting its of organic food. operating procedures by recording its terms of refer- The scope of the plan was furthermore shaped by ence, nomination procedures, and certification-mark previous organic food plans. In 1994, the Swedish manuals. FLO additionally launched a new approach, Parliament decided to aim to increase organic pro- “Making the Difference: The New Global Strategy duction by 10% by 2000, and a subsequent plan con- for Fairtrade” in 2009 to explain what it considers to centrated on the period to 2005. These plans were be fair trade. The organization has set up a new ver- clearly focused on ecological and economic dimen- sion of the website to increase its international and sions of organic agricultural production and con- transnational visibility. FLO publishes its standards sumption and the new plan maintained the same for a number of products online, the more recent be- scope (Jordbruksverket, 1996; 1999; 2001; ing soybeans and pulses in February 2009 and gold in Jordbruksdepartementet, 2006). In summary, the pro- March 2010. Moreover, the scope of the nuts and oil cess of making the plan more precise had the effect seeds standard has expanded to cover almonds of narrowing its original mandate. through an easy entrance scheme that reduces the waiting time for producers seeking fair-trade certifi- cation. Similar measures have been implemented for the fresh vegetables standard that includes sweet po-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

55

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability

tatoes. In summary, FLO’s concept of fair trade— reinforced and promoted the accepted definitions of what it does and does not encompass—becomes offi- sustainability. cial in the process of making it visible through docu- ments and the website. FLO stakes its claim in the Conclusion: Bureaucratization of Social ideoscape of sustainable development by putting Sustainability forth its version of social sustainability that example includes, for example, notions of democracy, partici- This article has explored how two meta- pation, transparency, and nondiscrimination. organizations, FLO and Organic Forum, have shaped In the case of Organic Forum, the visible output the concepts of fair trade and organic food, thereby of the process consisted of the printed action plan, providing ideas and content to the ideoscape of sus- evaluations, newsletters, and best-practice presenta- tainable development. We have shown how govern- tions that were circulated among the stakeholders, ance through bureaucratization has accomplished this government agencies, and beyond. This diffusion objective. The meaning of fair trade and organic food reinforced the narrowed conception of sustainability, has been pushed through a filter of formalization, as no definitions or action items relating to social precision, and visibility that has determined how—or sustainability were visible in these documents. even if—the social dimension of sustainable devel- Hence, it was difficult for organizations approaching opment could be turned into policy. organic food from a social perspective to find any- What then did social sustainability come to mean thing that either supported their activities or that they in the context of fair trade and organic food? In the could augment. The way in which the action plan was case of FLO, the notion of fair trade is devoted to made public directed the focus toward the aspects of sustainable development with a focus on issues seen organic food that had previously been defined and as belonging to the social dimension. These include, formalized. for example, workers’ rights, broad participation, and The action plan document took the form of a re- democratic rights. However, FLO’s version of social port printed in color and distributed to the participant sustainability is of a particular character. Dependent organizations and was also submitted to the Swedish on the organization’s goal of supporting producers Minister for Agriculture. Furthermore, Organic Fo- and workers in the global south, it is built on the idea rum published information on the plan both during of concentrating on producer organizations that have and after the project on its website. A newsletter from to meet particular requirements with respect to an assigned evaluator was also available on the web- democracy, participation, transparency, and nondis- site. These measures were regarded as an important crimination. The social dimension, then, is connected part of raising awareness of the plan and pushing to a particular geographic area, which in turn deter- members to comply as the newsletters presented ac- mines which products can be fair traded. These prod- tivities and statistics of the issues raised. Compari- ucts have to be produced and managed in specific sons highlighting both positive and negative exam- ways. In the case of Organic Forum and its action ples were also made across different sectors such as plan, the social dimension is never openly addressed meat, milk, and bread production. However, no ex- or even articulated. This dimension of sustainable amples concerning the social aspects, such as how to development has been crowded out, leaving little bridge the divide between organic and traditional room to address the social aspects of organic food farming or how to foster better dialogue between production and consumption—despite that fact that these fields were presented. the formal goals of the meta-organization and its ac- In addition to Organic Forum’s promotional ac- tion plan target sustainable development in general, tivities, some of the project participants posted the including the social dimension. plan on their own websites. Other organizations We have introduced governance through bureau- dealing with organic farming also regularly reported cratization to identify and explain a number of differ- on Organic Forum’s activities related to the plan. ent ways in which the social dimension is shaped. These organizations dealt mainly with organic agri- First, by formalizing fair trade and organic food into culture, once again showing that visibility reinforces standards and action plans governed by specific the narrowed scope and definition of organic produc- steering groups and committees, the bureaucratiza- tion. The accepted understanding only included agri- tion process determines how decisions are made. cultural products and focused solely on the economic Furthermore, it affects who is able to participate in and ecological dimensions. As other actors became the development of the policy at hand. Some actors aware of the plan and its subsequent effects, they may be left out depending on the particular way in participanted in determining the scope of subsequent which the process is formalized. projects that addressed similar topics. This further Second, the precision with which standards and action plans are articulated also plays a role in shap-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

56

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability ing the meaning of the social dimension. This hap- http://www.score.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.26403.1320939791!/FS pens through categorization and the ongoing search Csocialsustainability.pdf. Brunsson, N. & Jacobsson, B. 2000. A World of Standards. New for the “best” definition of the standard or the content York: Oxford University Press. of the action plan. Bryer, A. 2010. Beyond bureaucracies? The struggles for social Finally, the notions of fair trade and organic food responsibility in the Argentine workers’ cooperatives. Cri- became visible through the publication and the distri- tique of Anthropology 30(1):41–61. Casula Vifell, Å. & Soneryd, L. 2010. Organizing matters: how the bution of documents and other texts. These texts pre- “social dimension” gets lost in sustainability projects. Sus- sented particular visions of the social dimension that tainable Development 20(1):18–27. are included in the ideoscape of sustainable develop- Dillard, J., Dujon, V., & King, M. 2009. Understanding the Social ment. Dimension of Sustainability. New York: Taylor and Francis. Ehrman, J. & Stinson, B. 1999. Joint fact finding and the use of Following this line of argument, a comparison technical experts. In L. Susskind, S. McKearnan, & J. between the two cases leads to the conclusion that Thoman-Larmer (Eds.), The Consensus Building Handbook. meta-organizations that do not explicitly focus on the pp. 375–399. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. social dimension early on in their proceedings will be Ekologiskt Forum. 2007. Aktionsplan 2010: För en Ökad Ekologisk Konsumtion och Produktion [Action Plan 2010: less likely to include such aspects as their activities For Increased Organic Consumption and Production]. become bureaucratized over time. FLO explicitly Stockholm: KSLA. http://www.cul.slu.se/Aktionsplan2010/ addresses the social dimension while Organic Forum Aktionsplan.pdf (in Swedish). focuses on sustainable development in general. Fairtrade International. (FLO). 2008. Constitution of the Associa- tion. Bonn: FLO. http://www.fairtrade.net/fileadmin/user_ A more overarching issue concerns how the upload/content/2009/about_us/documents/flo-constitution- scope of the social dimension is filled with meaning june-2011-english.pdf. and comes to be understood. We see that governance Fairtrade International. (FLO). 2009. Generic Fairtrade Standards through bureaucratization moves the process of de- for Small Producers’ Organizations. Bonn: FLO. http://www.fas.usda.gov/info/Child_labor/04-10_EN_Gen fining social sustainability from the political arena to eric_Fairtrade_Standards_SPO_Aug_09_EN_amended_versi the bureaucratic realm thereby obscuring power on_04-10.pdf. struggles and the political aspects of such negotiation Handelman, D. 2004. Nationalism and the Israeli State: Bureau- (see also Miller & Rose, 1990). The bureaucratic cratic Logic in Public Events. New York: Berg. Jacobsson, K. 2004. Soft regulation and the subtle transformation processes take on a life of their own as standards and of states. Journal of European Social Policy 14(4):355–370. action plans become more precise, formal, and visible Johansson, K. & Tallberg, J. 2010. Explaining chief executive through goal setting and evaluation in the quest to empowerment: European Union summitry and domestic in- find the “best” criteria. Meta-organizations have the stitutional change. West European Politics 33(2):208–236. Jordbruksdepartementet. 2006. Ekologisk Produktion och Kon- power—in the form of bureaucratization—to deter- sumtion: Mål och Inriktning Till 2010 [Organic Production mine what social sustainability might mean. As is- and Consumption: The Objectives and Focus to 2010]. sues of representation and participation are very Regeringens Skrivelse 2005/06:88. Stockholm: Swedish rarely acknowledged in technical bureaucratic pro- Ministry of Agriculture (in Swedish). Jordbruksverket. 1996. Ekologisk Produktion: Aktionsplan 2000 cesses, the democratic aspects of governance through [Organic Production: Action Plan 2000]. Jönköping: Swe- bureaucratization need to be further investigated. dish Board of Agriculture (in Swedish). This would enhance our understanding of the legiti- Jordbruksverket. 1999. Svenskt Ekologiskt Jordbruk Inför 2000– macy of the regulatory practices carried out by meta- Talet: En Uppföljning av Aktionsplanen [Swedish Organic Agriculture for the New Millennium: An Evaluation of the organizations and how the social dimension has been Action Plan]. Jönköping: Swedish Board of Agriculture (in neglected. Swedish). Jordbruksverket. 2001. Ekologiska Jordbruksprodukter och Livsmedel–Aktionsplan 2005 [Organic Agricultural Production and Food Production–Action Plan 2005]. References Jönköping: Swedish Board of Agriculture (in Swedish).

Klijn, E. & Edelenbos, J. 2008. Network management as meta- Ahrne, G. 1989. Byråkratin Och Statens Inre Gränser [Bureau- governance. In E. Sørensen & J. Torfing (Eds.), Theories of cracy and the Inner Borders of the State]. Stockholm: Rabén Democratic Network Governance. pp. 199–214. New York: & Sjögren (in Swedish). Palgrave Macmillan. Ahrne, G. & Brunsson, N. 2008. Meta-organizations. Northamp- Meyer, J., Boli, J., Thomas, G., & Ramirez, F. 1997. World society ton, MA: Edward Elgar. and the nation state. American Journal of Sociology 103(1): Appadurai, A. 1996. Modernity at Large. Minneapolis: University 144–81. of Minnesota Press. Miller, P. & Rose, N. 1990. Governing economic life. Economy Barnett, M. & Finnemore, M. 2004. Rules for the World: Interna- and Society 19(1):1–31. tional Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca: Cornell Uni- O’Toole, L. 2008. Governing outputs and outcomes of governance versity Press. networks. In J. Torfing & E. Sørensen (Eds.), Theories of Boström, M. 2010. The Challenges in Achieving the “Social” Di- Democratic Network Governance. pp. 215–232. New York: mension of Sustainable Development: The Case of the Forest Palgrave Macmillan. Stewardship Council. Score Working Paper 2011:1. Stock- Raynolds, L., Murray, D., & Wilkinson, J. 2007. Fair Trade: The holm: Stockholm Center for Organizational Research. Challenges of Transforming Globalisation. New York: Routledge.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

57

Casula Vifell & Thedvall: Organizing for Social Sustainability

Reinecke, J. 2008. Standard Setting for the “Certification Revolu- Thedvall, R. 2006. Eurocrats at Work: Negotiating Transparency tion”: The Production of Ethical Certainty. 24th European in Post-national Employment Policy. Stockholm Studies in Group for Organisation Studies Colloquium. July 10–12, Social Anthropology No. 56. Reykjavík: University of Ice- Amsterdam. land Press. Renard, M. 2003. Fair trade: quality, market and conventions. Thedvall, R. 2010. The Role of Bureaucratisation in Organising Journal of Rural Studies 19(1):87–96. “Fair” Markets: The Case of the Fairtrade Labelling Or- Røvik, K. 2000. Moderna Organisationer [Modern Organiza- ganizations International (FLO). Score Working Paper tions]. Stockholm: Liber (in Swedish). 2010:11. Stockholm: Stockholm Center for Organizational Sahlin-Andersson, K. & Söderholm, A. 2002. Beyond Project Research. http://www.score.su.se/english/publications/score- Management: New Perspectives on the Temporary- reports. Permanent Dilemma. Malmö: Liber. Weber, M. 1958[1946]. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. Snyder, F. 1994. Soft law and institutional practice in the European New York: Oxford University Press. Community. In S. Martin (Ed.), The Construction of Europe, Young, W. & Utting, K, 2005. Fair trade, business and sustainable Essays in the Honour of Emile Noël. pp. 197–226. Boston: development. Sustainable Development 13(3):139–208. Kluwer. Sørensen, E. & J. Torfing (Eds.). 2007. Theories of Democratic Network Governance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Appendix: Democracy, Participation, and Transparency Minimum Requirements

1.3.1 Minimum requirements

1.3.1.1 An organizational structure is in place which enables effective control by the members. There is a General Assembly with direct or delegated voting rights for all members as the supreme decision-taking body, and an elected Board. The staff answers to the General Assembly via the Board. Fairtrade wants to work with organizations that see themselves as a tool for supporting the social and economic development of small producers. The way in which an organization works can be a key factor in supporting development. Members must be enabled to participate in free, fair and transparent Board elections and to become involved in discussions about major decisions. Where the organization considers it appropriate, an elected delegate system can be put in place. The certification body will check whether the organization abides by its own stated rules and regulations (constitution, by-laws and internal policies, including the election processes).

1.3.1.2 The organization holds a General Assembly at least once a year. The General Assembly is the supreme decision-making body of the organization. It is intended to enable all members to hold the organization’s Board and staff accountable for their activities, and to participate in defining the future strategies and activities of the organization. For the General Assembly to function effectively, it must meet at least once a year. The meetings must be properly minuted, signed by the President of the Board and at least one other member, and recorded. The minutes must contain a list of participants. The organization must communicate the plans for the General Assembly in such a way as to reach all the members in time.

1.3.1.3 The organization’s annual report, budgets and accounts must be presented to and approved by the General Assembly. This is a requirement common in most legal regulations for organizations of this kind. For members to be able to hold the organization’s Board and staff accountable, the presentation and approval of the annual report and the accounts during the General Assembly are essential.

1.3.1.4 Administration is in place. Participating in Fairtrade requires that the organization has an adequate administration. There is at least one person (or committee) in the organization responsible for managing the organizational administration and book-keeping. The organization also needs to have a bank account with usually more than one signatory. The official records and documentation of the organization must be maintained in a central place and be accessible to all members.

Source: FLO, 2009

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

58

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Issues of scale in the global accreditation of sustainable tourism schemes: toward harmonized re-embeddedness?

Mikael Klintman Research Policy Institute, Lund University, PO Box 117, Lund SE-22100 Sweden (email: [email protected])

In efforts to find synergies or, conversely, tradeoffs between the environmental and social pillars of sustainable devel- opment policies, geographical scale is often an important issue. This article critically analyzes issues of scale, such as local-global or North-South, to establish and improve international standards of ecologically sound products and pro- cesses. The article combines works on scale theory in geography with sociological work on disembeddedness and re- embeddedness. The approach is based on analyses of documents about standardization within the sustainable tour- ism sector. More specifically, the article analyzes efforts related to the Sustainable Tourism Stewardship Council (STSC). It holds that reducing issues to inherent qualities of local versus global—or to North versus South—runs the risk of obscuring urgent social, economic, and environmental sustainability problems concerning water, sanitation, preservation of cultural heritage, and so forth within countries in the South. Finally, the article presents certain practical policy recommendations for addressing the struggles associated with movement toward harmonized re- embeddedness.

KEYWORDS: tourism, international standards, developing countries, geographical distribution, economic sectors, social conditions, environmental policy

Introduction “micro-business” (Taylor, 1998). Yet, in comparison to other sectors (cf., Boström & Klintman, 2006), Consistent with the wider trend of ecostandards, sustainable tourism has ambitions to move from di- product labelling, and green political consumerism verse and complex schemes to international stand- (Boström & Klintman, 2008), sustainable tourism ards. Several—sometimes parallel or overlapping— programs have grown exponentially since the early global standardization programs have been carried 1990s. The international Mohonk Agreement defined out.2 sustainable tourism as “tourism that seeks to mini- In sustainable tourism—similar to sustainability mise ecological and socio-cultural impacts while programs within several other sectors such as forestry providing economic benefits to local communities and fishery—a key set of tasks is often discussed in and host countries” (Mohonk Agreement, 2000).1 terms of geographical scale. In the spirit of Agenda In 2004, there were more than 60 standardization 21, it has almost become a household phrase that the and verification programs related to sustainable tour- local and the global should be married, integrated, ism (Skinner et al. 2004). As in many other sectors— crossfertilized, or the like. This extensive use of food, electricity, textiles, and so forth—sustainable phrases and concepts surrounding the local and tourism schemes have been, and still partly are, in a global when problematizing several sectors makes it phase where small, destination-specific units set up local or regional criteria. According to the World 2 For instance, the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism (GCET) is a Tourism Organization, an average of 50 tourism set of principles aimed at guiding stakeholders in tourism devel- firms were certified per program in 2002 (UNWTO, opment. The Code was developed through a resolution of the 2002). In terms of employers and employees, this United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) General number is very small (compared to ecoschemes in Assembly meeting in Istanbul in 1997. Another initiative was taken by the largest and oldest organization involved in ecotour- other sectors) since 98% of firms in tourism are ism, The International Ecotourism Society (TIES), which is active in 90 countries. However, it has not developed standards or crite- ria, but is instead active in giving courses and educating the tour- 1 Sustainable tourism can be distinguished (although with over- ism industry in ecological improvements. At the European Union laps) from the more specific concept of “ecotourism,” the latter level, finally, there is the Voluntary Initiative for Sustainability in referring to “sustainable tourism with a natural area focus, which Tourism (VISIT), an association established in 2004 within the benefits the environment and communities visited, and fosters context of a European Union project on the ecolabelling of tourism environmental and cultural understanding, appreciation and aware- firms, based on an alliance initiated in 2001 between a dozen ness” (Mohonk Agreement, 2000). leading tourism ecolabels.

 2012 Klintman Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 59

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism

important to examine critically what is assumed and Using a perspective within scale theory (see implied in statements about the local and the global Born & Purcell, 2006), this article conceives of scales in voluntary policies. Using the case of sustainable not as given but as strategic, driven by social actors, tourism criteria and accreditation, this article criti- based on special interests (e.g., economic, political, cally analyzes the framings of sustainability issues as cultural). With this point of departure, the analysis is scale-related (such as “local-global” or “North- intended to show how a number of social and eco- South”), involved in processes intended to establish nomic challenges, which are not necessarily tied to and improve international ecostandards that could be geographical scale, are still presented simplistically awarded to ecologically sound products and pro- as founded on local-global tensions, in programs cesses. What concerns can be found beneath the fo- geared toward sustainable development. cus on scales, concerns that perhaps refer to chal- Importantly for dealing with tasks of sustain- lenges beyond scales? The use of a framing perspec- ability, one may—underneath these scale-oriented tive in the analysis is in line with the definition of framings—find several tensions and problems (sur- framing as a way in which various alliances, organi- rounding economic inequality, limitations to public zations, and actors simplify an uncertain and complex participation, neglect of cultural and environmental reality, partly to make it understandable and partly to values) beyond the local-global dualism. These are advance an agenda (e.g., Fischer, 2003; Klintman, issues that instead need to be confronted in terms of 2006). “disembeddedness,” and are not necessarily geo- The empirical point of departure for the analysis graphic in nature. is a particular effort in policies surrounding sustain- able tourism, namely the development of the Sustain- Theorietical Framework able Tourism Stewardship Council (STSC).3 Through the Council, a broad range of sustainable tourism The eagerness among some stakeholders to de- stakeholders are working to integrate a large number velop “internationally harmonized” ecostandards of sustainable tourism labels into one universal sys- within various consumer-related sectors is fully in tem of accreditation. The STSC is a proposed um- line with the market-liberal, “eco-pragmatic meta- brella organization that would set universal minimum frame” of many ecological standardization schemes standards for certification programs and accredit (Klintman & Boström, 2004). In addition to the envi- those that meet them. The core mission of STSC is: ronmental and social benefits that actors within standardization bodies associate with such harmoni- [T]o enhance the sustainability of tourism zation, there are, obviously, very strong (some would operations by ensuring better environmental say overriding) market motives behind these pro- and social performance, and improved eco- cesses, as international standards facilitate trade and nomic benefits to local communities and to make companies (and nongovernmental organizations certified businesses worldwide (Rainforest (NGOs)) visible and more legitimate in the eyes of Alliance, 2009). green political consumers (Crane, 2005). As Table 1 shows, the development of trust is key here. One This article places efforts to develop a council distinction can be made between internal trust, refer- for the ecoaccreditation of tourism within the context ring to the view within the organization, and external of several certification schemes, all of which, in one trust, which is relevant to users and other stakehold- way or another, are connected to STCS. ers (cf., Provan & Kenis, 2008). This article claims that at the core of the obsta-

3 cles to and opportunities for broad trust in several The empirical data in this article have been collected from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and public agencies in- environmental and “fair-trade” standardization volved in accreditation and certification of sustainable tourism schemes—as well as in a global accreditation schemes; the Sustainable Tourism Stewardship Council (STSC) system—is the issue of how problems are framed as has been in particular focus. Moreover, this article has used data scale-based. In certain streams of scale theory (see, from closely related and analytically comparable discussions sur- rounding other sustainable tourism schemes (that are, or may be- e.g., Zimmerer, 2006), scale (particularly with respect come, subject to accreditation under STSC). The document data to the local and the global) is often erroneously dis- have been collected from websites, reports, stakeholder comments cussed (in academia as well as among policy practi- on standards drafts, and press releases. The goal of the data collec- tioners) as inherent, and, even more erroneously, as tion has not been to make statistical generalizations, but to assem- ble a wide range of examples of discussions and points of view that inherently “good” or “bad.” Through the lens of scale illustrate challenges and dilemmas of creating sustainability stand- theory, Born & Purcell (2006) argue convincingly ards where environmental, social, and economic pillars are all against what they call “the local trap,” namely per- taken into account. Data have been gathered until the point of ceptions and explanations implying the overriding saturation, that is, the point where statements and discussions were repeated. and objective function of physical scale in develop-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

60

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism

Table 1 Framings of challenges in handling disembeddedness and gaining trust.

Framings of Challenges Internal trust External trust Procedural disembeddedness of How to have “the local community” How to design stakeholder participation in participation participate in criteria-setting in ways that ways that “the market” and/or the community approves. international NGOs approve. Procedural disembeddedness of use How to give “the local community” access How to give people access to the use of to the use of the schemes in that the the schemes in ways that “the market” community approves. and/or international NGOs approve. Substantive disembeddedness of How to develop substantive criteria that How to develop substantive criteria that criteria “the local community” approves. “the market” and/or international NGOs approve.

ment issues of various kinds, for instance in food and gence and internationalization of ecostandards are agriculture. They instead maintain that scales are central here, due to the often global character of socially produced, and that the relationships between tourism. By combining the above-mentioned out- scales—for instance, the local and the global—are looks of scale theory and social disembeddedness, the not independent of inherent qualities. Instead, scales following discussion highlights how closeness and are strategic, driven by social actors with their own distance—not just in a geographical sense but also in special interests, be it political, economic, or cultural. a socioeconomic, cultural, and ethnic sense, for in- This article seeks to go one step further by analyzing stance—play a major part in society’s endeavors to how tension between local and global scales explains develop certificates and standards for ecological and a multitude of challenges in programs geared to sus- ethical criteria (and their tradeoffs or synergies) of tainable development. Many dimensions of scale- goods and services. related framings have not been mapped out thus far and analyzed in depth. Subjective framings are typi- Analysis cally created from challenges as (geographically) scale-oriented to create cultural resonance for one’s To specify the rather broad concepts of disem- own “global view” (Boström & Tamm Hallström, beddedness and re-embeddedness, it is useful to con- 2010). struct another distinction crucial for understanding The above-mentioned framing perspective on trust surrounding sustainability projects, namely be- scale theory can be combined fruitfully with socio- tween “procedural” and “substantive” disembed- logical work on disembeddedness and re- dedness. Procedural aspects pertain to processes for embeddedness. Social theorist Anthony Giddens how decisions are made and who can make use of the (1990) refers to social disembedding as “the lifting resultant schemes. In contrast, substantive aspects out of social relations from local contexts of interac- concern what decisions are made, which criteria are tion and their restructuring across indefinite spans of decided upon, and so forth (cf., Klintman & Kronsell, time-space.” On one hand, this process entails a sepa- 2010). Applied to disembeddedness, the procedural ration of physical space from ecologically and so- aspect refers to processes of participation in decision cially based place. Giddens (1990) defines re- making and in uses that are distant from a particular embedding (or just embedding), on the other hand, as social context, such as from a local region and com- “the reappropriation or recasting of disembedded munity. Importantly, the case of sustainable tourism social relations so as to pin them down (however clearly illustrates the procedural disembeddedness of partially or transitorily) to local conditions of time participation (in decision making) as one task and and place.” procedural disembeddedness of use (of the schemes) Tourism can be understood as usually having as another task. Table 1 illustrates this distinction. traits of social disembedding, in that it introduces Substantive disembeddedness, in contrast, refers to foreign visitors to traditionally sheltered areas, which the actual criteria—for instance, for reductions of many commentators argue has the downside of negative environmental impacts of the tourism in- threatening the ability of local communities to protect dustry—that have been decided on at a distance from their socioeconomic situation and cultural heritage. the social and environmental context at stake. With the explicit aim of reducing negative social, Further on in the analysis, we shall see how three economic, and environmental impacts, NGOs have aspects of disembeddedness are involved, aspects that introduced a range of sustainable tourism labels and various actors have framed as challenges to a harmo- certificates at the local, regional, national, and inter- nized re-embeddedness of sustainable tourism ac- national levels. Efforts toward crossnational conver- creditation. The analysis starts, however, by demon-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

61

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism

strating how sustainable tourism is framed as “frag- ecutive director of the Rainforest Alliance, mented” attempts at re-embeddedness. which organized the partnership alongside the United Nations Foundation and various Nonharmonized Sustainable Tourism as United Nations agencies…This body will Fragmented Attempts at Re-embeddedness help to make this information availa- Despite regular calls for local participation and ble…and ensure that it is indeed reliable engagement (based on the idea of re-embedding so- (Block, 2008). cial interaction into the local context), there are, in one respect, great concerns about the multitude of Whereas there have been many attempts at re- national and international sustainable tourism embedding local concerns, cultures, and interests into schemes. In addition, there are problems surrounding tourism (through sustainable tourism schemes), ac- the subjectivity, and sometimes locally biased arbi- tors within STSC, among other organizations, imply trariness, of sustainable tourism claims. Scholars and that these schemes have become too political, biased, practitioners agree that the proliferation of ecolabel- and sometimes watered down due to an absence of ling schemes in tourism has generated fragmented impartial monitoring. Many sustainable tourism attempts at re-embeddedness which, in turn, has cre- schemes, these actors contend, cannot therefore be ated confusion on the part of consumers. This frag- trusted—externally by tourists or internally by NGOs mentation can make it difficult for any program to or by the tourism industry. function effectively (see Boström & Klintman, 2008). Several recent initiatives have been introduced to Handling Procedural Disembeddedness of address these concerns (see below). This reaction is Participation identical to the situation surrounding ecolabelling A key component of the social pillar of sustain- more generally (Dodds & Joppe, 2005). These con- able development is the procedural aspect of partici- cerns have led to calls for a globally standardized pation and representation. Who gets to participate in scheme involving several international actors, from the setting of principles and criteria of the sustain- industries to government agencies to NGOs. The ability program (Lehtonen, 2004)? One main reason World Bank has noted, “If certification [of sustain- for this procedural emphasis is the concern illustrated able tourism] is to continue and be successful…there by the following question (one that is often either is a need for one global body to set and monitor the posed or implied): How can sociocultural problems adoption of industry wide criteria” (Dodds & Joppe, be solved in light of the common Northern point of 2005). Moreover, these concerns reflect a certain reference/bias in transnational standard-setting or- hope, as expressed by STSC and the Rainforest Alli- ganizations? An influential NGO puts it in this way: ance in their rationales for global accreditation: “Next meeting needs to have better global represen- tation, from the different continents, etc.” (Tavares, The core mission of the STSC is to enhance 2008). This call for better representation stems from the sustainability of tourism operations by criticism of international ecoschemes, that the local ensuring better environmental and social level is ignored in favor of regulatory processes. The performance, and improved economic bene- complaint is based on efforts to facilitate local em- fits to local communities and to certified powerment. It grew in the 1990s, in connection with businesses worldwide. The STSC aims to do Agenda 21, and was aimed at enabling local commu- this through the establishment of a global nities to discuss and make decisions about their accreditation, standards, training, support needs, as well as to choose how to meet these needs and marketing organization, in order to in- (Chambers, 1998). Applied to sustainable tourism, crease the number and quality of certified the path breaking Mohonk Agreement states that “the sustainable tourism enterprises in the global development of a certification scheme should be a marketplace. Why? Because a trustworthy participatory, multistakeholder, and multisectoral international standards setting and accred- process.”4 Moreover, Sirakaya et al. (2001) maintain itation system will guarantee independently that this requirement reflects a “consensus among verified, internationally recognized certainty experts that stakeholder participation is integral to the and transparency for all tourism sector cer- tification programs (Sillence, 2007) (em- 4 phasis added). Issued in 2000, the Mohonk Agreement was a “[p]roposal for an ### International Certification Program for Sustainable Tourism and Ecotourism.” The Agreement is still a point of reference in the “There is mass confusion about what is sus- development of many ecotourism and sustainable tourism schemes. tainable tourism,” said Tensie Whelan, ex- See http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/tourism/documents/mohonk .pdf.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

62

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism development and application of sustainability indi- Finally, the underlying—and partly overlap- cators for monitoring ecotourism impacts.” ping—rationale is that small, local players are needed The phrase “to empower the local community” is as participants to ensure that the standards have the very common in the sustainable tourism context external trust of the market. To be “modern,” (Cole, 2006). Still, it is very difficult to assess who ecostandards must differ from the colonial principles exactly comprises “the local community.” As the of the North directing and patronizing the South. Australian researchers of water and wasteland issues, Consequently, there is a paradoxical tension between Schianetz et al. (2007), maintain, foreign and large companies competing with local small and medium enterprises (SMEs). The former [T]ourism destinations can range in scale needs the latter to become ecocertified in order to se- from whole countries and states to resorts cure public trust in their own ecocertification/ and small tourism sites. In the context of this accreditation. review, the chosen scale needs to be mean- Despite the apparent consensus about the im- ingful and practical for the sustainable man- portance of local participation, and although the Mo- agement and assessment of tourism and its honk Agreement contends that such processes should development. Setting boundaries too large, include local communities, tourism businesses, for instance at country or state level, could NGOs, community-based organizations, and gov- be problematic because issues are too di- ernment agencies (Honey, 2002), the deficit of par- verse and complex, whereas boundaries that ticipatory, multisectoral processes is not merely a are too narrow (e.g., resorts, hotels, individ- problem of a global or Northern bias (in the planning, ual tourism sites) do not allow the inclusion implementation, and assessment phases). In many of all aspects of, for instance, the necessary other cases of developmental work, the risk has been engineering infrastructure and the compre- shown to be so high that local elites, with their strong hensive analysis of all. social and financial means, monopolize the “voice of the local community” (Manyara & Jones, 2007; These challenges of scale aside, there are at least Simpson, 2008). A further aspect of the North-South three rationales for the calls for formulation of par- dichotomy, according to Buckley (2009), who has ticipatory and deliberative sustainable tourism stand- conducted extensive studies of environmental impli- ardization schemes. The first rationale is moral, and cations of sustainable tourism, is that what is sim- refers to the rights of those people and communities plistically reduced to “a Northern bias” also includes affected by the ecostandards and the criteria to affect positive efforts within the ecological pillar of sustain- the various stages of the scheme. For example, able development. As discussed below with regard to Blamey (2001) maintains that “Ethically, the re- the substantive disembeddedness (of environmental quirement that local communities benefit from eco- criteria), the ecological pillar of sustainable develop- tourism and participate in decision making is ‘the ment requires that international ecoaccreditation socially responsible, or right, thing to do,’ as it seeks bodies help local communities broaden the emphasis to diminish inequalities between North and South and of “local” environmental and health-related problems across class lines within the developing world” and embrace a more thoroughgoing account of wider (Blamey, 2001). environmental problems which do not always coin- The second rationale concerns trust in the crite- cide with the local ones (Buckley, 2009). ria’s substantive quality. This point is instrumental and contends that the criteria can only be successfully Handling Procedural Disembeddedness of Use implemented if the local communities have been en- Criticism contending that the socioeconomic gaged, since they are the ones living closest to the problems of tourism are due to the disadvantages of sites. Moreover, the local stakeholders often have the small local actors relative to large international cor- best knowledge about the sites in terms of their cul- porations is not merely an issue of “the international, ture, history, local environment, and so forth— corporate North” versus “the local South.” Nonethe- knowledge much needed in developing criteria less, this is how the tension is often framed, rein- (Fennell, 2008). Some commentators argue that these forcing the characterization of the global North as the actors have the most to gain if the schemes take their (self-) interested, profit-oriented private sector and local circumstances into account. The instrumental the South as environmentally conscious and con- rationale is driven by the assumption that “local cerned, dominated by civil society. Critics are wor- communities are most likely to protect or maintain a ried that transnational corporations placed in devel- resource base in a form that is suitable for tourism if oped countries will set the agendas of certification they stand to benefit from it” (Blamey, 2001). programs, that this may entail a bias toward Northern interests rather than concerns for Southern needs, and

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

63

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism

toward business interests rather than reduced envi- (SMEs), the global corporations, and the ronmental harm (Sasidharan & Font, 2001). millions of consumers who are in some way Interestingly, in practical ecocertification con- aware of—or involved in—making their texts, ecostandards are often concerned with the op- consumption and production of tourism posite challenge, namely how to reduce the usual goods and services more sustainable inclinations of local, short-term profit interests in the (Sillence, 2007). South to disregard broader environmental considera- tions and to expand assessments of local environ- As mentioned above, the call for local participa- mental problems and conditions in ways that can be tion and empowerment has become routine in stand- translated into the global, environmental goals de- ardization discussions of sustainable tourism. Relat- fined by the North. Fennell (2008) writes, “[W]hile ing this to the academic literature on local involve- the literature suggests that ecotourism ought to be ment and participation, Sorensen et al. (2002) iden- transparent with income shared among community tify three types of participation: informational, par- members, benefits are often realised by only a few ticipatory planning, and financial. From this perspec- members which ultimately forces the majority to tive, informational participation would be the lowest engage in other non-sustainable activities.” level of engagement since local people are largely Sometimes the local, short-term profit interests receivers of information that has been generated in the South are expressed as having indirect conse- elsewhere. Sorensen and his colleagues (2002) place quences, such as by entailing the issuance of unre- participatory planning at the middle level and regard stricted invitations to foreign investors to exploit it as a moderate degree of involvement. They inter- nature and local culture: “To date, few developing pret the third mode, financial participation, as the countries have imposed social or environmental crite- most powerful and empowering type of participation ria to foreign investors, seeing only short-term eco- (Sorensen et al. 2002). This ranking can contrast the nomic gains instead of long-term, holistic, sustain- harmonized schemes of sustainable tourism that some able tourism development” (Dodds & Joppe, 2005). developers have made. In such cases, the importance In such cases, researchers describe the local level of employing “local labor” is among the most com- as less than trustworthy, whereas researchers and mon prescriptions for improving social conditions, al- international NGOs describe the global and general though this is clearly addressed to large firms in the level (aside from single, unscrupulous investors) as North and based on cultivating external trust of the perceived as objective and trustworthy: “Consumers international tourism market. Bendell & Font (2004) deserve to know that a [locally defined] nature lodge observe that: that calls itself ‘green’ or a mountain trek that claims to be environmentally sensitive truly is” (Sanabria et [M]any [sustainable tourism] programs in- al. 2003). clude criteria on the creation of local em- What are typically portrayed as issues fully ployment, the use of locally sourced and based on this polarity can often, when analyzed in produced materials and food, the involve- greater depth, be boiled down to concerns about the ment of local communities, and the support challenges for SMEs with regard to ecocertification of networks of “green businesses” within a of tourism.5 Sillence (2007) argues that STSC devel- given destination. These criteria are im- opment plans need further research regarding SMEs portant since local economic empowerment because these businesses represent a substantial slice is an aspect of sustainability, even though, of the tourism industry. In each region, the specific on average, between 60 and 90% of the needs SMEs have must be evaluated. This point has price that tourists pay for their holidays goes been further acknowledged throughout the years at to those multinationals. STSC. Although reducing local unemployment is im- At the centre point of the global vision for portant to stimulating social sustainability, respond- the STSC are the thousands of administra- ents to surveys about sustainable tourism criteria tive departments, the hundreds of thousands often assert—although expressed in different terms— of Micro/Small and Medium Enterprises that the emphasis on local employment, rather than on SMEs, helps maintain a structure of procedural 5 Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) can be defined in various disembeddedness of foreign employers and local ways, one being enterprises with fewer than 250 employees and employees. I draw on Medina (2005), who notes, “less than 45 million USD [in 1998] in annual turnover” (Taylor et “Belizean villagers express a preference for self- al. 1998). This is obviously a very rough definition; the Rainforest employment over wage labour, perceiving the latter Alliance thus recognizes that further distinctions might be needed to benefit the employer more than the worker. This within this approach (Sanabria et al. 2003).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

64

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism preference suggests that the means through which aspect of this substantive disembeddedness is the economic benefits to local communities may be de- levels and thresholds of the standards, that is, in fined and measured may be more contentious than terms of environmental and social criteria. Kate anticipated by international experts.” Medina (2005) Dodson, Deputy Director of Sustainable Develop- moreover claims that local concerns about wage labor ment for the United Nations Foundation, explains could plausibly be found “well beyond Belize.” Ac- how during development of the Global Partnership cordingly, people in local communities may not per- for the Sustainable Tourism Criteria (GSTC)6 the ceive local employment (as employees) as a particu- tourist companies involved in the partnership com- lar benefit, but as the services and time that the local mented on the criteria developed after thirteen community offers the tourism industry. In a case months of consultation. study of sustainable tourism in Belize, Medina (2005) claims that “Belizeans also problematised the concept [T]here was a minimum of 91% approval for of participation in two different senses: they raised each criterion from industry; and 91% of the issues regarding how people desire to participate in industry answered they would be willing to ecotourism development—as employees or entrepre- adopt the criteria. In terms of outreach to neurs.” An excessive belief in the apparent gratitude certification programs there has been wide of local communities for increased employment via endorsement of the criteria and understand- sustainable tourism companies may actually hurt the ing of the need for the criteria, although it environmental and social goals of sustainable tour- will take some time for some existing certi- ism: “If…they [local communities] do not count fication programs to adjust their criteria wage labour as a benefit, they are unlikely to support (Sanabria et al. 2003). local protected areas. If they do not support protected areas, then both the conservation goals that led to It is fair to assume that the spokesperson per- their creation and the tourism that depends upon and ceives the target as 100% approval, and that 91% is supports such protected areas are at risk” (Medina, very close to this mark. Nonetheless, previous studies 2005). have raised concerns about whether a maximum level The involvement of small, local businesses (self- of acceptance among companies is ideal—from an employers) in planning and membership might be a environmental or label-marketing perspective. On more progressive goal, particularly through the im- one hand, efforts to achieve unanimity run the risk of proved visibility that such schemes can give SMEs. “green inflation” or the design of watered-down crite- The challenges of small firms with regard to ecocerti- ria (Boström & Klintman, 2008). On the other hand, fication have frequently been stressed. In previous in the case of accreditation of sustainable tourism, debates about ecostandards in tourism, there has been where there is much debate about the absence of local consensus that SMEs are typically unfavorably SMEs from the South, it is worth exploring whether treated in the schemes (Font, 2007). As a response to this high level of acceptance among an exclusive the challenges of SMEs’ low representation in the group of sustainable tourism actors (mainly big for- schemes in the South, STSC has discussed providing eign firms) could pave the way for subsequent inclu- subsidies, not to the SMEs directly, but to small, re- sion of aspirant SMEs that have little experience in gional certification programs that would make it eas- sustainable tourism. ier and more attractive for SMEs to participate: Researchers and scholars alike argue that setting “There is concern that small certification programs criteria involves a dilemma between overly strict and from developing countries will need subsidies to par- unduly loose criteria. Standards can be seen as too ticipate in a global accreditation program. A variety binding if only a small portion of the tourism industry of funding mechanisms, including tourism industry 6 and government support and foundation and donor The GSTC were jointly developed by a coalition established in grants, were seen as a viable mechanism to pay for 2007 that consisted of 27 organizations. These entities included the the non-accreditation activities” (Sanabria et al. United Nations Foundation, the Rainforest Alliance, and the Fed- eration of Tour Operators. STSC describes its relationship with 2003). GSTS as follows: “As a stewardship council, the STSC needs a common set of baseline criteria by which to accredit existing sus- Handling Substantive Disembeddedness: Raising tainable tourism certification programs. The GSTC are envisioned or Lowering the Environmental and Social to serve that purpose.” The GSTC Partnership and STSC have secured a close relationship and each involved with different areas Criteria? of sustainable tourism. While the STSC focuses on the more tech- The issue of the excluded SMEs raises the obvi- nical aspects of accrediting certification programs, GSTC provides ous question of how to increase the participation of educational and implementation tools that any member of the local SMEs in planning, participation, and member- travel industry—whether certified or not—can use to improve their sustainability practices. See http://www.rainforestalliance. ship with regard to international accreditation. An org/tourism.cfm?id=questions.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

65

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism

can qualify, despite comprehensive efforts by diligent expensive programs, need simpler designs, companies. And, in light of the often-stated im- and require latitude to adjust to management portance of including local SMEs from the South in and physical limitations. The respondents these processes, several commentators ask whether, if were unanimous in their view that SMEs the criteria are too difficult to reach, the overall cam- need comprehensive support if they are not paign will exacerbate inequalities between the South to be disadvantaged by certification pro- and the North. Accordingly, some observers hold that grams. Accordingly, governments, NGOs, a lowering of standards (at least initially) would fa- industry associations and other potential do- cilitate the inclusion of small, local actors in the nors should be prepared to provide inte- schemes (cf., Sharpley, 2000). grated packages of financial, technical and Within this complex dilemma, the main chal- marketing assistance to SMEs (Sanders, lenge is to find a common baseline: 2004).

• To help certification and other voluntary Among the TIES and STSC documents are programs ensure that their standards meet a strong calls to increase the number of companies that broadly accepted baseline. meet the international ecostandards toward which • To offer governmental, nongovernmental, and these accreditation organizations are aiming. For private-sector programs a starting point for SMEs to meet these standards would not just have developing sustainable tourism requirements. general sustainability-related merits, but also busi- • To serve as basic guidelines for education and ness advantages. As Font (2007) maintains, “it allows training bodies, such as hotel schools and [these companies] in the medium term to reach the universities (Sanabria et al. 2003). economies of scale to produce better training for ap- plicants and marketing of their products.” Intriguingly, it is difficult to find concrete and clear discussions among actors in international ac- Discussion and Conclusion: Challenges to creditation about the possibility of having one Harmonized Re-embeddedness (slightly stricter) standard for large and/or foreign companies and another one (slightly looser, at least As a study of social sustainability challenges, temporarily) for local SMEs. To be sure, there are this article has explored scale-related framings in calls to allow for “variations [in] physical, economic, policy discussions about internationally harmonized cultural and social realities” (Font, 2007), although it accreditation of sustainable tourism schemes. The is not obvious that this includes “sliding scales” of theoretical basis for this exploration was a question- substantive criteria. “Sliding scales” could refer to ing of whether scales have inherent qualities of use- the degree to which education programs should be fulness or uselessness in sustainability projects. Ten- carried out, how much the use of the accreditation sions between the local (South) and the global/ should cost, or other criteria. The use of dual stand- geographically distant (North) constitute the primary ards is commonplace in several other sectors in the scale-related theme. Justifications of the need for United States and Europe, such as admissions to international accreditation, as put forward by NGOs schools and universities, where underprivileged and businesses, have drawn attention to the problem groups can be accepted with lower grades. The idea that nonharmonized sustainable tourism schemes are behind such “affirmative action” is that these candi- less likely to be trusted externally, independently dates may become role models for subsequent appli- verified, and transparent. Moreover, the landscape of cants, so that the two standards can ultimately be sustainable tourism certifications was described as a merged. However, there are signs that it is not so confusing, global mess. In sociological terms, this much the levels of environmental impact that the criticism reflects a view of nonharmonized sustain- SMEs would not be able to meet (in terms of envi- able tourism landscapes as fragmented attempts at re- ronmental or social records), but rather the economic embeddedness. If conventional tourism can be char- means, or business interest, to become involved in acterized as socially disembedded, the multitude of the standardization schemes. As one of the actors sustainable tourism schemes may have included crite- from The International Ecosystem Society (TIES) ria directed toward re-embeddedness into specific states: cultures and regions. Yet, the overall picture, according to the accred- The same structural problems of high costs, itation actors, is one of fragmentation and sometimes complexity, and lack of flexibility to reflect excessive local biases of the ecoschemes. This is local conditions apply with special force to interesting, in light of the typical emphasis on in- smaller enterprises. The SMEs can’t afford creasing the local re-embeddedness of ecolabelling

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

66

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism

argument in the accreditation discussions moves fur- ther by questioning whether hiring local people is an effective strategy for social sustainability. Instead, fa- cilitating SMEs appears to be more powerful, where the people involved are in a stronger position. Due to a generally acknowledged bias of accreditation pro- cesses toward large industrial interests (in the North as well as the South), this challenge is not easily met. The overarching goal of international accredita- tion of sustainability programs (or harmonized re- embeddedness) might be perceived as oxymoronic in the case of sustainable tourism. On one hand, re-

Figure 1 Three challenges to harmonized re-embeddedness. embedding implies a degree of local adaptation. Harmonization, on the other hand, connotes interna- schemes, empowering local communities, and so tional standardization (across local areas and regions, forth. While partly an environmental and social eq- and around the globe). In any case, harmonized re- uity matter, the primary problem that arises from the embeddedness is indeed the ambition. Harmonized “confusion” described above is a market concern of disembeddedness of an international accreditation NGOs and the sustainable tourism industry and this is scheme presupposes the maintenance of a common what prompts the call for “global harmonization” mutual trust between internal and external actors through ecoaccredited tourism. Nevertheless, actors (Boström & Klintman, 2008) by developing trust and involved in developing the accredited standard motivation both externally (among consumers, tour- (within STSC) emphasize that they face very signifi- ists, and international tourism firms) and internally cant challenges (Skinner et al. 2004). From this per- (among local communities, SMEs and employees). spective, the privileged position of the international, The accreditation actors, as well as the tourism in- Northern-based NGOs, as well as the short-term dustry, emphasize the goal of including more repre- profit-seeking, large-scale sustainable tourism busi- sentatives from “the local communities” in the plan- nesses, was framed as the root of the problem. ning process, and more members of SMEs in the rel- However, when analyzed in greater depth, it is evant tourism regions. possible to identify three interrelated challenges, as Finally, it is necessary to address the substantive indicated in Figure 1, challenges that transcend the disembeddedness of criteria. To meet this challenge, North-South polarity in the fixed, normative sense. tourism actors face several choices concerning levels First, procedural disembeddedness of participa- of criteria: tion, or the distance between the accrediting regula- tors and the regulated local communities, is an echo • To have common baseline criteria with capacity of the common social sustainability call for local for stricter local criteria (which could benefit the empowerment and local participation in the planning goal of environmental sustainability). of accreditation. However, the vagueness of the scale • To have a common baseline, with capacity for descriptor “local” becomes very conspicuous. In ad- softer local criteria (which could benefit the goal dition, the risk of a “local elite” designating itself as of social sustainability). “the whole of the local community” is also apparent. • To have a sliding scale of fees for members, Furthermore, although sustainability programs often which may make membership more inclusive of call for local participation in decision making, it is far economically less powerful organizations. This from obvious that this type of participation provides a in turn may, or may not, comport with stricter or viable path toward a socially sustainable ecoaccredi- softer criteria. tation scheme. Second, the challenge of procedural disembed- To avoid setting boundaries of overly strict or dedness of use mainly concerns the common lack of unduly loose criteria is a difficult task. The first of occupational or financial participation of the local the three strategies outlined above emphasizes the communities. To be sure, a typical description of the ecological pillar of sustainable development, whereas socioeconomic challenge of tourism is also one of the second strategy is founded on the social pillar geographical scale—of the international, corporate (which would facilitate the engagement of local North versus the local, environmentalist South. In SMEs). Although the third strategy, reducing the many of the 60-plus ecotourism schemes this situa- financial burden through a sliding-scale system, tion has led to strong calls for international corpora- making it easier for less prosperous, local SMEs that tions to employ the local population. However, the want to become members, is in one sense based on

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

67

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism the economic pillar, it is probably more relevant to Fischer, F. 2003. Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and the ecological and social pillars because it invites Deliberative Practices. New York: Oxford University Press. Font, X. 2007. Ecotourism certification: potential and challenges. more actors to be part of the criteria-setting process In J. Higham (Ed.), Critical Issues in Ecotourism: Under- and actual implementation. Despite the apparent standing a Complex Tourism Phenomenon. pp. 386–405. driving priorities in the three strategies above, it is far Maryland Heights, MO: Butterworth-Heinemann. from obvious to what extent their respective effects Giddens, A. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. would promote advantageous synergies or less desir- Honey, M. 2002. Ecotourism and Certification: Setting Standards able tradeoffs among social, economic, and envi- in Practice. Washington, DC: Island Press. ronmental outcomes. As Lehtonen (2004) claims, Klintman, M. 2006. Ambiguous framings of political consumer- “the key challenges of sustainable development re- ism: means or end, product or process orientation? Interna- tional Journal of Consumer Studies 30(5):427–438. side at the interfaces—synergies and trade-offs— Klintman, M. & Boström, M. 2004. Framings of science and ide- between its various dimensions.” However, as schol- ology: organic food labelling in the US and Sweden. Envi- ars we need to elaborate extensively on our method- ronmental Politics 13(3):612–634. ologies, designing new ways of studying more Klintman, M. & Kronsell, A. 2010. Challenges to legitimacy in food safety governance? The case of the European Food broadly, particularly by comparing sustainability Safety Authority (EFSA). Journal of European Integration projects in social and ecological consequence anal- 32(3):309–327. yses. This pursuit entails determining whether each Lehtonen, M. 2004. The environmental-social interface of sustain- strategy necessarily entails tradeoffs between the able development: capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecological Economics 49(2):199–214. social and environmental pillars or if the ends can be Manyara, G. & Jones, E. 2007. Community-based tourism enter- made to meet the objective of harmonized re-embed- prises development in Kenya: an exploration of their poten- dedness. tial as avenues of poverty reduction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15(6):628–644. Medina, L. 2005. Ecotourism and certification: confronting the principles and pragmatics of socially responsible tourism. References Journal of Sustainable Tourism 13(3):281–295. Mohonk Agreement. 2000. Proposal for an International Certifi- Bendell, J. & Font, X. 2004. Which tourism rules? Green standards cation Program for Sustainable Tourism and Ecotourism. and GATS. Annals of Tourism Research 31(1):139–156. Mohonk Mountain House, New Paltz, NY. http://www. Blamey, R. 2001. Principles of ecotourism. In D. Weaver (Ed.), rainforest-alliance.org/tourism/documents/mohonk.pdf. The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism. pp. 5–22. New York: Provan, K. & Kenis, P. 2008. Modes of network governance: CABI. structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Block, B. 2008. Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria Announced. Administration Research and Theory 18(2):229–252. http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008885.html. July Rainforest Alliance. 2009. Partnership for Global Sustainable 6, 2010. Tourism Criteria and Sustainable Tourism Stewardship Born, B. & Purcell, M. 2006. Avoiding the local trap: scale and Council Announce Merge to Form Tourism Sustainability food systems in planning research. Journal of Planning Edu- Council. http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/newsroom/news/ cation and Research 26(2):195–207. gstc-stsc-merge. January 22, 2012. Boström, M. & Klintman, M. 2006. State-centered versus nonstate- Sanabria, R., Skinner, E., Font, W., Maccarrone-Eaglen, A., driven organic food standardization: a comparison of the US Sallows, M., & Frederiksen, M. 2003. Sustainable Tourism and Sweden. Agriculture and Human Values 23(2):163–180. Stewardship Council: Raising the Standards and Benefits of Boström, M. & Klintman, M. 2008. Eco-Standards, Product La- Sustainable Tourism and Ecotourism Certification. New belling and Green Consumerism. New York: Palgrave Mac- York: Rainforest Alliance. http://rmportal.net/library/content/ millan. nric/1702.pdf/at_download/file. Boström, M. & Tamm Hallström, K. 2010. NGO power in global Sanders, E. 2004. What Businesses Seek from Certification and the social and environmental standard-setting. Global Environ- Range of Incentives that Governments, NGOs, Trade Associ- mental Politics 10(4):36–60. ations, and Others Could Offer. The Washington, DC: The Buckley, R. 2009. Evaluating the net effects of ecotourism on the International Ecotourism Society. environment: a framework, first assessment and future re- Schianetz, K., Kavanagh, L., & Lockington, D. 2007. Concepts search. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 17(6):643–672. and tools for comprehensive sustainability assessments for Chambers, R. 1998. Beyond “Whose reality counts?” New meth- tourism destinations: a comparative review. Journal of Sus- ods we now need? Culture and Organization 4(2):279–301. tainable Tourism 15(4):369–389. Cole, S. 2006. Information and empowerment: the keys to achiev- Sharpley, R. 2000. Tourism and sustainable development: explor- ing sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism ing the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 14(6):629–644. 8(1):1–19. Crane, A. 2005. Meeting the ethical gaze: challenges for orienting Sasidharan, V. & Font, X. 2001. Pitfalls of ecolabelling. In X. Font to the ethical market. In R. Harrison, T. Newholm, & D. & R. Buckley (Eds.), Tourism Ecolabelling: Certification Shaw (Eds.), The Ethical Consumer. pp. 219–232. Thousand and Promotion of Sustainable Management. pp. 105–120. Oaks, CA: Sage. Wallingford: CABI. Dodds, R. & Joppe, M. 2005. CSR in the Tourism Industry? The Sillence, G. 2007. Governance Systems, Business and Marketing Status of and Potential for Certification, Codes of Conduct Plans for Setting up and Running the Sustainable Tourism and Guidelines. Washington, DC: IFC/World Bank. Stewardship Council (STSC). New York: Rainforest Alli- http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEXPCOMNET/Resou ance. rces/CSR_in_tourism_2005.pdf. Simpson, M. 2008. Community benefit tourism initiatives: a con- Fennell, D. 2008. Ecotourism and the myth of indigenous steward- ceptual oxymoron? Tourism Management 29(1):1–18. ship. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 16(2):129–149.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

68

Klintman: Global Accreditation of Sustainable Tourism

Sirakaya, E., Jamal, T., & Choi, H. 2001. Developing indicators Taylor, S., Simpson, J., & Howie, H. 1998. Financing small busi- for destination sustainability. In D. Weaver (Ed.), The Ency- nesses. In R. Thomas (Ed.), The Management of Small Tour- clopedia of Ecotourism. pp. 411–432. Wallingford: CABI. ism and Hospitality Firms. pp. 58–77. London: Cassell. Skinner, E., Font, X., & Sanabria, R. 2004. Does stewardship United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). 2002. travel well? Benchmarking accreditation and certification. Voluntary Initiatives for Sustainable Tourism. Madrid: Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Man- UNWTO. agement 11(3):121–132. Zimmerer, K. 2006. Cultural ecology: at the interface with political Sorensen, H., Kjeld Hansen, L., Hammarlund, K., & Larsen, J. ecology—the new geographies of environmental conserva- 2002. Experience with and strategies for public involvement tion and globalization. Progress in Human Geography in offshore wind projects. International Journal of Environ- 30(1):63–78. ment and Sustainable Development 1(4):327–336. Tavares, A. 2008. The Future of Certified Sustainable Tourism: A Briefing on the Launch of the Critical Missing Tool, the Sus- tainable Tourism Stewardship Council. World Bank Work- shop. September 17.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

69

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Tradeoffs and entanglements among sustainability dimensions: the case of accessibility as a missing pillar of sustainable mobility policies in Italy

Roberta Cucca1 & Enrico Maria Tacchi2 1 Diap (Department of Architecture and Planning), Politecnico di Milano, Via Bonardi 3, Milan 20133 Italy (email: [email protected]) 2 Laris (Laboratory for Research and Intervention on Societies), Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Via Trieste 17, Brescia 25121 Italy (email: [email protected])

This article analyzes the tradeoffs between the environmental and social dimensions in sustainable mobility policies. We focus on the Italian context, where car dependency is a particularly prominent feature of the transportation sys- tem. During the past decade, many local administrations have promoted policies to foster more “sustainable mobility” as a way to manage congestion and reduce environmental pollution. However, these initiatives have often missed an important sustainability pillar: improving the accessibility of the most vulnerable to economic and social resources. This issue may have implications for social justice because access to mobility is an important dimension of inequality. A proposed framework identifies some possible tradeoffs related to sustainable mobility policies, concerning medium- to long-range mobility and short-range mobility. The article argues that, paradoxically, policies fostering mobility may lead to environmental pollution (e.g., low cost airlines), and that policies to contain the environmental impacts of mo- bility may harm social justice (e.g., environmental taxation) in the absence of strong promotion of collective transpor- tation. Finally, we analyze possible solutions to reach sustainable accessibility.

KEYWORDS: mobility, transportation, travel, public policy, environmental impact, civil rights, public access, pollution control

Introduction is, however, a broader and independent literature about the overlapping concepts of social cohesion Sustainable development clearly requires the in- and social exclusion (Pahl, 1991; Hopwoodet et al. tegration of the economic, ecological, and social pil- 2005; Littig & Griessler, 2005; Dempsey et al. 2011; lars. While scholars and practitioners have mainly Ranci, 2011).1 approached sustainability from the standpoint of en- The main aims of this article are to highlight the vironmental protection and resource management, the relevance of an integrated approach to sustainability social pillar has been a more limited part of the re- and to avoid possible tradeoff mechanisms among the search agenda (Dillard et al. 2009), although it is different dimensions of this concept in the process of generally recognized that “human well-being, equity, policy design and implementation. For instance, in a democratic government, and democratic civil society paradoxical way, initiatives oriented toward fostering are central constituents of sustainability” (Magis & mobility may lead to increases in environmental pol- Shinn, 2009). lution while programs to contain the ecological im- The most compelling contributions about sus- pacts of mobility may undermine social justice and tainability are mainly related to the concept of envi- increase inequalities. ronmental justice (Leonard, 1989), in terms of both inequalities in access to environmental goods and unequal distribution of environmental risks (Beck, 1986). While democratic inclusion in the governance of sustainability has also received a great deal of at- tention (see, e.g., Hajer, 1995; Glasbergen, 1998; van Tatenhoven, 2003; Pellizzoni, 2010), social inequali- 1 ties, justice, and inclusiveness have rarely been inte- Colantonio (2008) argues that “chronological analysis of social grated into studies of sustainability (with some inter- sustainability themes also shows how traditional themes, such as equity, poverty reduction and livelihood, have increasingly been esting exceptions, e.g., Polese & Stren 2001; complemented or replaced by more intangible and less measurable Vrankenet et al. 2002; Magis & Shinn, 2009). There concepts such as identity, sense of place and the benefits of ‘social networks’.”

 2012 Cucca & Tacchi Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 70

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

Accessibility as a Wobbly Pillar of Sustainable pean Commission’s most recent data, for example, Mobility demonstrate that 80% of all personal journeys are by car, and that in the European Union between 1975 To analyze possible tradeoff dynamics, this arti- and 1995 per capita daily travel distance doubled, cle discusses an even more important issue in the with a further doubling forecasted by 2025 (Eurostat, wider debate about sustainability: the challenges of 2007). Road congestion in Europe (EU-27) currently fostering sustainable mobility. There are several rea- costs €130 billion (US$170 billion) annually and the sons for growing attention to this issue, but most total external costs of motorized traffic are estimated important is the idea that while mobility in one form at €270 billion (US$300 billion) per year, around 4% or another has been essential throughout human his- of Europe’s gross domestic product (GDP) (Eurostat, 4 tory, in recent years it has undergone strong expan- 2007). sion and acceleration—of both people and goods—all Finally, with respect to social impact, the growth around the globe (Urry, 2000). This development has of mobility is leading to new sources of polarization, been due to several drivers. First, a significant num- largely dependent on the even more evident contrast ber of innovative technologies for transporting both between “desired” and “hindered” flows of mobility people and goods, especially in the field of infor- (Bauman, 1998). The first term describes an encour- mation technology and communication have encour- aged and supported mobility, such as the movements aged greater mobility (Castells, 1996).2 Second, re- generated by international tourists or business travel- cent decades have seen an increase in freedom of ers: in this case flows are often fast, autonomous, and movement within many political and territorial con- free. The second concept refers to slow mobility texts such as Eastern Europe and Asia (Bauman, flows, which in most cases are unwanted, and im- 1998). Finally, the spread of the free market and the peded movements, such as those of migrants around growth of the international financial economy have the world. Accordingly, we can assert that mobility gradually enveloped almost all of the planet’s main problems are the basis of some important processes economies, promoting a significant increase in the that build up the contemporary social system of ine- 5 movement of raw materials, workers, and products qualities. (Sheller & Urry, 2006). As a consequence, there is a need to reduce the These changing scenarios have promoted new harmful environmental and health effects exacerbated mobility dynamics, with important environmental, by polluting forms of transportation, as well as to economic, and social impacts. mitigate the economic externalities generated by traf- First, there is little doubt that mobility has im- fic jams. Policy efforts to ensure access to public portant consequences for environmental protection, goods have led to the establishment of institutions in terms of both natural resource consumption (e.g., and public administrations to encourage measures raw materials, fuel, soil) and air and noise pollution. that foster “sustainable mobility” (EU, 2006). Ac- More specifically, motorized transportation can be cording to the European Commission (CEC, 2000), divided roughly into four main modalities, of which sustainable mobility should provide the following: waterways and railways have a lower environmental impact, while airways and roadways are more harm- • The basic needs of mobility and development of ful in terms of both pollution and natural resource individuals, companies, and society must be sat- utilization (EU, 2009). As far as the environmental isfied, assuring safety in a way suitable for pre- dimension of sustainability is concerned, it is clear serving human health and ecosystems, and pro- that the extraordinary growth of the most ecologically moting equity within each generation and be- problematic forms of transportation is responsible for tween generations. a preponderant share of the challenges.3 • The transportation systems must be economi- Another important impact concerns economic cally accessible and operate efficiently; they externalities related to road congestion. The Euro- should guarantee a variety of different transpor-

2 4 Although some movements of people have been replaced by Road congestion represents an economic cost of uncompensated online exchanges (Lyons & Kenyon, 2003), other flows are de- environmental effects of production and consumption that diminish pendent on activities generated by information and communication consumer utility and raise enterprise costs outside the market technologies in a process of mutual reinforcement (Moos et al. mechanism (UN, 1997). 5 2006). Among others, Tomlison (1999) emphasizes that most of the 3 In Europe, for example, as far as people mobility is concerned, world’s population has no social skills or financial means to take between 1995 and 2004 passenger movements increased dramati- advantage of the opportunities offered by mobility in the contem- cally in the air-transport sector (+48.8% passenger/kilometers) and porary age. In strong disagreement with commentators who want private car mobility (+17.7%), while railway mobility increased at “the whole world in movement,” he says that the paradigmatic a lower rate (8.6%) and sea transportation decreased (-11.1%) experience of global modernity for most people is to stay in one (Eurostat, 2007). place.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

71

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

tation means to choose and support a competitive These tradeoffs are explored from a cross- economy and regional development. disciplinary perspective (environmental and regional • Emissions and waste must be restricted within sociology, transportation economics, and urban plan- the carrying capacity of the planet, using renew- ning) that integrates literature and statistical data on able resources at the rate of self regeneration, or travel behavior and infrastructure supply, as well as slower, and using nonrenewable resources at evaluates the potential impacts of policies that have rates lower than or equal to the development of been adopted for both medium- to long-range mobil- renewable substitutes. In the meantime, land use ity and short-range mobility. This expansive ap- and noise production should be minimized. proach aims at filling a gap in the literature. In fact, studies and documentation on sustainable mobility The first component of this definition clearly usually concern cities or major metropolitan areas emphasizes the key issue of accessibility in sustain- without taking into account long-distance movements able mobility (Litman, 2003).6 It also calls for the (Ponti, 2010). The customary tendency of focusing elimination of barriers to equal access to education, on more urbanized areas is understandable because of employment, health services provision, and food several important issues that arise from the concen- shopping, as well as sporting, leisure, and cultural tration of physical mobility flows in those areas, no- activities (SEU, 2003).7 The segment of the popula- tably the problem of congestion.9 Nevertheless, some tion most affected by this kind of social vulnerability relevant effects on the urban context may depend on comprises people without a car at their disposal how long-distance (for example at the national level (SEU, 2003), usually because of low income or inap- in Italy) and very long-distance movements (for propriate age (elderly and young people). Research example at the European level) are organized. The suggests that women tend to be disproportionately reason we consider both ranges is to highlight how subjected to such circumstances (Hine & Grieco, long- and short-distance movements can become 2003; Mercado et al. 2011). They are also more likely entangled, promoting vicious circles that are difficult to be at risk of social exclusion from lack of access to to interrupt. For both dimensions we will describe the appropriate transportation, a concept defined as “the tradeoffs related to the policies that have been im- unique interplay of a number of factors, whose con- plemented and possible interventions to promote sequence is the denial of access, to an individual or more sustainable accessibility, where accessibility is group, to the opportunity to participate in the social understood to be a broader concept than mobility; it and political life of the community, resulting not only is not just the ability to overcome a space, but to in diminished material and non-material quality of reach an opportunity (Vasconcellos, 2001). life, but also in tempered life chances, choices and reduced citizenship” (Kenyon et al. 2002). Long-Range Sustainable Mobility Although transit equity should be embedded in the definition of sustainable mobility, in some con- Although mobility of people and goods for long texts it is absent or potentially (and paradoxically) and very long distances has been an essential feature weakened by tradeoff dynamics across the different of human history, in recent years such travel has un- dimensions of sustainability policies.8 To highlight dergone strong development and acceleration (Figure these potential tradeoffs, we consider the tensions 1).10 In particular, when we consider sustainable mo- between environmental protection and the social jus- tice dimensions in sustainable mobility policies in 9 Italy. The first typology refers to short distances (sometimes possible to traverse on foot or by bicycle) and medium distances (such as commuter flows, usually limited to 50–100 kilometers). The se- cond typology focuses on longer journeys. 10 6 Sociologist John Urry (2000), for example, argues that “For the Numerous scholars argue for shifting from policies oriented present I consider some of the socio-spatial practices involved in toward mobility (as ease of movement per se) to policies that foster travelling, especially as in many cultures travelling appears to be sustainable accessibility (as ease of reaching destinations) because ‘always necessary’ for family life, leisure and friendship, as well as this focus might promote greater attention to equity impacts (see, for work and security. The scale of such travelling is awesome. e.g., Levine & Garb, 2002). 7 There are over 600 million international passenger arrivals each According to the Social Exclusion Unit in the UK, arguably the year (compared with 25 million in 1950); at any one time 300,000 most important institution working on the links between transpor- passengers are in flight above the US; a half million new hotel tation and social inclusion in Europe, the barriers to accessibility rooms are being built each year worldwide; and there is one car for are mainly represented by the availability and physical accessibil- every 8.6 people worldwide…International travel now accounts for ity of transportation, the cost of transportation, services located in over one-twelfth of world trade. It constitutes by far the largest inaccessible places, and personal safety and security. movement of people across boundaries that has occurred in the 8 Sustainable planning is another interesting example of possible history of the world. International and domestic tourism together tradeoffs between the different dimensions of sustainability accounts for 10 per cent of global employment and global GDP. (Coffman & Umemoto, 2010). And this affects everywhere.”

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

72

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

2006).12 Second, reductions in the environmental impacts of transportation have been pursued by shifting flows of goods from roads to railway net- works or to water through improvements in intermo- dality.13 This policy may be implemented through the empowerment of railways and harbors and discour- aging road traffic.14 Finally, long-range flows of goods have been constrained by applying environ- mental taxation (incorporated into retail prices), es- pecially to goods regarded as nonessential (e.g., alco- hol, tobacco, luxuries) (Muller & Sterner, 2006).

Figure 1 Increasing trends for passenger and goods However, this latter measure seems to have negative movements (EU, 2009). social effects due to the degree that developing countries remain dependent on these kinds of prod- bility within this range it is necessary to distinguish ucts. between goods and people transportation, not only In short, with regard to the long-range mobility because they are entangled, but because these two of goods, two important tradeoff mechanisms emerge modalities have different implications in terms of between the environmental and the social dimen- social justice and inequality. sions. On one hand, there may be warrant in won- dering if a small elite has the right to maintain low Goods Transportation costs for nonessential goods, dumping the environ- Goods transportation worldwide has been in- mental impacts of mobility on the community. On the creasing dramatically with the rise of the globalized other hand, the potential social impacts of fiscal economy and also due to innovations in transporta- measures that limit the distribution and availability of tion during the last century. While intercontinental certain goods needs to be accounted for. flows of goods have been primarily (70%) managed by shipping (UNCTAD, 2010), at least for the Euro- People Mobility pean countries the most problematic areas in terms of There is a little doubt that the reduction of goods transportation are related to intracontinental and na- transportation could leave more space for the mobil- tional movements. In Europe, transportation by road ity of people, an important civic right from many remains prevalent, as evidenced by the massive pres- points of view. This civic right concerns freedom of ence on Italian highways of heavy goods vehicles movement, at least in terms of leaving a country or (HGVs) coming from all European countries as a result of the International Road Transport Conven- tion.11 Eurostat’s (2007) data indicate that between 1995 and 2005 goods transportation grew from 2,972 12 to 3,903 billion tons-kilometers. This increase was Decoupling is often used in the context of economic production largely dependent on road and sea transportation, and environmental quality: it refers to the ability of an economy to which accounted for 44% and 39%, respectively, of grow without corresponding increases in environmental pressure. An economy that is able to sustain growth of its gross domestic total freight moved in 2005. Conversely, rail volumes product without simultaneously worsening environmental condi- are still marginal in Europe (9%), while in Italy rail tions is said to be decoupled (OECD, 2002). 13 covers only around 5% of continental goods traffic Furthermore, the long length of the Italian coasts offers the and 3% of national movements. opportunity to more effectively exploit the so-called “motorways As far as the sustainability of goods transporta- of the sea” by shifting high traffic volumes to this mode. The pro- cess has already partly occurred, mainly with respect to goods tion is concerned, there are different policy perspec- movements. According to Assotrasporti, the Italian Transport tives. First, efforts have been made to achieve a gen- Management Agency, cargo shipments at the twelve major Italian eral decoupling of economic growth and mobility by ports increased from 253 to 319 tons between 1998 and 2007, a promoting local production through the use of subsi- rise of more than 25% (Ispra, 2008). Rail transportation is not growing in Europe because of its generally poor flexibility, which dies or taxation (OECD, 2002; Muller & Sterner, often makes it an uneconomic alternative. Numerous programs, such as the Marco Polo Programme in the EU or the intermodal container terminal on the Pacific coast of Canada, have been de- veloped to try to overcome this problem (Santos et al. 2010). 14 To encourage greater use of rail transportation, some European 11 The International Road Transport Convention is also known as countries have imposed a quota on the number of tractor-trailer the TIR (Transports Internationaux Routiers) Convention negoti- trucks allowed to cross the Alps by road. Such a measure could be ated in 1975 under the auspices of the United Nations Economic usefully extended to several congested and critical areas of the Commission for Europe. Italian peninsula.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

73

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

moving inside domestically.15 Nations typically con- sions of sustainability. Contemporary electric vehi- sidered to be “democratic” may also be distinguished cles face difficult obstacles to increase their share in from authoritarian regimes through mobility, since road transportation, mainly due to high costs, low the former have freedom of internal movement autonomy, and lack of recharging infrastructure. Ad- (Bauman, 1998) and international mobility (which is, ditionally, they do not represent a solution to the conversely, restricted by most dictatorships) (Sheller problem of traffic congestion. In regard to biofuels, & Urry, 2006). many studies have demonstrated their potential social Along with these political considerations, we can impacts, especially in developing countries, when add other cultural and social issues. Modern means of large amounts of land customarily used for food transportation, especially by airplane and car, make crops are converted to the production of fuel crops physical interconnections faster, cheaper, and safer, despite a need to feed the local population (von although they are usually worse in terms of environ- Braun & Pachauri, 2006; Sawyer, 2008; Carrosio, mental impact.16 Combined with the diffusion of con- 2011). temporary communications technologies, low cost In Italy, at the moment, the most important means of transportation offer opportunities for en- problem is that a strong emphasis on improving the hancing people’s relations at different levels road network is prominent in national transportation (Castells, 1996; Castells et al. 2007): we can travel policies (Ambiente Italia, 2007), although it is well very far in a reasonable time and at a low cost (e.g., known that such prioritization can only lead to an to attend a university or a language course, to contact increase in road traffic (Noland, 2007). new customers, to receive specialized hospital treat- In contrast, policies to improve water transporta- ment, to participate in tourism, or to partake in ap- tion are quite absent from contemporary policy de- pealing popular events such as sports, entertainment, bates, although the Italian coasts offer extensive un- and public or family ceremonies). As Poulit (2007) derutilized opportunity for passenger transportation. argues, mobility also represents a huge advantage A reported increase of 23% in passengers between both in terms of choice and freedom, as well as with 1998 and 2007 is comprised primarily of very short- respect to economic growth and cultural opportuni- range traffic (such as crossing the Strait of Messina ties. For example, the effective social unification of between Calabria and Sicily or connecting Naples Europe has been largely supported by low-cost air with the islands of Campania) or cruise-based tour- travel. However, tensions between the ecological and ism (Ispra, 2008). social dimensions of sustainability may be very Concerning very long distances, air traffic in It- strong. The Italian case is a clear example. With aly has dramatically increased in recent years as a respect to people’s medium- to long-distance mobil- result of the widespread presence of over 60 airports, ity, Italians have a particularly high level of automo- while the railway system is not competitive on high- bile dependency due to the economic and social his- speed routes, especially due to very high fares (Ispra, tory of the postwar period (Paolini, 2005). In terms of 2008). As a matter of fact, several initiatives have cars per capita, Italy scores second in the world worked in opposition to efforts to shift flows of pas- ranking, just after the United States. Italy has 63.2 sengers from aircraft to railways, such as the reacti- vehicles per 100 inhabitants in comparison to an av- vation of flights between Milan and Trieste; they erage for Europe (EU-27) of 46 per 100 people. This roughly follow the Lisbon-Kiev European Intermodal extreme situation generates disabling traffic conges- Corridor,17 along a completely flat region. As the tion and severe air-pollution problems, which are literature explains, the railway seems unable to match compounded by the national fleet’s high average age the low-cost airline pricing strategies (reducing oper- and the large percentage of diesel vehicles operating ating costs and perceived ticket prices, increasing in the country. revenues by offering amenities) (Sauter-Servaes & The environmental impact of car dependency can Nash, 2007). to some degree be mitigated by new “green” technol- In general, as far as the mobility of people is ogies, such as electric cars or biofuels (Ambiente concerned, we can observe in Italy relatively higher Italia, 2007). However, this strategy suffers from par- development of those transportation modes with adoxes and tradeoffs between the different dimen- greater environmental impacts, while the relatively “greener” sectors show widespread weakness. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to identify strate- 15 We avoid here a discussion of barriers to the inflow movements gies to improve long-range sustainable mobility in of immigrants which occupies the attention of virtually all Western countries. 16 17 For instance, according to http://www.ecopassenger.org, trains Council Decision of 29 October 1993 on the creation of a trans- are usually less polluting—carbon dioxide, particulate matter, and European road network (93/629/EEC). nitrous oxides—and energy consuming than airplanes and cars.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

74

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

Italy. The only recent encouraging investment has Table 1 Distribution of casualties by type of road occurring in been in implementation of a high-speed railway sys- Italy in 2007 (ISAT, 2007). tem (connecting Turin to Naples, passing through Typology of % Accidents % Deaths % Injuries Milan and Rome), plans for which local communities Road have (ironically) contested for their environmental Highway 5.9% 10.3% 7.1% impact and very high costs. Also contributing to this Extra-urban road 17.5% 45.5% 19.6% opposition has been a perception that the project Urban road 76.6% 44.2% 73.3% seems mainly devoted to satisfying the needs of the elite travelers (Della Porta & Piazza, 2008). The price of rail transportation is not competitive with air travel From an ecological perspective, the major prob- and the high cost of developing the necessary rail lem is the periodic violation of European-mandated infrastructure has reduced public funds for mainte- particulate and gaseous concentration limits, espe- nance of the traditional railway system that commut- cially in the northern parts of the country. In Milan, ers use on a daily basis (Zanchini et al. 2010). There for example, air-quality conditions fell below regu- is a little doubt that promoting sustainable accessibil- lated levels on more than 100 days during 2009, ity of people to distant locations will not be possible nearly three times more than the maximum permitted without strong intervention to make the railway net- by EU legislation. Even if the correlations between work economically sustainable, for instance by air emissions and human health are complex to assess adopting the marketing strategies used by the low- (Finkelstein et al. 2004), the likely impacts on public cost airlines (Sauter-Servaes & Nash, 2007). At the health seem clear enough and are particularly severe same time, transportation of goods needs to be de- for elderly people and children (Hoek et al. 2002; creased or shifted to water or to railways. Gorman et al. 2003). The same sociodemographic groups are also the principle victims of automobile Short- to Medium-Range Sustainable Mobility accidents. In Italy, there were more than 230,000 accidents in 2007 with at least 5,000 fatalities and Global changes brought about by mobility heav- 325,000 injuries. Approximately 76% of these acci- ily affect local contexts, in terms of both human well- dents occurred in urban areas, comprising 44% of all being and environmental quality, and from a per- fatalities and 73% of all injuries (Table 1). The dis- spective of inequality concerning local resource ac- proportionate percentage of deaths in urban areas is cess. By focusing the analysis on short- to medium- mainly due to accidents involving members of vul- range mobility, two different territorial dimensions nerable populations (pedestrians and cyclists). are particularly important for the Italian situation: This situation of “unsafety” represents a high problems related to urban mobility (Colleoni, 2008), barrier to the accessibility of local resources by vul- that are discussed in the section below, and chal- nerable members of society who often do not have lenges associated with moving into “fragile areas” access to cars and may self-segregate from certain characterized by economic and demographic decline, public spaces (Beckmann, 2004). Children, the el- a lack of public services (e.g., schools, hospitals, lei- derly, and disabled people represent targets particu- sure services) and a shortage of public transportation larly affected by negative traffic impacts.18 For safety facilities (Osti, 2004). As outlined in the subsequent reasons, they are generally kept away from the streets section, for Italy it is a relevant issue because ap- and squares (Appleyard, 1981). proximately 35% of the country’s total land area— Abandonment of the streets by the most vulnera- supporting 8.5% of the country’s population—is ble groups actually started with the progressive ex- characterized as “fragile” (Cresme, 2000). pansion of public spaces devoted to vehicle mobility and the decreasing of areas available for socialization Urban Mobility (Engwicht, 1993). To develop automobility, many In Italy, the issue of sustainable mobility in cities urban public spaces were converted into vehicular is a rather well-developed research and policy topic thoroughfares or parking facilities and new collective because of the high concentration of movement spaces have, in turn, been created in suburban dis- within urban boundaries (Asstra-ISFORT, 2005).

Based on national data for 2005, approximately nine 18 out of ten trips by motorized transportation modes Disabled people comprise another category that is adversely affected by the contemporary mobility system. A necessary condi- occur within cities (Asstra-ISFORT, 2005). Cars ac- tion for their participation in society is that the physical space and count for approximately 80% and public transporta- the transportation system focus on the removal of barriers and the tion represents 12% of urban trips (Asstra-ISFORT, accessibility of services (Dauhs, 1982). Although in recent years 2005). This modal split has pronounced implications significant progress has been made, at least in terms of planning regulations, physical barriers are often insurmountable or do not for local sustainability. allow disabled people to travel autonomously (SEU, 2003).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

75

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

tricts (e.g., decentralized administrative offices, gro- same time, recent efforts to develop the accessibility cery stores, scientific and technological parks, of these poor areas have neither received many re- leisure-time areas), in most cases, unreachable with- sources from local administrations to improve tradi- out a car and often generating supplementary mobil- tional public transportation nor have they used many ity demands (Viale, 2007). In fact, when this process innovative tools, such as demand response transpor- of decentralization is not well-supported by the pub- tation systems (DRTS), car sharing, and carpooling.20 lic transportation system, automobiles can expand Local public action has instead been largely oriented their influence zone, with all the resulting conse- to sustainable mobility strategies focused on the quences, such as increasing travel speeds and traffic- ecological dimension. flow intensity (Moriarty & Reed, 1989). One example is Ecopass, a pollution charge with These issues raise the wider problem of justice variable fees to enter the city center based on the with respect to urban mobility, especially in terms of specific “EURO class” of the vehicle.21 Although this access to social and economic resources. Actually, measure is innovative with respect to the environ- there is a strong relationship between access to means mental dimension of sustainable mobility, it does not of transportation and social exclusion of the unem- consider appropriately the potential social justice ployed, the elderly, families with children, young- impacts on the weakest sectors of society. In Italy, sters, and low-income people (Cass et al. 2005). Al- vulnerable people typically live in deprived areas though vulnerable social groups often do not perceive poorly connected by public transportation to the city themselves as socially excluded, because of a general center and cannot afford low-emission vehicles, de- inability to recognize alternatives outside of their spite public funding to support the renewal of private immediate local contexts (Oppenchaim, 2010), re- parking facilities in recent decades. For this reason, search widely recognizes it to be a significant factor policies oriented to increasing automobile operating in accessing higher education and employment op- costs should be implemented with caution. While portunities, and adequate medical care (Boffi et al. such measures could confer environmental benefits, 2004; Mercado et al. 2011). It seems that in a society they could hurt low-income people who have no op- where automobile ownership is taken for granted, not tion but to drive (Mercado et al. 2011). Furthermore, having a car or a driver’s license can limit life policies oriented to renewing private parking facili- chances (Viale, 1996). ties show another interesting tradeoff between the To address problems related to congestion and different sustainability dimensions: by fostering own- , some Italian cities such as Milan, ership of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), public ad- Parma, and Reggio Emilia, have recently imple- ministrators are reducing environmental impacts from mented measures that have generated international congestion, but are not acting on the underlying prob- visibility. Unfortunately, these interventions have lems that create these conditions in the first place.22 not, according to our interpretation, generally demon- As outlined in Figure 2, time (minutes per person) strated a satisfactory balance across sustainability spent daily in movements in Italy has increased in dimensions. In particular, policies have focused on recent years. In addition, congestion may also worsen reducing environmental impacts and neglected the dangerous conditions that lead to road accidents. social aspects of sustainability. We consider here Milan, a city where transpor- tation policies have been characterized by a strong tradeoff between, on one hand, environmental pro- tection and, on the other hand, equity in accessibility to social and economic resources. While Milan has a the selection of schools by students, poor accessibility to health creditable public transportation system, particularly services by elderly people, and the impossibility for currently unemployed people to reach potential workplaces. in comparison to other Italian cities, many of its dis- 20 DRTS is an advanced, user-oriented form of public transport advantaged areas are not well connected to the rest of characterized by flexible routing and scheduling of small/medium the city. This is the case for some social housing dis- vehicles, operating in shared-ride mode between pick-up and drop- tricts on the outer fringes (Infussi, 2006), as well as off locations according to passenger’s needs. 21 for outlying suburban areas that are only weakly Ecopass differs from the congestion charge used in London, linked to the inner city and to other municipalities on Stockholm and Trondheim because cars pay fees depending on 19 their level of environmental impact. More specifically, Euro 4 the metropolitan periphery (Laris, 2009). At the vehicles do not pay a charge to enter the city center, while more polluting cars are subject to a variable fee (Gervasoni & Sartori, 19 This research was carried out in a suburban area (Pinzano) 2007; Villavecchia, 2009). 22 located 15 kilometers from Milan and characterized by severe Some recent data on the impacts of the Ecopass charge in Milan socioeconomic deprivation, lack of public services, and poor infra- demonstrate that decreases in traffic congestion have been tem- structure connecting the area to other suburbs or to the inner city of pered by adoption of less polluting vehicles (Comune di Milano, Milan. Focus groups highlighted several problems: restrictions on 2009).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

76

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

density, thus there is potential for DRTS interven- tions in the form of subsidized taxis alongside con- ventional public transportation (UK Commission for Integrated Transport, 2008). However, public institu- tions, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), or businesses have launched some meaningful experi- ments along these lines (Cucca, 2009b). These initia- tives are oriented, first of all, to improving the acces- sibility of public services and communities and to spread services throughout the territory. Because of the Internet’s relevance in the development of such services, many local administrations in rural and mountainous regions are acting to limit the digital Figure 2 Trend of the time (minutes/person) spent daily in divide that still characterizes these fragile areas movements in Italy (Author’s elaborations on Asstra- ISFORT, 2009). (Warren, 2007). As far as these services are con- cerned, there are some interesting examples from the care sector, especially related to the needs of the el- We have highlighted several reasons why effec- derly who comprise a prominent part of the rural tive action to promote sustainable mobility should be population, the delivery of prescription drugs and the oriented to tools sensitive to the social dimension, provision of home-health services by NGOs and co- encouraging the weak Italian attitude toward organ- operatives as a strategic tool to enhance their sustain- izing individual transfer (e.g., by private car) in col- able life conditions. In addition, some actors are lective movements (e.g., buses, trains, collective cars) promoting new kinds of collective transportation that For example, the introduction of car-sharing are less expensive than traditional public bus ser- schemes, or means of transportation that are available vices. An NGO in northern Italy’s mountainous areas “on demand” (sometimes known as DRTS), have has recently introduced an interesting system of car- achieved few results in areas that have tested such pooling to organize people who are commuting reg- measures because they are too expensive for public ularly, as well as traveling more infrequently, along administrations, or lack a “critical mass” of users common routes (Panna, 2009). paying a fee for the service (Debernardi & Battaiotto, However, these experiments will likely be insuf- 2009). It is well known that the struggle against auto- ficient if they are not framed as part of a more gen- mobile culture is a big challenge in Italy due to a long eral strategy of integrated transportation policies for history of public support for car manufacturing these so-called fragile areas (Santos et al. 2010). (Featherstone et al. 2004; Paolini, 2005). There is Contemporary organizational modes have many im- little doubt that this change requires a strong infor- pacts on local sustainability and demonstrate some mation strategy and time to reach all possible users interesting paradoxes, the most prominent of which is (Banister, 2008), especially the most vulnerable such the lack of environmental pollution generated by the as elderly people (Mercado et al. 2011). population’s low access to economic and social re-

sources. This phenomenon not only fosters the eco- Mobility into Fragile Areas nomic and demographic decline of fragile areas, but All of the problems discussed above with respect also implies huge social costs for residents, who are to urban mobility also affect Italy’s fragile areas, and forced to become daily commuters or are pressed to their gravity is compounded because of very weak migrate toward the suburbs, increasing urban sprawl public action to address the issue (Osti, 2007). Recent and is associated environmental impacts. studies identify progressive demographic decline in a very significant number of communities in the coun- Final Remarks: Fostering Sustainable try’s rural or mountainous areas (Cresme, 2008). A Accessibility total of 1,650 towns out of 8,101 in Italy are deemed

to be at risk of permanent abandonment by 2015 This article has sought to demonstrate the com- (Cresme, 2008). Although there are many reasons for plexity of issues related to sustainable mobility and to this phenomenon, a particularly prominent factor is analyze some of the tradeoffs that emerge out of cur- the lack of economic opportunities in these commu- rent policies that have been adopted in Italy. A har- nities, a problem exacerbated by inadequate public monious balance among environmental protection, transportation (Osti, 2007). economic prosperity, and social integration is diffi- The provision of bus service in rural and moun- cult to achieve through initiatives for the reorganiza- tainous areas is expensive because of low population tion of people and goods mobility. Current mobility

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

77

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy trends are contributing to a range of environmental approaches are related to land-use policies that re- problems including resource consumption (fuel and duce the physical separation of activities, increase soil) and air and noise pollution. In addition, the ad- density and concentration (e.g., mixed-use develop- vantages and disadvantages of mobility are not ment, housing location, space and route layouts), and equally distributed in terms of access to social and situate public services in proximity to already- economic resources. High levels of accessibility have existing infrastructures. Successful compact cities been achieved only by a minority of the world’s pop- are, however, only attainable by creating attractive ulation that is able to enjoy the benefits of very fa- and affordable spaces and localities in the urban area, vorable economic, logistical, and infrastructural con- and by reducing opportunities and motivations for ditions. In fact, ecological harm from mobility is “escape mobility” (Heinze, 2000). It is also important mainly generated by the most developed countries, to put services at accessible points in rural and which arguably should assume some financial burden mountainous areas and to fight urban sprawl dynam- for environmental mitigation or renewal. A further ics. Another strategy to facilitate this process is to challenge is that the social and environmental costs encourage the uptake of information and communi- often accrue to people who can hardly enjoy the re- cations technologies to reduce mobility demand lated benefits. This situation entails a problem of through telework and computerization of utility ser- fairness in burden sharing for environmental protec- vices (Moos et al. 2006). Initiatives that enable home tion that unduly encumbers low-income people. As a care, especially with respect to the needs of elderly or result, the socioenvironmental costs of transportation disabled people can have this desirable effect systems should be carefully evaluated, with consider- (Shergold & Parkhurst, 2010). The containment of ation devoted to identifying who gains and who loses movement also seems particularly important in terms from specific policy decisions. of the mobility of goods and strategies that decouple However, there is little doubt that mobility repre- and valorize local production. sents, at the same time, an increasingly strategic asset Finally, there is the ambitious goal of reorganiz- for human development. Research has shown how ing individual movements by creating opportunities social inequalities can be measured, inter alia, in for collective mobility. This objective can be pursued terms of differential access to resources (SEU, 2003). through the “classic cure of iron” by extending un- For this reason, the challenge is to improve strategies derground networks and developing railway infra- oriented to more sustainable accessibility by limiting structure, including penetration into the urban context some of the tradeoffs between the different dimen- (Tacchi, 2007). There is also the upgrading of buses sions of the concept: environmental protection, eco- and increasing their efficiency by, for instance, cre- nomic sustainability, and accessibility (CEC, 2000). ating new dedicated lanes. Opportunities additionally Such an approach becomes possible only by the inno- exist to trial and diffuse innovative strategies such as vation of tools available for the task, with particular DRTS, car sharing, and carpooling. The provision of attention to facilitating, controlling, and reorganizing information about how to effectively combine differ- the flows at different territorial levels, to interrupt the ent means of transportation to reach a particular des- vicious feedback loops between short and long ranges tination can play an important role as a component of of mobility (Cucca, 2009a). these strategies. First, it is necessary to facilitate individual The ultimate goal should be promotion of inte- movements by structuring actions that make individ- grated transportation policies (Santos et al. 2010) at ual travel more ecofriendly and safe. This objective different territorial levels that are able to manage the can be achieved by encouraging transportation that pressures of globalized modernity, where challenges does not promote automobile dependency, such as of movement have become prominent features of walking and bicycling and the development of a new social inequality (Cass et al. 2005). Accordingly, transportation hierarchy that reduces urban traffic some experimental policies to promote sustainable speeds and reallocates space to light mobility and mobility, as part of wider policy programs, have be- social life (Banister, 2008). The above discussion gun to receive attention and deserve to be supported. describes how such strategies can improve accessi- These measures, often promoted by civil society, bility to local resources for the most vulnerable peo- effect different sustainability dimensions and take ple. However, because of the personal automobile’s into consideration both the ecological and social pil- high legitimacy, it is also important to foster the dif- lars. Only a balanced transportation system can con- fusion of ZEVs and to improve traffic flows through tribute to comprehensive and unambiguous progress the innovative use of traffic-control systems (Begg & toward sustainable development and promote a tran- Gray, 2004). sition from the focus on ecofriendly mobility to sus- Second, planners should seek to contain individ- tainable accessibility. The real challenge is not one of ual movements in various ways. The most important fostering greener mobility for a narrow elite, but

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

78

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy promoting fair and responsible access to resources for Comune di Milano. 2009. Monitoraggio Ecopass. [Ecopass As- all. sessment]. Milan: Agenzia Mobilità Ambiente e Territorio (in Italian). http://www.comune.milano.it/dseserver/ecopass/re port/Report_Ecopass_9mesi09.pdf. Cresme. 2000. L’Italia del Disagio Insediativo: Investire nel Acknowledgment Belpaese–Servizi Territoriali Diffusi per la Competizione The authors are grateful to the anonymous referees and the Globale. [Housing Discomfort in Italy: Investing in the Beau- editors for constructive comments and suggestions. tiful Country–Widespread Territorial Services for Global Competition]. Rome: Serico (in Italian). Cresme. 2008. 1996/2016–Eccellenze e Ghost Town nell’Italia dei Piccoli Comuni. [Excellences and Ghost Towns in Italian References Small Municipalities]. Rome: Serico (in Italian) http://www.confcommercio.it/home/ArchivioGi/2008/Varie/ Ambiente Italia. 2007. Rapporto Sullo Stato del Paese. [Report on SINTESI-RICERCA-def-6-08.doc_cvt.htm. the State of the Country]. Milan: Edizioni Ambiente (in Ital- Cucca, R. 2009a. Partecipare alla Mobilità Sostenibile: Politiche, ian). Strumenti e Attori. [Participating in Sustainable Mobility: Appleyard, D. 1981. Livable Streets. Berkeley: University of Cali- Policies, Tools and Actors]. Rome: Carocci (in Italian). fornia Press. Cucca, R. 2009b. Cittadini più consapevoli e istituzioni più re- Asstra-ISFORT. 2005. Avanti c’è Posto? Report Annuale Sulla sponsabili. [More conscious citizens and more responsible Mobilità Urbana: i Bisogni dei Cittadini, le Risposte Della institutions]. Etica per le professioni 11(1):37–43 (in Italian). Città. [Is There Room Next? Annual Report on Urban Mobil- Dauhs, J. 1982. The situation of the handicapped in today’s traffic, ity: Citizens’ Needs and the Answers of the City]. Rome: viewed by those concerned. In Bundesministerium für Charles Isfort Carminucci (in Italian). Verkehr (Ed.), Mitteilungen über Forschungen zur Asstra-ISFORT. 2009. Il Dato è Tratto: Alla Ricerca di un Punto Verbesserung der Verkehrsverhältnisse der Gemeinden. di Svolta. [The Data Have Been Cast: Looking For a Turning Maßnahmen und Möglichkeiten zur Integration behinderter Point]. Annual Report. May 9. Rome (in Italian). Menschen im Verkehr. pp. 132–133. Bonn: Forschung Banister, D. 2008. The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Stadtverkehr. Policy 15(2):73–80. Debernardi, A. & Battaiotto, S. 2009. La mobilità sostenibile: Bauman, Z. 1998. Globalization: The Human Consequences. New verso un approccio integrato. [Sustainable mobility: towards York: Columbia University Press. an integrated approach]. Inquinamento 51(111):26–29 (in Beck, U. 1986. Risikogesellshaft: Aufdem Weg in eine andere Italian). Moderne. [Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity]. Frank- Della Porta, D. & Piazza, G. 2008. Le Ragioni del no: Le Cam- furt: Suhrkamp Verlag (in German). pagne Contro la Tav in Val di Susa e il Ponte Sullo Stretto. Beckmann, J. 2004. Mobility and safety. Theory, Culture & Soci- [The Reasons for Refusal: The Campaign Against the High- ety 21(4–5):81–100. Speed Railway in Susa Valley and the Bridge Over The Begg, D. & Gray, D. 2004. Transport policy and vehicle emission Strait]. Milan: Feltrinelli (in Italian). objectives in the UK: is the marriage between transport and Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. 2011. The environment policy over? Environmental Science & Policy social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban 7(3):155–163. social sustainability. Sustainable Development 19(5):289– Boffi, M., D’Ovidio, M., Tornaghi, C., & Natoli, E. 2004. Urban 300. Mobility of Elderly People: GPS and GIS for Collecting and Dillard, J., V. Dujon, & M. King (Eds.). 2009 Understanding the Analyzing Space-Time Information on Mobility. Seventh Social Dimension of Sustainability. New York: Routledge. AGILE Conference on Geographic Information Science. Engwicht, D. 1993. Reclaiming Our Cities and Towns: Better April 29–May 1, Heraklion, Crete. Living with Less Traffic. Philadelphia: New Society Publish- Carrosio G. 2011. I Biocarburanti: Globalizzazione e Politiche ers. Territoriali. [Biofuel: Globalization and Regional Policies]. European Union (EU). 2006. Keep Europe Moving: A Transport Roma: Carocci (in Italian). Policy for Sustainable Mobility. http://europa.eu/rapid/ Cass, N., Shove, E., & Urry, J. 2005. Social exclusion, mobility pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/06/818. January 20, and access. Sociological Review 53(3):539–555. 2012. Castells, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society: The Infor- European Union (EU). 2009. Energy and Transport in Figures. mation Age. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Luxembourg: European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/ Castells, M., Fernández-Ardévol, M., Linchuan Qiu, J., & Sey, A. energy/publications/statistics/doc/2009_energy_transport_fig 2007. Mobile Communication and Society: A Global Per- ures.pdf. spective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Eurostat. 2007. Panorama of Transport: Statistical Books. Luxem- Coffmann, M. & Umemoto, K. 2010. The triple-bottom-line: burg: Office for Official Publications of the European Com- framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice. En- munity. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB vironment, Development, and Sustainability 12(5):597–610. /KS-DA-07-001/EN/KS-DA-07-001-EN.PDF. Colantonio, A. 2008. Traditional and Emerging Prospects in So- Featherstone, M. 2004. Automobilities: an introduction. Theory, cial Sustainability. EIBURS Working Paper Series. Oxford: Culture & Society 21(4–5):1–24. Oxford Institute for Sustainable Development (OISD). Finkelstein, M., Jerret, M., & Sears, M. 2004. Traffic air pollution http://oisd.brookes.ac.uk/sustainable_communities/resources/ and mortality rate advancement periods. American Journal of SocialSustainabilityProspectspaper.pdf. Epidemiology 160(2):173–177. Colleoni, M. (Ed.). 2008. La Ricerca Sociale Sulla Mobilità Ur- Gervasoni, A. & Sartori, M. 2007. Il : esperienze in- bana: Metodi e Risultati di Indagine. [Social Research on ternazionali, costi, benefici e sostenibilità finanziaria. [Road Urban Mobility: Methods and Survey Results]. Milan: pricing: international experiences, costs, benefits and finan- Edizioni Libreria Cortina (in Italian). cial sustainability]. Liuc Papers, Serie Impresa e mercati fi- Commission of the European Communities (CEC). 2000. Defining nanziari 198(6):1–42 (in Italian). an Environmentally System: Commis- Glasbergen, P. 1998. The question of environmental governance. sion Expert Group on Transport and Environment. Brussels: In P. Glasbergen (Ed.), Cooperative Environmental Govern- CEC. ance. pp. 1–18. Boston: Kluwer.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

79

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

Gorman, D., Douglas, M., Conway, L., Noble, P., & Hanlon, P. Science, Practice, & Policy 2(1):3–14. http://sspp.proquest. 2003. Transport policy and health inequalities: a health im- com/archives/vol2iss1/0511-020.moos.html. pact assessment of Edinburgh’s transport policy. Public Moriarty, P. & Reed, C. 1989. Reducing vehicular travel needs Health 117(1):15–24. through increasing efficiency. Urban Policy and Research 7 Hajer, M. 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecologi- (4):161–175. cal Modernisation and the Policy Process. New York: Clara- Muller, A. & Sterner, T. 2006. Environmental Taxation in Prac- don Press. tice. Farnham, Surrey: Aldershot. Heinze, G. 2000. Transport and leisure: growth as opportunity. In Noland, R. 2007. Transport planning and environmental assess- European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) ment: implication of induced travel effects. International (Ed.), Transport and Leisure, ECMT Round Table 111. pp. Journal of Sustainable Transportation 1(1):1–28. 1–51. Paris: OECD. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Hine, J. & Grieco, M. 2003. Scatters and clusters in time and (OECD). 2002. Indicators to Measure Decoupling of Envi- space: implications for delivering integrated and inclusive ronmental Pressure from Economic Growth. Paris: OECD. transport. Transport Policy 10(4):299–306. Oppenchaim, N. 2010. The Daily Mobility of Adolescents of Seg- Hoek, G., Brunekreef, B., & Goldbohm, S. 2002. Association regated Neighbourhoods. Paper presented at the International between mortality and indicators of traffic-related air pollu- Sociological Association World Conference. July 11–17, tion in The Netherlands: a cohort study. Lancet 360(9341): Göteborg. 1203–1209. Osti, G. 2004. Un’economia leggera per aree fragili: criteri per la Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., & O’Brien, G. 2005. Sustainable devel- sostenibilità ambientale nel Nord Italia. [A light economy for opment: mapping different approaches. Sustainable Devel- fragile areas: criteria of environmental sustainability in opment 13(1):38–52. northern Italy]. Sviluppo Locale 11(27):9–31 (in Italian). Infussi, F. 2006. Il Progetto nel Processo di Riqualificazione Sos- Osti, G. 2007. Are Public Transport Systems so Flexible to Satisfy tenibile Della Città Pubblica: Versione Provvisoria. [The Remote Rural Areas’ Needs? XXII Congress of the European Project in the Process of Sustainable Redevelopment in Pub- Society for Rural Sociology. August 20–24, Wageningen lic Cities: Draft Issue]. Milan: Diap (in Italian). University, The Netherlands. Istituto Nazionale di Statistica (ISTAT). 2007. Statistiche Sugli Pahl, R. 1991. The search for social cohesion: from Durkheim to Incidenti Stradali. [Statistics on Road Accidents]. Rome: the European Commission. European Journal of Sociology ISTAT (in Italian). 32(2):345–360. Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale Panna, E. 2009. Riempire le auto per svuotare le strade: i vantaggi (ISPRA). 2008. Qualità dell’ambiente Urbano. [Quality of del ‘car pooling’. [Fill the cars to clear the streets: the ad- Urban Environment]. http://www.apat.gov.it/site/_content vantages of ‘car pooling’]. Etica per le Professioni 11(1):60– files/00154500/154513_V_Rapporto_%20Aree_urb.pdf (in 65 (in Italian). Italian). Paolini, F. 2005. Un Paese a Quattro Ruote: Automobili e Società Kenyon, S., Lyons, G., & Rafferty, J. 2002. Transport and social in Italia. [A Four-Wheels Country: Cars and Society in Italy]. exclusion: investigating the possibility of promoting inclu- Venice: Marsilio Editore (in Italian). sion through virtual mobility. Journal of Transport Geogra- Pellizzoni, L. 2010. Environmental knowledge and deliberative phy 10(3):207–219. democracy. In M. Gross & H. Heinrichs (Eds.), Environ- Laboratory for Research and Intervention on Societies (Laris). mental Sociology: European Perspectives, and Interdiscipli- 2009. Azione Sperimentale “Tempi per Pinzano:” Nuove nary Challenges. pp. 159–182. New York: Springer. Modalità di Erogazione e Localizzazione dei Servizi. [Ex- Polèse, M. & Stren, R. 2001. The Social Sustainability of Cities: perimental Action “Times for Pinzano:” New Ways to De- Diversity and the Management of Change. Toronto: Univer- liver and Locate Public Services]. Limbiate: Te.M.P.O. (in sity of Toronto Press. Italian). Ponti, M. 2010. La mobilità sostenibile e il futuro delle metropoli. Leonard, J. 1989. Environment and the Poor: Development Strate- [Sustainable mobility and the future of metropolis]. Vita e gies for a Common Agenda. Washington, DC: Overseas De- Pensiero 93(1):113–119 (in Italian). velopment Council. Poulit, J. 2007. Connecting People While Preserving the Planet. Levine, J. & Garb, Y. 2002. ’s conditional New York: Esri Press. promise: promotion of accessibility or mobility? Transport Ranci, C. 2011. Competitiveness and social cohesion in western Policy 9(3):179–188. European cities. Urban Studies 48(13):2789–2804. Litman, T. 2003. Sustainable Transportation and TDM: Planning Santos, G., Behrendt, H., & Teytelboym, A. 2010. Policy instru- that Balances Economics, Social and Ecological Objectives. ment for sustainable road transport. Research in Transporta- Victoria: Victoria Transport Policy Institute. http://www.vtpi. tion Economics 28(1):46–91. org/tdm/tdm67.htm. Sauter-Servaes, T. & Nash, A. 2007. Applying low-cost airplane Littig, B. & Griessler, E. 2005. Social sustainability: a catchword pricing strategies on European railroads. Transportation Re- between political pragmatism and social theory. International search Record 1995:1–8. Journal of Sustainable Development 8(1–2):65–79. Sawyer, D. 2008. Climate change, biofuels and eco-social impacts Lyons, G. & Kenyon, S. 2003. Social Participation, Personal in the Brazilian Amazon and Cerrado. Philosophical Trans- Travel and Internet Use. Proceedings of the Tenth Interna- actions of the Royal Society of London B(biological Sciences) tional Conference on Travel Behavior Research. August 1– 363(1498):1747–1752. 13, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Shergold, I. & Parkhurst, G. 2010. Operationalising “sustainable Magis, K. & Shinn, C. 2009. Emergent principles of social sustain- mobility”: the case of transport policy for older citizens in ru- ability. In J. Dillard, V. Dujon, & M. King (Eds.), Under- ral areas. Journal of Transport Geography 18(2):336–339. standing the Social Dimension of Sustainability. pp. 15–44. Sheller, M. & Urry, J. 2006. The new mobilities paradigm. Envi- New York: Routledge. ronment and Planning A 38(2):207–226. Mercado, R., Paez, A., Farber, S., Roorda, M., & Morency, C. Social Exclusion Unit (SEU). 2003. Making the Connections: 2011. Explaining transport mode use of low-income persons Final Report on Transport and Social Exclusion. London: for journeys to work in urban areas: a case study of Ontario SEU. and Quebec. Transportmetrica. Online March 22. Tacchi, E. 2007. Conurbazioni urbane e sistemi di mobilità. [Urban Moos, M., Andrey, J., & Johnson, L. 2006. The sustainability of conurbations and mobility systems]. In S. Paone (Ed.), Alla telework: an ecological-footprinting approach. Sustainability:

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

80

Cucca & Tacchi: The Missing Pillar in Italy

ricerca Della Città Futura: l’Ambiente Nella Dimensione Viale, G. 1996. Tutti in Taxi: Demonologia dell’Automobile. [Eve- Urbana. pp. 197–215. Pisa: Edizioni ETS (in Italian). ryone in Taxi: A Demonology of Cars]. Milan: Feltrinelli (in Tomlison, J. 1999. Globalization and Culture. Chicago: University Italian). of Chicago Press. Viale, G. 2007. Vita e Morte dell’Automobile. [Life and Death of UK Commission for Integrated Transport. 2008. A New Approach the Automobile]. Turin: Bollati Boringhieri (in Italian). to Rural Public Transport. London: HMSO. Villavecchia, B. 2009. Prototipo sperimentale di contrasto United Nations Conference on Trade and Development dell’inquinamento da traffico urbano. [An experimental pro- (UNCTAD). 2010. Review of Maritime Transport. New totype to face urban traffic pollution]. Etica per le Profes- York: United Nations. sioni 11(1):50–55 (in Italian). United Nations (UN). 1997. Glossary of Environment Statistics: Vranken, J., Decker, P., & van Nieuwenhuyze, I. 2002. Urban Studies in Methods. Series F, No. 67. New York: UN. Governance, Social Inclusion and Sustainability: National http://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/SeriesF/SeriesF_67E.p Context Reports. Antwerp: Garant. df. Warren, M. 2007. The digital vicious cycle: links between social Urry, J. 2000. Sociology Beyond Society: Mobilities for the disadvantage and digital exclusion in rural areas. Telecom- Twenty-First Century. New York: Routledge. munications Policy 31(6–7):374–388. van Tatenhoven, J. & Leroy, P. 2003. Environment and participa- Zanchini, E., Nanni, G., & Eroe, K. 2010. Pendolaria 2010: La tion in a context of political modernisation. Environmental Situazione e Gli Scenari del Trasporto Ferroviario Pendo- Values 12(2):155–174. lare in Italia. [Pendolaria 2010: Situation and Outlook of von Braun, J. & Pachauri, R. 2006. The Promises and Challenges Railway Commuter Transport in Italy]. Rome: Legambiente. of Biofuels for the Poor in Developing Countries. Washing- http://www.regione.toscana.it/regione/multimedia/RT/docum ton, DC: International Food Policy Research. http://www. ents/2011/02/25/b51b89b2b9f07e19bafd09f17d28b410_dossi ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ar05e.pdf. erpendolaria0000002089.pdf (in Italian). Vasconcellos, E. 2001. Urban Transport, Environment, and Eq- uity: The Case for Developing Countries. London: Earthscan.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

81

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Green social cooperatives in Italy: a practical way to cover the three pillars of sustainability?

Giorgio Osti Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Trieste, Piazzale Europa, 1, Trieste 34127 Italy (email: [email protected])

This article provides an introductory description of Italian green social cooperatives which are democratic nonprofit organizations specializing in the provision of environmental services. The background to this topic is the literature on the “third sector,” usually called social entrepreneurship, and the “sociology of environment,” mainly that part con- cerned with consumption and lifestyles. Green social cooperatives are a concrete attempt to unify the three pillars of sustainability. The analysis is divided into two parts. The first part highlights the challenges that the environmental crisis raises for social enterprises and considers three dimensions in particular: work integration, generalized or linear exchange, and the theory of the commons. The discussion reveals mismatches between the urgency of moving to- ward a sustainable world and the competences of social enterprises. The second part examines this asymmetry and uses the social cooperative, the main empirical expression of social enterprise in Italy, as its point of departure. The article proposes a typology with which to frame green social cooperatives and employs a qualitative approach to out- line a concrete case for each type. The result is the emergence of a social area, at present decidedly underdeveloped and undersized, but with considerable potential for job creation and environmental services. The analysis demon- strates that social enterprises are interesting hybrids of economic and social sustainability, but to promote the envi- ronmental pillar of sustainability they must combine work and habitation (or production and consumption) according to a logic of sufficiency.

KEYWORDS: nonprofit associations, employment, community involvement, social services, rights of future generations, resource management, human-environment relationship

Introduction: The Environment as a Stimulus Work comprises not only social recovery and for the Reconsideration of Work employment, but also has an entrepreneurial dimen- sion: the pleasure of doing new things and doing Social enterprises are entrepreneurial activities them well. If we relate the environmental question to with two primary objectives: “identify a stable but work as a source of meaning, three aspects of partic- inherently unjust equilibrium that causes the exclu- ular interest to social enterprises emerge: 1) work is sion, marginalization, or suffering of a segment of the manipulation of environmental goods; 2) work is humanity”; organize a direct and efficient activity to knowledge of nature’s mechanisms; and 3) work is a change this equilibrium, reinvesting the surpluses in way of living in a place. the community, rather than in shareholders and own- The first meaning is the most common of the ers (Martin & Osberg, 2007). Besides social aims and three: work is the constant manipulation of goods the nonprofit constraint, social enterprises also often present in nature for the purpose of ensuring the sur- have the features of financial and managerial auton- vival of self and family. The value of work consists omy and the democratic representation of employees in transforming environmental goods into objects (one vote per person) (Borzaga & Defourny, 2001). usable by humans. Environmental goods are therefore A central concern for social enterprises is the means with which to obtain sustenance, services, and high value of “work” that is inherent in the concept sometimes a stock of resources from which further of the “work integration social enterprise” (Spear & goods and services can be derived or accumulated. Bidet, 2005). The principle is that work is a constitu- In fact, social enterprises move with alacrity in ent part of human dignity (Sennett, 1998). Social the environment in search of work opportunities for enterprises offer excellent opportunities for recovery their members, especially the disadvantaged ones. and integration through work, removing people in Because of its simplicity and immediacy, the manip- serious difficulties from welfare dependency. This ulation of environmental goods is generally a useful characterization applies not only to those suffering source of employment: consider “green care” or the hardship, for even the most fortunate find that work maintenance of public and private green spaces. Of is a source of freedom and personal expression. course, we can distinguish between obtaining organic

 2012 Osti Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 82

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

food and carefully tending gardens or golf courses. In If, for example, a social enterprise intends to furnish one case, we have products intended to satisfy basic energy-saving services to households, it must possess needs; in the other, services for decidedly less urgent highly refined knowledge about insulating materials ones. Nevertheless, the emphasis on work as the ma- and heat-diffusion processes. Otherwise, the organi- nipulation of nature to extract goods and services zation will need to rely on externally appropriated does not entail many differences. What is important sources of knowledge, which are generally expen- is guaranteeing work in itself because it gives people sive, difficult to evaluate, and dependence inducing. dignity and recognition. The problem of technical-organizational profes- Work in the second sense—knowledge about sionalism is particularly severe in social enterprises nature—closely concerns the environmental question. (Fazzi & Stanzani, 2005) and is exacerbated in the The environmental crisis is intimately bound up with case of environmental protection because it requires science, even if in an ambivalent way. On one hand, systematic knowledge. For example, this is what the scientific revolution in a general sense is blamed happened to small farmers forced to face the mod- as one of the main causes of the crisis (an objective ernization of agricultural methods; they not only had and manipulative view of nature) (see, e.g., to possess agronomic skills but also chemical, me- Pellizzoni, 2009) while, on the other hand, technical chanical, and accounting ones. In short, this was a or experimental knowledge makes it possible to difficult learning process that in many cases led to quantify human and environmental damage and to removal of the business function from farmers and its devise solutions. Science is, therefore, a mixed transfer to external agencies (van der Ploeg, 2008). blessing for the environment. Whatever the case may That social enterprises may suffer the same fate is be, it is evidently difficult to return to magical beliefs evinced by the waste-management sector, where so- or to take refuge in agnosticism. Human societies cial enterprises have tended to assume those parts of incessantly produce technical innovations and envi- the overall cycle with the smallest knowledge con- ronmental changes, the impact of which must first be tent, with serious risks that their workers will be oc- monitored and then managed by means of refined cupationally marginalized. knowledge and instruments. The third meaning of work—a way of inhabit- This meaning of work as knowledge and as ing—arises from criticism of the typical vocational or knowing how to manipulate the environment emerges Weberian conception of work (Beruf). Various to its fullest extent in the work of scholars such as movements, among them environmentalism (Gorz, Peter Dickens.1 The expression that synthesizes the 2003) and what we may call the minimalist or pau- question is “environment professions.” Accordingly, perist ones (Etzioni, 2004; Cohen, 2005; Gesualdi, there is a considerable body of literature on these 2005), criticize the fact that work has become an end professions, along with numerous expectations of in itself. Such movements maintain that work is now their employment impact (Beato, 2000; Morriss et al. primarily a dire necessity and only secondarily a 2009). The constant creation of synthetic products, source of pleasure. They denounce the fact that work and the cumulative effects of human transformations, has become a social duty, a moral obligation, an ex- requires distinct specializations that subsequently orbitant sign of prestige and material wealth which give rise to new disciplinary branches, and they, in clearly extends beyond its original purpose. turn, foster the birth of new public agencies or au- This view also comprises a critique against thorities. The academic disciplines, for their part, methods that measure work solely in terms of mone- have created an environmental subsector of their tary remuneration. That work has become commodi- own, with a clear trend toward specialization. fied is certainly not a new observation (see, e.g., Social enterprises, therefore, confront a further Polanyi, 1944), but it regains vigor from the envi- challenge if they want to concern themselves with the ronmental perspective because of the monetary environment: they must acquire highly complex translation of the entire value (monetary and non- knowledge and skills. Social professionalism (i.e., monetary) of numerous environmental goods. The interactions, relationships, ties) is useful insofar as it commodification of work, relationships, art, and the is still necessary to grasp interdependences among environment has distorted their meaning, as well as phenomena according to an ecological logic. How- our enjoyment of them. It is for these reasons that the ever, the individual parts of ecosystems are so com- value of voluntary or community work has been most plex as to discourage any form of rough intervention. appreciated in the environmental field (Linne, 2001). Such work involves the free delivery of services en- 1 Dickens (2002) contends that capitalist forces are always able to dowed with an imponderable social and existential control labor, keeping the workers unskilled. The environmental value. crisis—given its complexity and systemic character—is a further From an environmental-philosophical perspec- proof for testing the capacity of labor forces to overcome this situ- tive, monetized work must be calibrated to people’s ation, launching a great project of self-skilling.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

83

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

real needs. Such a requirement also entails revaluing different extents in all human domains (Thompson, self-production, neighborhood work, and work un- 2003; Bruni, 2008; Sacchetti & Sugden, 2009), it is dertaken at the local scale. The environmental crisis especially recognized as an ordering principle of so- highlights that work that is disconnected from its cial enterprises. However, typical forms of interper- material basis and instrumental meaning becomes a sonal reciprocity inherent in social enterprises are mere commodity relocatable at will. Work has be- challenged when the issue of sustainability is raised. come a largely self-referential activity that prevents If they want to be “green,” they have to develop new understanding that it is untenable to defend a job if it forms of reciprocity, called linear (A  B  C …) pollutes the place where one lives. The possibility of or generalized (A  BCD), where the arrow indi- relocating work and the self-referential view of it cates the act of giving (gift). create a nonsensical conflict between the professional In social enterprises, relationships have value in sphere and the residential domain. themselves because they have therapeutic effects and Insofar as social enterprises adopt an extremist give meaning and satisfaction to those who engage in position on work, they are liable to commit the same them. Moreover, as transaction cost theory maintains, error of separating the worker from the resident. The in some productive contexts and for certain goods, appeal to the local community is a crucial aspect of reciprocity is more efficient than the hierarchy or the approach adopted by work cooperatives—the market (Ouchi, 1980). Strong bonds among principal integration of a disadvantaged person depends on and agent are the best conditions for the provision of both work and extra-work relations. Without the sup- high quality goods or of high relational content ser- port of the local community, a social enterprise— vices. even if it provides regular work for its members—is There is little question that reciprocity has draw- flawed. The environmental perspective heightens the backs as well: its stickiness and the personalization of community dimension because it requires taking ac- relationships may induce pathological phenomena, count of numerous integrating factors (e.g., health, such as moral and psychological blackmail and vari- consumption, lifestyle, infrastructure impact) that a ous forms of collusion (bribes represent an extreme social enterprise must use as criteria for evaluation of example). Nevertheless, reciprocity is a way to regu- its service. late highly complex and risky relationships requiring The all-encompassing perspective urged by the a large degree of trust between parties. The social en- environmental crisis is crucial. This is evident in the terprise is one such case, in that it must reconcile the case of immigrants, a social category vulnerable not principles of efficiency and solidarity, it must work so much in regard to work (which may instead be with people suffering from distress of diverse kinds, relatively abundant) as to housing and its conditions, and it must constantly cope with highly uncertain which are generally seriously inadequate and stigma- circumstances. Trust among practitioners, and be- tizing. This third meaning of work as a function of tween these and the beneficiaries, is of crucial im- living both corrects and includes the other two (work portance: social work is essentially team work. as a source of recognition and work as a profession). Does the environmental perspective add to or It also furnishes precise parameters with which to subtract from the salient reciprocity of social enter- evaluate the concrete actions of social enterprises. prises? Reciprocity in activities that are difficult to The social enterprises most virtuous from this point evaluate—such as environmental monitoring—is of view are those that respond to the need for both important because the trustful relation conveys in- occupational and residential integration into the formation not otherwise obtainable (Dodgson, 1993). community. Reciprocity thus yields a form of knowledge that cannot be transmitted through the normal codes of The Environment as a Stimulus for Generalized science, which instead work according to the subject- and Linear Reciprocity object schema (Honneth, 2005).2 Thus intuited are connections whose understanding is improved by The social dimension of green social enterprises interpersonal accord. However, this situation raises (GSEs) can be construed on the basis of reciprocity, the risk that knowledge may be confined within a an archetypal principle regulating human exchanges very narrow domain and be restricted to the interac- (see, e.g., Becker, 1990). Based on symmetry be- tive capacities of the two parties concerned. Put in tween the exchangers and on a permanent obligation more direct terms, a reciprocal relationship between to give, to receive, and to return gifts (Mauss, 1923- doctor and patient is not enough to diagnose a tumor; 24), reciprocity is widely considered the distinctive

feature of the so-called “third sector” to which social 2 enterprises belong (Donati, 1996; Boccacin, 2005). Jay (2008) explains that “Honneth stresses the priority of recognition to cognition, the intersubjective interaction that sub- Even if reciprocity is present in various forms and to tends any relationship between subject and object, self and world.”

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

84

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

also required is a body of knowledge and procedures nish; in the case of , for instance, external to that relationship. Nevertheless, long- it must deal anonymously with thousands of users of lasting and affective patient-doctor relations may urban cleansing services. be—as Honneth argues—a prerequisite for encoded Two challenges ensue with waste management: knowledge. the first is that a good home-collection service or the Concern for the environment can be a stimulus management of an ecological platform requires the for concern for objects and things external to social GSE to establish with the user both a personalized relations (Smith, 2005). The environment rarely pre- exchange, based on the particular needs of the indi- sents itself in the guise of a person with whom to vidual user, and a generalized exchange based on the establish a dialogue. There are certainly flesh-and- rights/duties of every citizen in regard to the provi- blood people who are victims of environmental in- sion of public hygiene services. The second challenge justices, and for whom reciprocity and dialogue may is that the waste-management cycle is very long; be the most appropriate medicines. But in the major- some parts of the waste collected often have distant ity of cases, the environment presents itself as an and improper destinations. The social enterprise can- impersonal good devoid of human features. In some not gloss over this fact by claiming, as do many firms cases, it is a forecast of damage to generations not yet in the sector, that it is responsible for only one phase born or living in remote areas. Here, reciprocity be- of the process, while it knows nothing about the tween A and B is not enough. In fact, reciprocity waste’s final disposal location. In other words, the must be integrated with a type of relationship that we undertaking of environmental services by a responsi- may call “generalized exchange” (Ekeh, 1974; see ble social enterprise greatly extends the chain of reci- also Pearce & Conger, 2003), and that concern for the procity relations. Dyadic or small group relationships environment helps to develop. As Ricoeur (1990) are not enough. Necessary instead is linear reciproc- puts it, this capability entails considering not only the ity in which the paradigm is the intergenerational gift face of the other but also the face of everybody; that (Bearman, 1997). This is a path of sequential respon- is, the anonymous other whose specific features I sibility that could easily be adopted by social enter- shall never be able to grasp for practical reasons, and prises that want to be environmentally sustainable. If with whom I shall never establish an enduring rela- sustainability means the lasting use of an environ- tionship. mental good, linear reciprocity is an important source The “face of everyone”—which Ricoeur prefers of commitment “over time” for every actor in the to the “anonymous” face—recalls care for the other chain. as the holder of rights without distinctions of a per- sonal kind. One form of recognition is treatment of The Environment as a Stimulus to Enter the other as a role, an abstract entity, a bundle of Commons rights. This does not always give pleasure, nor is it understood, but in some circumstances it can be a It is possible to further grasp the potential of so- highly refined form of respect: respect for the other cial enterprises acting on the environment by consid- as a person as such without considering any social ering the well-known classification of goods first capacity or individual attribute. The pedagogical drawn up by Elinor Ostrom (1990) and then elabo- force of the notion of “everybody” is strongly appar- rated upon by several Italian authors (Borzaga, 2007; ent in the case of environmental rights. These are Marelli, 2009; Bravo, 2011). If we start from the ty- living conditions for thousands of people, many of pology resulting from the cross-referencing of sub- them not yet born, and to whom broad and imper- tractability and excludability,3 we have four kinds of sonal respect must be given. goods (Figure 1). The current environmental crisis is In the case of GSEs, movement in this direction attributable to a shift of many goods from public to entails enlargement of the number and the types of commons (Pellizzoni, in press). The air, water, and stakeholders to consider. The range will depend on forests have become scarcer and more polluted re- what environmental services the GSE wishes to fur- sources. Every new human action subtracts value from them, reduces their quantity, and diminishes their quality. These goods have scant excludability: Subtractability in short, they become commons. High Low

High private goods club goods 3 Excludability Subtractability, or rivalness, refers to the degree to which one Low commons public goods person’s use of a resource diminishes others’ use. Excludability refers to whether or not a user can be efficiently excluded from Figure 1 A typology of public goods. using a resource.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

85

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

High subtractability and low excludability facil- Throughout history, enterprises arose that dealt itate opportunism—in other words, one can enjoy a specifically with the management of drinking water. good without contributing to its protection. Common This service was typically promoted by wealthy citi- goods require close control to inhibit free riding lest zens who wanted the convenience of piped water in they be rapidly depleted. The problem is how to ex- their homes. Municipal corporations then took over ercise this managerial influence. Hardin’s (1968) with the intention of distributing the precious liquid proposals that goods (or rights to their use) should be to everybody, even the least well off. The use of allocated to private agents, or that centralized public drinking water has been so strongly embodied in control should be created, stand in opposition to the technical and accounting systems (the mains water bottom-up institutional arrangements that Ostrom supply) that it has become an outright subtractable (2000) theorized. Such interventions involve creating and excludable good from which private enterprises forms of self-governance that comprise an appropri- could extract a profit. As is well known, water pri- ate mix of firmness and flexibility, positive and neg- vatization is now strongly contested, because it is ative sanctions, stable and revisable procedures. The feared that drinking water will give rise to specula- relevant institutions are not always public, but in tive use and less diligence in ensuring its distribution some cases can consist of undivided private property, in low-density housing areas, which is notoriously such as certain forests in the Italian Alps. less profitable. The political reaction to this tendency Social enterprises are in some respects oriented has been to propose the exclusive management of the to private goods and they often furnish discrete goods good by an entirely public corporation. to individuals. Home help for a dependent elderly This context of the (contested) privatization of person is a very frequent case. The objection that this common goods offers enormous scope for action by is the supply of a relational good that arises from the social enterprises (Fiorentini & Preite, 2004; Rieth, relationship between the provider and consumer is 2005; Pestoff, 2009). These organizations could correct (Gui, 2000). In fact, according to the classifi- manage goods of a public nature that have become cation used here, a relational good tends to be a club commons because of the complexity of supply sys- good: it is not depleted by use (low subtractability), tems and the intensity of their use. These goods have but at the same time it is very easy to exclude other attracted interest in their exploitation in the purely potential users from the relationship. Various forms economic sense. This situation, though, poses conflict of community or group therapy are indivisible goods, in two respects: equality in both the social and territo- but they are easily and rightfully excludable. If there rial senses and the need to moderate resource use. In were indiscriminate access to the service, the thera- this regard, social enterprises have ample terrain on peutic value of the group work would collapse. which to assert their social (equity) and environmen- Social enterprises therefore can operate agilely in tal (saving) commitment. Empirical cases, though, the domain of club goods. This applies all the more to are rare; some cooperatives in the Alps have their environmental services. In fact, there are many cases own hydroelectric plants (Mendini et al. 2007) or of cooperatives that furnish natural and cultural guide irrigation systems (Bravo, 2002). Accordingly, the Po services; these are club goods in that their use is col- valley reclamation consortia tasked with regulating lective, or at any rate it concerns an indivisible good water drainage and the irrigation of fields can be con- like a landscape, an ecosystem, or a cultural asset. sidered social enterprises sui generis (private status, The service may be exclusive (in the form of an entry public function). ticket to a park or a museum or payment of a guide), What makes the “social enterprise solution” dif- but its use—within certain limits—does not subtract ficult, besides ideological resistance, is the territorial value from the good. Club goods yield an economic scale of the delivery systems for environmental return for the supplier, with the consequence that goods. Water, for example, typically accumulates cooperatives have been set up by young people in over wide catchment areas that require integrated areas of environmental or archaeological value. management on a large scale (Bobbio, 2005). This But the dynamics of environmental goods open challenge necessitates the coordination of numerous new prospects. Goods that were once public have private users and other institutions, as well as the become not only more subtractable, but also rather availability of adequate investments. For the govern- easily excludable, owing to increasingly technical ance of a social enterprise, even if it is conducted on requirements imposed by their provision. Drinking a multistakeholder basis, managing goods on such a water provides an example: its distribution through scale may be very difficult (Fazzi, 2007). Hierar- underground mains and the controlled connections to chical management mechanisms would have to be each user make it a more easily excludable good and applied, and this would conflict with the principle of thus discourage free riding (although, of course, it reciprocity that generally regulates nonprofit organi- does not disappear entirely). zations.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

86

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

Aim of the Social Enterprise Value Set on the Produce Produce and Inhabit Environment Instrumental A–Simple environmental services (e.g., urban B–Territorial promotion services (e.g., cleansing) environmental education) SIMPLE GSE TERRITORIAL GSE

Final C–Services with high technical-innovative D–Services incorporating lifestyles (e.g., content (e.g., solar energy plants) residences with self-contained consumption) INNOVATIVE GSE COMMUNITARIAN GSE

Figure 2 Types of green social enterprises (GSE).

Analytical Criteria and Types of Green Social sions produces a Cartesian space with four quadrants Enterprises in which four ideal types of social enterprise can be arranged (Figure 2). The previous section discussed how social enter- Quadrant A comprises the vast majority of social 5 prises require certain operational mechanisms to be cooperatives that are involved generically with the 6 able to effectively address environmental sustain- environment. Organizations that furnish services for ability. Under appropriate circumstances, conserving the maintenance of public green spaces, for urban the environment can stimulate the creation of work waste collection, and for urban sanitation probably opportunities with low-entry thresholds, provide account for one quarter of the Type B social cooper- training in systemic skills (e.g., analysis, planning, atives in Italy (Mattioni & Tranquilli, 1998). The coordination), expand awareness of the needs of the census of social cooperatives conducted by the Isti- local community, complement arrangements for dy- tuto Nazionale di Statistica (ISTAT) in 2003 reported adic or circular reciprocity with linear and general- approximately 400 such cooperatives operating in the ized reciprocity, and increase attention to commons “green” sector, which also includes agriculture and undergoing privatization. forestry. They represent approximately 20% of the 7 These considerations can be illustrated by con- Type B social cooperatives in the country. Little ceiving the social enterprise as a system that interacts with its environment. In this case, “environment” has an end-directed approach aims at the conservation (or the repro- the twofold meaning of “everything that is distinct duction) of an ecosystem over a long period of time. 5 from the organization” and “the domain comprising In Italy, “social enterprises” almost always take the form of vital resources (ecosystems).” Notably, these defini- “social cooperatives,” a unique institutional form created in 1991 tions overlap, producing new exigencies for the so- by a national law. Social cooperatives can be of Type A (commu- nity services to nonmembers) or Type B (one third of the coopera- cial enterprise, which is a system that receives con- tive’s members must be disadvantaged people) (see Thomas, stant stimuli from the environment and on which it, 2004). The rationale of this national law was to institutionalize the in turn, reacts. solidarity toward nonmembers rather than the typical mutuality among members of cooperatives. Having codified the essential features of the re- 6 lationship between the social enterprise and the envi- The case-selection method is based on an “ideal types” mode of organization (Zijderveld, 2004). It captures and interprets the dis- ronment, it is now possible to consider whether a tance between models and real cases. The former are constructed combination of these features exists that enables con- with the analytical dimensions of social enterprises envisaged in struction of a typology to guide empirical investiga- the initial paragraphs of this article and summarized in Figure 2. tions. This typology—which must be a good com- The latter are the result of “purposive sampling” or selection of a few exemplary cases, usually one or two for each ideal type. It is a promise between variety and parsimony—can be nonrandom sample of real cases used as examples of the theoreti- constructed on the basis of two key dimensions. The cal types. The article is not based on a statistical survey of social first ranges from whether the social enterprise is, on cooperatives, but only the exemplification of their theoretical traits one hand, exclusively concerned with work or through singular aspects of case studies. The method is then quali- tative and is justified by the explorative nature of the analysis and whether it, on the other hand, reconciles work and the hybrid nature of social cooperatives. The main source of em- living (attention to acting professionally and with pirical cases is a special issue of the Italian journal Impresa Sociale consideration of the local community). The second from 2007 that highlights several green social cooperatives in dimension specifically concerns the environment in different regions of the country. It merits noting that inside the same legal framework, social cooperatives are “used” for many terms of whether it is viewed as an instrument or as different aims, such as waste management and fighting crime syn- 4 an end in itself. The intersection of these two dimen- dicates. 7 According to the European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises (2011), in 2008 the Italian social cooper- 4 The second dimension can be translated in terms of sustainability atives numbered 13,938, of which 814 were working in the indus- (see Robinson, 2004). An instrumental approach to the environ- trial sector, and 230 were active in the waste and water manage- ment means using an environmental label for other purposes, while ment and sanitation sectors. The report does not specify how many

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

87

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

information is available at the European level, but it The most innovative social cooperatives in Italy is almost certain that activities to do with waste recy- are shifting toward waste prevention and reuse. In cling, especially in its recovery and transaction seg- other words, these organizations have developed ini- ment, are most common among GSEs (Bicciato et al. tiatives with low technological, but high cultural 1999; Ferraresi & Sidaway, 1999; Aiken & Spear, content that enables them to promote more moderate 2005; Williams et al. 2005; Heike & Koring, 2008). consumption and to conduct workshops to repair After beginning on a small scale in the late discarded—but otherwise functional—goods for re- 1990s with the start-up of integrated waste manage- sale (Zanetti, 2007). In terms of the typology in Fig- ment, these services began to develop quite rapidly in ure 2, this means that such cooperatives move from Italy. In particular, municipal administrations con- Quadrant A to Quadrant B (educational services) and tracted the collection of certain types of waste and Quadrant D (lifestyles). This shift, though, has impli- waste-recycling facilities to social cooperatives (Osti, cations for revenue because users are unlikely to pay 2002). Furthermore, the maintenance of public green for educational and cultural services, so that ongoing spaces was outsourced to social cooperatives. Coop- provision is dependent on public subsidies. Contrib- eratives also work on private gardens and sanitize uting further to the challenge is the fact that demand industrial areas, creating a macroscale area of activity for these services is often sporadic, a situation that that can be designated as “hygiene services.” differs dramatically from public hygiene services that These services were initially hailed as highly in- have a daily or weekly periodicity. Given this dis- novative because they introduced more refined meth- tinction, some social cooperatives have tended to ods of waste sorting and recycling and because the shift from the enterprise model to voluntarism or institutions assigned a multifunctional role to the “way of life” models. social cooperatives (Osti, 1998). This enthusiasm The most emblematic case is the network of the subsided over time because it became apparent that Emmaus communities. But the “Riciclaggio e Soli- these were low-grade activities and the institutional darietà” cooperative, based in Florence and run by partners were unwilling (or unable) to foster the the “Mani Tese” (Open Hands) nongovernmental growth of social enterprises. Nevertheless, the sector organization, resembles the model as well.9 Revenues has created numerous opportunities for work integra- are very low because the repair of used objects is tion and substantial revenues for the cooperatives and time consuming, and customers for such objects— a chance to diversify their activities. with the exception of some collectors—are not pre- The problem remains of the level of pared to pay very much money for them. professionalism associated with public hygiene ser- Quadrant B—territorial services—comprises so- vices. Only rarely are social cooperatives able to de- cial enterprises furnishing home-care services, tourist sign such services themselves and propose them to entertainment and recreation, environmental educa- public authorities. While Lombardy, the first region tion, and cultural promotion. This category effec- of the country to introduce a large-scale waste-sorting tively captures the social cooperatives that have been system, offers some encouraging, contravening evi- established in rural areas of Italy that are well en- dence (Panna, 1999), most social cooperatives in dowed with environmental amenities but lack ade- Italy have failed in their attempts to assume a more quate commercial and social services. In fact, these industrial and professional profile. However, tech- organizations plan and manage care services for the nical factors are to some degree responsible for these resident population and recreational services for out- developments—once an advanced waste-sorting sys- siders (Carrosio, 2007). It is no coincidence that tem is introduced, further recycling phases become tourism-oriented cooperatives and social cooperatives highly mechanized and require specific expertise and tend to merge together. This is the case also for for- large investments. Few social cooperatives have en- estry cooperatives that now increasingly engage in tered the more industrial phases of the waste cycle, biomass recovery for energy purposes in addition to which instead has been taken over by nonsocial co- the provision of civil and tourism services. Their operatives belonging to large consortia.8 action is centered on promoting noninvasive use of territory. A census of Italian ecotourism cooperatives

9 of the 10,538 social cooperatives working in the service sector Emmaus Italy is a network of communities, created in France by provided environmental services occasionally or secondarily. Abbé Pierre, and involved in the accommodation of marginal 8 There are two kinds of Italian cooperatives: nonsocial (or quasi- people, who specifically work in the sector of recycling and reuse profit) and social. This article discusses the latter type, which rep- as a form of personal redemption. Mani Tese is an Italian secular resents a smaller part of the Italian cooperative movement. Ac- nongovernmental organization (NGO) working mainly in the sec- cording to the European Research Institute on Cooperative and tor of international cooperation. It has a “green” identity as well, Social Enterprises (2011), in 2008 there were 57,640 Italian non- very similar to the American voluntary simplicity movement social cooperatives; see also footnote 7. (Grigsby, 2004).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

88

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

conducted during the late 1990s counted almost 250 funding scheme focused on supporting innovative, cases (Eco&Eco, 1999); more recent numbers are not transnational projects aimed at tackling discrimina- available. These organizations were often for-profit tion and disadvantage in the labor market (European cooperatives created or inspired by environmental Communities, 2004). associations, particularly ones interested in the pro- Quadrant C comprises social cooperatives for tection of natural sites (Osti, 2007). which the introduction of environment-friendly tech- The second type of social enterprise in Quadrant nologies in recent years has created useful opportuni- B is most prevalent in urban and suburban contexts ties to acquire work for their members and to develop affected by poor community life. The most frequent customary industrial skills. These activities specifi- activity is the management of social centers that host cally concern the installation of energy-production after-school and consumer clubs, as well as recrea- devices and, more rarely, the construction of low- tional and sports activities. Obviously, the manage- energy buildings; these mainly involve “nonsocial” ment of public premises does not compete with the cooperatives that have sufficient technical and practi- supply of work opportunities. On the contrary, the cal knowledge to consider construction of an entire integration between work and habitation is the dis- building. tinctive feature of this type of social cooperative Some Italian social cooperatives have found it (Battaglini, 2007). The most commercial part of such relatively easy to enter the market for the installation organizations may be the management of a bar or of solar panels. The ability of these organizations to sports facility, the facilitation of weekend breaks and move in this direction is, however, grounded in prior holidays, and the maintenance of green areas. The expertise that derives from earlier experience in the attribution of “instrumental” to the use of the envi- assembly of complex devices, primarily switchboards ronment by social cooperatives of this kind signifies (Battaglini, 2007). Still, the installation of panels is that their main concern is socially focused; environ- simple enough to be done by that part of cooperative mental issues are addressed only on a reactive basis, membership represented by disabled workers. Of for instance, in response to the threatened closure of a course, the social cooperatives provide the installa- public park or the presence of a polluting factory. tion phase, while the assembly of the panels them- Various kinds of practitioners are involved in selves is out of their sphere of activity. Nevertheless, these social cooperatives, with a predominance of they are satisfied that they are contributing to a clean cultural educators. Great importance is given to energy transition. communication and training. The already-mentioned Initiatives by social cooperatives in the energy- problem of low remuneration persists because the technology field exist at different levels. The first organization depends on public revenues or donations activity centers on the aforementioned installation of by local residents. Services that can be sold at full panels. Notable is the concentration of these organi- price—a day with a nature guide or entertainment by zations in Lombardy, with promising forms of inte- an educator—can survive only on the basis of high gration in “districts of social economy,” i.e., local volume. Nevertheless, the problem of remuneration agreements of small firms and consumers clubs can be attenuated by the establishment of appropriate (Biolghini, 2007). Consortia and larger cooperatives mutual-help arrangements. When a territorial cooper- promote a number of technician-training schemes, ative is well-integrated into a network of public bod- and in some rare cases cooperatives undertake their ies and associations, an exchange of services and own research and development in the energy- operators takes place that enables some members to technology sector. Programs to enable collective pur- be fully compensated. Cooperatives that are better off chasing of energy-saving devices exist; these initia- because they operate in more lucrative sectors (e.g., tives are spearheaded by cooperative banks and other homes for the elderly or with children) acquire train- financial associations, although such efforts are typi- ing and recreational services from cooperatives of the cally coordinated with social cooperatives. Quadrant B type. In addition, local authorities, aware In the case of energy cooperatives, it merits con- of the social and cultural value of these initiatives, sidering not only their capacity to learn techniques often seek to ensure that funding is provided on a but also their commercial practices. Unlike some regular schedule. other goods, both energy-production and energy- It is furthermore instructive to consider the ca- conservation devices are discrete products for which pacity of social cooperatives to assemble themselves it is relatively easy to identify a price and to market. into larger associations to participate in European Why and how have some social cooperatives entered Union (EU) calls for proposals. For example, some the energy-technology sector? There is reason to Italian social cooperatives have been able to prepare think that what happened first in the organic sector, and win bids on environment-related projects fi- and then in the waste sector, has been repeated. More nanced by the Communitarian Initiative EQUAL, a specifically, some social enterprises have managed to

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

89

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

effectively anticipate the market, to create the insti- larly prevalent in rural areas where religious and tutions needed to realize the value of certain energy identity movements use the cooperative formula as technologies and to develop a comparative advantage the best way to economically express their ideals position for themselves (Bravo & Villa, 2007). In (Carrosio, 2004-5). other words, they were organizations able to innovate There are also cases in which care for marginal- before private for-profit enterprises. The social pur- ized people, community life, and a search for pose of these organizations has provided greater free- solidarity-enhancing modes of work have merged dom to transcend considerations of short-term profit- into a single large organization or are closely con- ability that dissuade “rational” entrepreneurs. There nected in networks. A rare but paradigmatic example is, in fact, evidence to suggest that the latter can get is provided by the movement “Comunità e Famiglia” bogged down in excessively detailed calculations and that refers to itself as a “solidarist condominium” thus become risk averse at the expense of creativity (Volpi & Volpi, 2002). The participants in this (Beveridge & Guy, 2005). scheme reside together, take care of disadvantaged The social orientation of an enterprise may there- young people, and observe quite stringent ecocon- fore enhance its capacity for risk-taking and innova- sumption rules. They live in a radical style, sharing tion. Nevertheless, it warrants keeping in mind that their homes and ecofriendly practices with disadvan- only a very small minority of social cooperatives are taged people. The sustainability dimension is not involved with energy technologies. The entry thresh- secondary in such a composite and all-encompassing old to the sector is often high, and it is certainly more organization. It is prominent in the awareness of the limiting than is the case for urban hygiene. Another crucial importance of consumption and the urgency difference (especially with respect to waste disposal) of the ecological crisis. There is a growing conviction is that the energy sector entails closer engagement among the members of this movement that merely with private agents more than with public bodies. reassembling activities on more efficient bases can- Moreover, competition in energy technology is in- not reverse the crisis without a parallel and substan- tense and firms are frequently forced out of business. tial “reduction” of consumption volumes at both the The social enterprises in Quadrant C also have residential and industrial levels (Osti, 2006). more chances of overlapping with nonsocial cooper- Quadrant D harbors a further type of social co- atives, especially those operating in the housing sec- operative concerned with consumption. Old con- tor. Such circumstances also mean greater competi- sumption cooperatives, born at the beginning of the tion within the cooperative domain, with potential for twentieth century, persist in Italy, the largest of internecine competition. This situation previously which manifest environmental awareness through emerged in the waste sector when ordinary coopera- marketing initiatives. Besides these historical cases, tives delivering routine services resented the entrance however, consideration should be given to a new of social cooperatives with new practices such as category of social cooperatives that manage “fair sorted collection and help from public authorities. trade purchase groups” (FTPs) and give priority to An Italian province with a strong cooperative environmental objectives. The aim of these organiza- tradition, such as Brescia, exhibits rather marked tions is to reduce consumption, shorten supply polarization between a consortium of ordinary coop- chains, and develop relationships with producers that eratives (that comprise noncooperative enterprises as use environmentally preferable practices (Brunori et well) and a consortium of social cooperatives (Bravo al. 2012). & Villa, 2007). Working to protect the environment Social entrepreneurship intersects with the FTPs therefore creates many social and economic interac- when these groups decide to give a broader and more tions, but paradoxically it does so to a lesser extent commercial organization to their service. This re- inside the cooperative movement. quires a legal structure more appropriate than a sim- Finally, we come to the social enterprises located ple association and able to engage in complex eco- in Quadrant D that interpret environmental action as nomic relationships. There are no statistics on how a lifestyle. In analytical terms, these entities are many FTPs have a cooperative form and many of formed by the intersection between, on one hand, the them continue as informal organizations because they dimension of producing and inhabiting and, on the are averse to bureaucratization. In contrast, other other hand, treating the environment as an end in groups find it convenient to rely on an existing social itself. These kinds of organizations were discussed cooperative to avoid the costs of initial organization above in terms of the shift of certain social coopera- and to enhance their multifunctional capacity. tives in the waste-management sector to waste pre- A final aspect regards the food producers that vention and reuse. In addition, some social coopera- FTPs use. They are not social enterprises, but small tives in Quadrant D have begun to engage in experi- individual farms, the backbone of Italian agriculture. ments in communal living. These cases are particu- Nevertheless, some agricultural cooperatives are in-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

90

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

volved and have a “lifestyle” component: almost all social cooperatives instead are engaged in labor- of them use organic farming methods (Carrosio, intensive services. Their success in these endeavors 2004-5) and others practice the green-care approach depends heavily on other organizations that may be that often entails residential services for disavantaged present in the relevant sectors. For instance, if large people (Di Iacovo, 2009). The economic solidity of public or private utilities are operating as quasimo- these socioagriculture cooperatives mainly derives nopolies, it will be difficult for social cooperatives to from the close commercial and personal relationships enter or to acquire roles of responsibility. that they maintain with a wide network of consumers Yet social enterprises also have room to maneu- and institutions. Of particular relevance are certain ver, provided they possess practical knowledge and southern Italian cooperatives located in areas of the insights deriving from their capacity to create strong country dominated by organized crime (Angelini & and durable relationships with ordinary people. Pizzuto, 2007). In these regions, young people, Communal transport provides an example: shared church groups, and free associations have created travel should be encouraged by arrangements such as agricultural and crafts cooperatives, often with the carpooling and car sharing, in which social enter- legal form “social” enterprise, not only because they prises have a specific competence based on reciproc- deliver services of this type, but also because they ity. The picture is even more promising with regard express a determination to free local communities to the durable management of common goods (“com- from the grip of criminal syndicates. These efforts are munitarian” GSEs). There are few social enterprises evidence of a further means to promote the merging dedicated to reducing the consumption of resources, of work and habitation through social-political re- but they exhibit a certain dynamism as evinced by the establishment of the community. creation of fair-trade districts. The difficulty in this case is typical of every enterprise that conceives itself Prospects: Beyond the Instrumental Approach as a “producer” that presumably must grow indefi- nitely. But the ecological ideal does not require pro- The preceding analysis of GSEs in Italy has duction to stop; it instead requires production of what highlighted a number of crucial dimensions of these is necessary and can be consumed with sobriety—in organizations. Although specific data are not availa- other words, it pursues “a logic of sufficiency” (de ble, it is likely that the majority of these entities in Geus, 2003; Princen, 2005; Sachs & Santarius, 2005). the country are concentrated in the upper part of Fig- Accordingly, some social cooperatives have sought to ure 2, and divided between the so-called simple and bring together green production, rehabilitation of territorial GSEs for which environmental objectives insulated dwellings, and education campaigns em- are either instrumental (provide a simple source of phasizing the prudent use of goods. The success of work) or highly diluted into broad cultural services. these enterprises has to date been attributable to their From a social point of view, this orientation is justi- ability to combine these aspects of producing, living, fied on the basis that jobs are created, attention is and communicating. From this combination, they paid to the local community, and production and have derived strong legitimation for their existence habitation are pursued as valuable goals. and operations. The social enterprises in the “com- The challenge of environmental sustainability munitarian” quadrant express a coherence that elicits supplements this line of development: social cooper- the approval and support of other organizations. atives centered on work and reciprocity are not suffi- These organizational relationships prompt a final cient to cope with goods exhaustion that profoundly consideration. It is pointless to deny that GSEs do not undermines the possibility of working and living enjoy high social power—they do not have bargain- together. To understand the limits of GSEs in this ing power with utilities and municipalities, the coop- field, the environmental problem origins have to be erative movement considers them its “poor relations,” mentioned, along with a related crisis of knowledge the trade unions fear their competition since it in- about the secondary effects of human actions and a fringes upon general labor rules, environmental or- reduction in the quality and quantity of common re- ganizations regard them as excessively rigid in their sources. employment relationships, and for-profit enterprises It is precisely in these two spheres—knowledge usually try to exploit them. Public opinion is largely and commons—that social enterprises are notably indifferent to GSEs, and at best considers that dele- weak. Very few social cooperatives are able to oper- gating them disagreeable functions, such as waste ate in the area of applied knowledge (“innovative” disposal, is already a major concession. GSEs) because these activities require expertise in This description may seem ungenerous, but it is ecosystems or complex systems to enable the inte- necessary to avoid the risk of idealizing initiatives grated management of, say, waste recycling or energy undertaken in highly precarious conditions. The supplies. We have seen that the majority of Italian prestige and legitimacy of GSEs, from which derive

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

91

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy material resources as well, probably resides in a Bravo, G. & Villa, M. 2007. Imprese sociali verdi? L’esperienza demonstrated commitment to environmental sustain- della provincia di Brescia [Green social enterprises? The ex- perience of Brescia Province]. Impresa Sociale 76(4):102– ability and the creation of jobs. The instrumental 126 (in Italian). approach can only be left behind by shifting between Bruni, L. 2008. Reciprocity, Altruism, and the Civil Society. New the lower quadrants in the analytical scheme, with York: Routledge. more applied knowledge of how ecosystems work Brunori, G., Rossi, A., & Guidi, F. 2012. On the new social rela- tions around and beyond food: analysing consumers’ role and and application of a rigorous logic of sufficiency to action in Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale (Solidarity Purchasing producing and consuming. From this commitment we Groups). Sociologia Ruralis 52(1):1–30. may derive greater appreciation of GSEs and initial Carrosio, G. 2004-5. Un caso emblematico di economia leggera in reconciliation among the three pillars of sustain- aree fragili: la cooperativa Valli Unite [An emblematic case of soft economy in fragile areas: the Valli United coopera- ability. tive]. Sviluppo Locale 11(27):78–93 (in Italian). Carrosio, G. 2007. Imprese sociali verdi in aree fragili [Green social cooperatives in fragile areas]. Impresa Sociale References 76(4):127–143 (in Italian). Cohen, M. 2005. Sustainable consumption American style: nutri- Aiken, M. & Spear R. 2005. Gateways into Employment: Third tion education, active living and financial literacy. Interna- Sector Organisations Working With Groups Disadvantaged tional Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology in the Labour Market. Tokyo: Consumers’ Cooperative In- 12(4):407–418. stitute. de Geus, M. 2003. The End of Over-consumption: Towards a Angelini, A. & Pizzuto, P. 2007. Cooperative sociali, ambiente e Lifestyle of Moderation and Self-restraint. Utrecht: Interna- beni confiscati alla mafia [Social cooperatives, environment tional Books. and confiscated goods to the Mafia]. Impresa Sociale Dickens, P. 2002. A green Marxism? Labor processes, alienation, 76(4):158–168 (in Italian). and the division of labor. In R. Dunlap, F. Buttel, P. Dickens, Battaglini, E. 2007. La sfida delle imprese sociali in una società & A. Gijswijt (Eds.), Sociological Theory and the Environ- tardo moderna [The social cooperatives challenge in a late ment. pp. 51–72. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. modernity society]. Impresa Sociale 76(4):169–189 (in Ital- Di Iacovo, F. (Ed.). 2009. Supporting Policies for Social Farming ian). in Europe: Progressing Multifunctionality in Responsive Ru- Bearman, P. 1997. Generalized exchange. American Journal of ral Areas. Florence: Arsia. Sociology 105(5):1383–1415. Donati, P. (Ed.). 1996. Sociologia del Terzo Settore [Sociology of Beato, F. 2000. Aree protette, professioni e professionalità: princi- the Third Sector]. Rome: Nis (in Italian). pali risultati di una ricerca europea [Protected areas, profes- Dodgson, M. 1993. Learning, trust, and technological collabora- sions and professionalism: main results of European re- tion. Human Relations 46(1):77–95. search]. Futuribili 1(2):113–120 (in Italian). Eco&Eco. 1999. Ecoturismo, Gestione Verde dei Rifiuti e Cooper- Becker, L. 1990. Reciprocity. Chicago: University of Chicago ative: Analisi di Casi e Indicazioni di Policy [Ecotourism, Press. Green Management of Waste and Cooperatives: Case Studies Beveridge, R. & Guy, S. 2005. The rise of the eco-preneur and the and Policy Indications]. Bologna: Economy and Ecology. messy world of environmental innovation. Local Environ- http://www.eco-eco.191.it/download/coop_verde_rif.pdf (in ment 10(6):665–676. Italian). Bicciato, F., L. Foschi, & F. Capozzo (Eds.). 1999. La Finanza Ekeh, P. 1974. Social Exchange Theory: The Two Traditions. Etica e le Imprese Sociali Verdi: Una Prospettiva Interna- Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. zionale [Ethical Finance and Green Social Enterprises: An Etzioni, A. 2004. The post affluent society. Review of Social Econ- International Perspective]. Milan: Fondazione Enrico Mattei omy 62(3):407–420. (in Italian). European Communities. 2004. Equal, Free Movement of Good Biolghini, D. 2007. Il popolo dell’Economia Solidale: Alla Ricerca Ideas: Working Against Discrimination and Inequality in Eu- di Un’altra Economia [The People of the Solidarity Econ- rope. Brussels: European Commission omy: Searching for Another Economy]. Bologna: EMI (in European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enter- Italian). prises. 2011. La Cooperazione in Italia [Cooperation in It- Bobbio, L. 2005. Governance multilivello e democrazia [Multi- aly]. Italy: EURICSE (in Italian). level governance and democracy]. Rivista delle Politiche So- Fazzi, L. 2007. Governance per le Imprese Sociali e il Non Profit ciali 2:51–62 (in Italian). [Governance of Social Enterprises and the Non-Profit Sec- Boccacin, L. 2005. Third Sector and Social Partnership in Italy: A tor]. Rome: Carocci Faber (in Italian). Sociological Perspective. Milan: Vita e Pensiero. Fazzi, L. & Stanzani, S. 2005. Le culture organizzative della coop- Borzaga, C. 2007. Le Forme di Proprietà e di Governance Dei erazione sociale: identità in movimento [The organizational Produttori di Beni di Interesse Collettivo [The Property and cultures of social cooperation: identity in motion]. In Centro Governance Forms of Producers of Common Interest Studi CGM (Ed.), Beni Comuni. Quarto Rapporto Sulla Goods]. ISSAN Working Paper 22. Trento: Institute for the Cooperazione Sociale in Italia. pp. 119–154. Turin: Fonda- Development of Non-Profit Organisations (in Italian). zione Agnelli (in Italian). Borzaga, C. & J. Defourny (Eds.). 2001. The Emergence of Social Ferraresi, P. & Sidaway, J. 1999. Global Ecology: Environmental Enterprise. New York: Routledge. and Social Regeneration. Brussels: CECOP R&D. Bravo, G. 2002. Istituzioni e capitale sociale nella gestione di Fiorentini, G. & Preite, D. 2004. L’integrazione funzionale fra risorse comuni: il caso dei sistemi di irrigazione Valdostani aziende pubbliche e non profit nella gestione dei servizi pub- [Institutions and social capital in the management of common blici locali [The functional integration of public and non- pool resources: the case of Val d’Aosta irrigation systems]. profit enterprises in the management of local public utilities]. Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia 43(2):229–250 (in Italian). Non Profit 9(3):541–597 (in Italian). Bravo, G. 2011. Agents’ beliefs and the evolution of institutions Gesualdi, F. 2005. Sobrietà: Dallo Spreco dei Pochi ai Diritti Per for common-pool resource management. Rationality and So- Tutti [Soberness: From the Wastefulness of a Few People to ciety 23(1):117–152. Rights for All]. Milan: Feltrinelli (in Italian).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

92

Osti: Green Social Cooperatives in Italy

Gorz, A. 2003. L’immatériel: Connaissance, Valeur et Capital Panna, E. 1999. Nuove strategie per le imprese sociali verdi: un [The Immaterial: Knowledge, Value and Capital]. Paris: Gal- esempio italiano (cooperativa La Ringhiera) [New Strategies ilée (in French). for green social enterprises: an Italian example (Cooperative Grigsby, M. 2004. Buying Time and Getting By: The Voluntary La Ringhiera)]. In F. Bicciato, L. Foschi, & F. Capozzo Simplicity Movement. Albany: State University of New York (Eds.), La Finanza Etica e le Imprese Sociali Verdi: Una Press. Prospettiva Internazionale. pp. 52–57. Milan: Fondazione Gui, B. 2000. Beyond transactions: on the interpersonal dimension Enrico Mattei (in Italian). of economic reality. Annals of Public and Cooperative Eco- Pearce, C. & Conger, J. 2003. Shared Leadership: Reframing the nomics 71(2):139–169. Hows and Whys of Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hardin, G. 1968. The . Science 162(3859): Pellizzoni, L. 2009. Revolution or passing fashion? Reassessing 1243–1248. the precautionary principle. International Journal of Risk As- Heike, A. & Koring, C. 2008. An Investigation and Analysis of the sessment and Management 12(1):14–34. Second-Hand Sector in Europe. Bremen: Institute of Pellizzoni, L. (in press). Mistaking publics: a challenge for envi- Technology and Education. http://www.rreuse.org/t3/file ronmental governance. In C. Claeys-Mekdade & M. Jacqué admin/editor-mount/documents/Leonardo-SH-Sector/LSH00 (Eds.), Environment, Knowledge and Democracy. Bern: 4-European-Sector-Analysis-Report-english.pdf. Lang. Honneth, A. 2005. Verdinglichung [Reification]. Frankfurt: Suhr- Pestoff, V. 2009. Here comes the citizen co-producer. openDemoc- kamp Verlag (in German). racy November 12:1–5. http://www.opendemocracy.net/ Jay, M. 2008. Introduction. In M. Jay (Ed.), Reification: A New openeconomy/victor-pestoff/here-comes-citizen-co-producer. Look at an Old Idea. pp. 3–16. New York: Oxford University Polanyi, K. 1944. The Great Transformation. New York: Reinhart. Press. Princen, T. 2005. The Logic of Sufficiency. Cambridge, MA: MIT Linne, G. 2001. Pathways to a Sustainable Future: Results from the Press. Work & Environment Interdisciplinary Project. Dusseldorf: Ricoeur, P. 1990. Soi-même Comme un Autre [Oneself as an Hans-Böckler Stiftung. Other]. Paris: Seuil (in French). Marelli, B. 2009. Irrigation systems and values: understanding the Rieth, L. 2005. Old Concepts, New Actors: Public Goods, TNCs’ process of self-governing water resources in Northern Italy. Power and NGOs’ Legitimacy–The Provision of the Public Proteus 26(1):17–24. Good “Peace and Security” in Weak Zones of Governance. Martin, R. & Osberg, S. 2007. Social entrepreneurship: the case for 46th Annual International Studies Association Conference. definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review 5(2):29–39. March 1–5, Honolulu, Hawaii. http://www.allacademic.com Mattioni, F. & Tranquilli, D. 1998. Da Svantaggiati a Imprendi- /meta/p70797_index.html. tori: Risorse Umane, Mercato e Sviluppo delle Cooperative Robinson, J. 2004. Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea Sociali di “Tipo B” in Italia [From Disadvantaged to Entre- of sustainable development. Ecological Economics 48(4): preneur: Human Resources, Market and Development of 369–384. Type B Social Cooperatives]. Rome: D’Anselmi (in Italian). Sacchetti, S. & Sugden, R. 2009. The organization of production Mauss, M. 1923–24. Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l’échange and its publics: mental proximity, market and hierarchies. dans les sociétés archaïques [The gift: form and reason for Review of Social Economy 67(3):289–311. exchange in archaic societies]. L’Année Sociologique 2(1): Sachs, W. & Santarius, T. 2005. Fair Future. Munich: C.H. Beck 30–186 (in French). oHG. Mendini, N., Tomasi, A., & Tonelli, P. 2007. Cooperazione tren- Sennett, R. 1998. The Corrosion of Character: The Personal Con- tina: produzione e distribuzione di energia fra ricerca del sequences of Work in the New Capitalism. New York: W. W. nuovo e attualità dell’antico [Trento cooperation: production Norton. and distribution of energy, searching for the new and updat- Smith, G. 2005. Green citizenship and social economy. Environ- ing the old]. Impresa Sociale 76(4):190–202 (in Italian). mental Politics 14(2):273–289. Morriss, A., Bogart, W., Dorchak, A., & Meiners, R. 2009. Green Spear, R. & Bidet, E. 2005. Social enterprise for work integration Jobs Myths. New York: Social Science Research Network. in 12 European Countries: a descriptive analysis. Annals of http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1358423. Public and Cooperative Economics 76(2):195–231. Osti, G. 1998. Questione rifiuti in Italia e ruolo degli organismi Thomas, A. 2004. The rise of social cooperatives in Italy. Voluntas non-profit [The waste problem in Italy and the role of non- 15(3):243–263. profit organizations]. Aggiornamenti Sociali 49(12):889–902 Thompson, G. 2003. Between Hierarchies and Markets: The Logic (in Italian). and Limits of Network Forms of Organization. New York: Osti, G. 2002. Il Coinvolgimento dei Cittadini Nella Gestione dei Oxford University Press. Rifiuti [The Involvement of Citizens in Waste Management]. van der Ploeg, J. 2008. The New Peasantries: Struggle of Auton- Milan: Angeli (in Italian). omy and Sustainability in an Era of Empire and Globalisa- Osti, G. 2006. Nuovi Asceti: Consumatori, Imprese e Istituzioni di tion. London: Earthscan. Fronte alla Crisi Ambientale [New Ascetics: Consumers, Volpi, E. & Volpi, B. 2002. Un’alternativa Possibile: Le Comunità Enterprises, and Institutions in Front of Environmental Cri- di Famiglie [A Possible Alternative: The Communities of sis]. Bologna: Il mulino (in Italian). Families]. Saronno: Monti (in Italian). Osti, G. 2007. Nature protection organizations in Italy: from elitist Williams, N., Croker, M., & Barrett, D. 2005. Review of the Vol- fervour to confluence with environmentalism. In C. van untary and Community Waste Sector in England. London: Koppen & W. Markham (Eds.), Protecting Nature: Organi- The In-House Policy Consultancy. http://archive.defra. zations and Networks in Europe and the USA. pp. 117–139. gov.uk/environment/waste/thirdsector/documents/community Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. review.pdf. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of In- Zanetti, C. 2007. Da rifiuti a risorse: le cooperative di inserimento stitutions for Collective Action. New York: Cambridge Uni- lavorativo e la sfida ambientale [From waste to resource: the versity Press. work cooperatives and the environmental challenge]. Impresa Ostrom, E. 2000. Crowding out citizenship. Scandinavian Political Sociale 76(4):145–167 (in Italian). Studies 23(1):3–16. Zijderveld, A. 2004. Ideal type. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Ouchi, W. 1980. A framework for understanding organizational Social Theory. pp. 289–390. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. failure. In J. Kimberly & R. Miles (Eds.), The Organizational Cycle Life. pp. 395–429. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

93

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Has social sustainability left the building? The recent conceptualization of “sustainability” in Danish buildings

Jesper Ole Jensen1, Michael Søgaard Jørgensen2, Morten Elle2, & Erik Hagelskjær Lauridsen2 1 Department of Housing and Urban Renewal, Danish Building Research Institute, Dr. Neergaards Vej 15, Hørsholm 2970 Denmark (email: [email protected]) 2 DTU Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Building 424, Lyngby 2800 Denmark

Sustainable buildings have often been niche products, but in recent years a new approach has emerged in Denmark aimed at mainstreaming and normalizing this mode of construction and seeking to attract ordinary Danes through market conditions. The aim is to present an alternative conceptualization of sustainable buildings to the ecocommuni- ties’ vision and to involve traditional building firms in their design and development. From a theoretical perspective, the mainstreaming of sustainable buildings can be seen either as an example of ecological modernization or techno- logical transition. The new conceptualization has implied a narrower approach to sustainability and a lack of social sustainability measures. While earlier paradigms of sustainable buildings emphasized themes such as community building, self-provisioning, local empowerment, and shared facilities, such objectives are largely absent in the new types of sustainable buildings. We question to what extent it is possible to design sustainable settlements without social sustainability. By viewing sustainable buildings as technological configurations, we argue that the multiactor approach, fragmentation of roles, and absent initiatives for social sustainability influence the buildings’ environmental performance and should be important for the next generation of these structures.

KEYWORDS: buildings, housing, interest groups, energy efficiency, architectural design, social environments

Introduction • Grassroots ecocommunities: A number of alter- native and green rural settlements emerged in Developing “sustainable buildings” has become Denmark in the 1980s and 1990s emphasizing a central goal for national and local policies as part of community, self-sufficiency, alternative technol- efforts to reduce energy consumption and to limit ogies and lifestyles, and spirituality. greenhouse-gas emissions. While numerous viable • Subsidized urban projects: Commitment to the technical solutions already exist, the main challenge Brundtland Report created a public drive for currently is to implement them in the built environ- green buildings in the 1980s and 1990s that was ment (Guy, 2006). Sustainable buildings have tradi- aimed at testing, approving, and institutionaliz- tionally been “niche” products and have been intro- ing green technologies on the basis of extensive duced in protected contexts (Rip & Kemp, 1998); public funding. Danish projects included sustain- they have rarely matured for wider market dissemi- able renovation under the Urban Renewal Act, as nation. Previous development of sustainable build- well as sustainable building projects in the social ings in Denmark has involved a changing range of housing sector. concepts over time (Gram-Hanssen & Jensen, 2005; Jensen & Gram-Hanssen, 2007).The different config- A similar typology of sustainable buildings can urations in terms of planning, “hardware” technolo- be found in other countries, such as Germany and gies, infrastructure, facilities, financing, and social Austria (see, e.g., Rohracher & Ornetzeder, 2002). In ideals include the following: recent years, however, there have been several at- tempts in Denmark to provide sustainable buildings • Green buildings as energy-saving devices: After for “ordinary Danes”—detached houses that appear the oil crisis of 1973, science-based efforts were traditional and where the sustainability enhancements made in Denmark to develop technologies to im- are not very visible. These new building projects prove the energy performance of buildings and share a number of features in their visions, purposes, regulations were introduced for implementing imagined users, design, and conceptualization of these technologies. sustainability, and in many ways differ from earlier sustainable building “paradigms.” The new approach

 2012 Jensen et al. Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 94

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

has focused on applying low energy standards to We conducted qualitative interviews, using a “traditional buildings,” primarily detached houses in semistructured interview guide, but also allowed in- suburban areas, and has devoted little attention to formants to introduce viewpoints about the concept social sustainability. In other words, the buildings are and process, adding an explorative element to the typically established as traditional housing with lim- procedure. We recorded and transcribed the inter- ited shared responsibilities, facilities, and organiza- views, and afterwards thematically analyzed them in tion. The aim has been to involve the conventional accordance with the predefined themes of our inter- building sector, encouraging and qualifying it to view guide: description of the project in terms of build sustainable buildings. This development can, in aims, sustainability focus, number and types of the light of sociotechnical transition theory (Rip & dwellings, and key actors; background for initiation; Kemp, 1998; Geels, 2002), be seen as an attempt to and experiences and themes raised by the informants. accelerate the progression of sustainable buildings The analysis and conclusions from the case studies from niche-based innovations to established regime- were subsequently presented to key actors on sustain- level alternatives. In this process, Danish local au- able buildings at a closed workshop, as well as to thorities (municipalities)—given the role that they individuals with general experience and expertise in have played in initiating and framing many of these the field of sustainable buildings, including research- development projects—have been very active. This ers, architects, and regulators. The comments and process implies a number of changes and challenges discussions helped to correct, challenge, and qualify in relation to previous approaches to encourage the the conclusions. construction of sustainable buildings. To compare the studies of new sustainable This article explores challenges to the strategy of buildings, we drew on existing research and docu- mainstreaming sustainable housing in Denmark, but mentation from several Danish ecovillages. This ma- the discussion is likely relevant as well for other terial included published studies and reports, websites contexts. We especially discuss the absence of the of the respective communities, as well as our own social dimension in relation to pursuing the goals of investigations based on qualitative interviews and environmental sustainability, asking if it is possible visits to the buildings. For example, we carried out to ignore social sustainability and still legitimately studies as part of the collaborative projects “Sustain- achieve environmentally sustainable buildings. And able Flow Management” (Moss et al. 2001) and if not, why not, and how can the mainstreaming ap- Practical Evaluation Tools for Urban Sustainability proach be improved by, for example, learning from (PETUS).1 other sustainable building concepts. Theoretical Aspects Methodology We apply two different theoretical perspectives This article is based on a recent study of new to analyze development of the new mode of sustain- sustainable building development sites in Denmark. able buildings in Denmark that aim to normalize the These developments do not necessarily define them- practice and make the homes accessible to “ordinary selves as part of a collective approach, but clearly Danes” through customary provisioning channels. share an ambition to “normalize” sustainable build- First, ecological modernization theory (EMT) ings. The specific cases were selected to represent the represents an optimistic view of the greening of the characteristics of the new approach to sustainable market based on a reinvention of existing institutions. buildings, but also to include properties with varied From this standpoint, sustainability should not be ownership (social housing versus privately owned ac- seen as contravening the market, but rather as an op- commodation) to provide a basis for comparison. We portunity for further market development. This view also prioritized projects where construction was contrasts with the idea that sustainability can only be completed, with residents in occupation for at least pursued in niches (a perspective sometimes referred three months. The case studies are predicated on in- to as “small is beautiful”) that are outside market terviews with key actors, visits to the sites, and docu- mechanisms. EMT suggests that sustainable devel- ment studies. In total, 22 interviews were conducted opment implies a modernization process in which across six cases. Informants included representatives sustainable practices are gradually integrated into from the institutions that took the initiative on the institutions, businesses, and personal decision making projects and included municipal officials, a producer instead of being delegated to the environmental man- of building insulation, and a social housing company, agement sector. This integration occurs through pro- as well as other key informants such as designers, cesses of measurement and visualization (Hajer, consultants and, in two instances, residents.

1 For details on PETUS see http://www.petus.eu.com

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

95

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

1995; Mol & Sonnenfeld, 2000; Spaargaren, 2000), large degree of irreversibility, and at the same time the deployment of new economic instruments, novel makes it difficult for new alternatives to scale up modes of cooperation such as voluntary agreements from niches. Some theorists have included other ac- (Boström, 2003; van Tatenhove & Leroy, 2003), and tors in the regime, such as users, policy makers, fi- innovative roles for nation states, social movements, nancial institutions, and scientists, labeling this ele- and market actors (van den Burg, 2006). The EMT ment of the model as a “socio-technical regime” perspective therefore highlights governance chal- (Geels, 2002). Finally, “niches” are isolated and pro- lenges for sustainable development. Accordingly, tected environments where technologies are able to Spaargaren & Mol (2008) argue that increasing glob- develop and then possibly transfer to the regime. Rip alization weakens state-led environmental regulation & Kemp (1998) emphasize the role of niches in tech- and instead requires effective and legitimate forms of nological innovation, but other scholars have sug- environmental authority at the local and nonstate gested that technological change might also be a top- level. down process, spreading from the macro-level (or the Second, we argue that sustainable buildings landscape) to the regime (see, e.g., Geels, 2002; should be seen as sociotechnical artifacts where ma- Shove, 2003). terial structures are interwoven with uses of the From the perspective of EMT, the sustainability building (Farmer & Guy, 2005; Guy, 2006; Lovell et agenda formulated by the eco-communities is likely al. 2009). We use transition theory to frame the un- to be understood as favoring demodernization, de- derstanding of sustainable buildings, as well as their industrialization and counterproductivity (Mol & relation to protected niches and possible transition Spaargaren, 2000), and therefore not contributing to pathways for the existing building sector (or regime). growth-based notion of sustainable development. In this view, technology consists of material struc- while the new wave of sustainable buildings adheres tures and physical artifacts in addition to natural re- to an EMT-oriented approach, anti-modernization sources, organizations, and social structures. Thus, and “back to basics” ideologies still have a notable technology can be seen as “configurations that work” role in the Danish context of sustainable buildings (Rip & Kemp, 1998). The theory suggests that and it is difficult to grasp their development only changes do not just occur in technology, but also in through EMT (Jensen & Gram-Hanssen, 2007). By user practices, regulations, industrial networks, infra- comparison, transition theory stresses innovative structures, and symbolic meanings (Rip & Kemp, niche development, based on shared visions and pro- 1998; Geels, 2002). To work in practice, all elements tection from the market, as the main driver of tech- have to be in place. When these elements are in bal- nological change. The theory therefore offers a pos- ance they allow for some adjustments in the configu- sible explanation and more elaborated understanding ration, for instance in terms of facilitating smaller of barriers and potentials for sustainable technologies technological changes. and practices to evolve, as well as an alternative to In contrast to a traditional view of technological the gradual modernization process stressed by EMT. development, Arie Rip & René Kemp (1998) argue that “emphasizing the artifact and the technologist Status and Background for the New Sustainable runs the risk of underconceptualizing the social envi- Buildings ronment into which the novelty is introduced.” They suggest that instead of focusing mainly on the inno- Table 1 presents descriptions of the six case vation itself more attention should be paid to its studies. A comparison of these cases to the earlier adoption or the rearrangement of individual behav- generation of Danish sustainable buildings points up iors, organizations, and society to adopt (and adapt several interrelated issues. to) the novelty. Transition theory is based on a hierarchy of three Normalization and Market Orientation levels: macro-level landscapes, meso-level regimes, The new wave of sustainable buildings is and micro-level niches. First, “landscape” as a meta- strongly oriented toward the market, signaling that phor represents solid and stable structures in terms of there is no conflict between economic growth and cities, buildings, and technical infrastructure, as well sustainability. The slogans include “from the extraor- as social structures such as legislation and norms. dinary to the ordinary” (Lærkehaven), “building Second, “regimes” are the practices embedded in houses for normal people” (Fremtidens parcelhuse), institutions and infrastructures such as production- and “building traditional family houses as passive process technologies, product characteristics, skills houses” (Comfort Houses). These catchphrases are and procedures, in addition to the way problems are meant to convey a market approach that includes defined and managed (Rip & Kemp, 1998). The con- design aimed at integrating sustainability into mod- figuration of the technology within a regime gives it a ern, spacious, attractive buildings; collaborating with

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

96

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

Table 1 Characteristics from the six examples of new Danish sustainable buildings.

Number and Type of Name and Location Dwelling Developer Environmental Issues “Fremtidens 86 detached houses Municipality of Køge Low energy and sustainable materials as defined by Parcelhuse,” Køge and local Agenda 21 the “Swan Label.” group “Teglmosegrunden,” 91 dwellings Municipality of Reduction of fossil fuels, promotion of local Albertslund Albertslund percolation of rainwater, limits on the use of groundwater, waste minimization. “Stenløse Syd,” 750 dwellings, mostly Municipality of Stenløse Maximum energy consumption defined (35 kilowatt- Stenløse detached houses hours per square meter, kWh/m2), recirculation of heating, solar collectors, no use of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or pressure-treated wood, collection of rainwater. “Lærkehaven,” 122 dwellings as social Social housing Combines sustainability with good architecture. Lystrup, Århus housing association Energy demand defined through passive house “Ringgården” standard (15 kWh/m2) and energy class 1 (30 kWh/ m2), good indoor climate, environmentally sound materials. Rønnebækhave II, 23 dwellings as social Social housing Tests whether the passive house standard can be Næstved housing administrator “Domea” applied in a Danish context (as the first building in Denmark). Komforthusene, Vejle 10 detached houses Isover Applies the passive house concept, making it a learning project for the building industry.

“traditional” actors in the building industry; and, Similarly, the municipality of Stenløse Syd “pre- overall, making sustainable buildings economically ferred to collaborate with the market and thereby accessible and attractive. As an example, the project reach 90% of the population rather than collaborate program of “Fremtidens Parcelhuse” (Future Single- with a small segment of environmentally conscious Family Houses) in Køge characteristically states: citizens” (planner, Stenløse). At the same time, the municipality had seen that voluntary agreements [T]he Agenda 21 committee in the Munici- were not effective; professional builders were very pality of Køge and the Green House believe slow to implement sustainable technologies and the there is a great need to develop modern users lacked the knowledge to demand these prod- Danish single-family houses that are energy- ucts. The municipality therefore saw itself as “the efficient and environmentally friendly. missing link” between the building sector and users Work to develop energy-efficient and envi- of sustainable buildings and as landowners they could ronmentally friendly single-family housing demand certain sustainability goals. In general, the has been carried out at the grassroots level strategy and ideology of the projects are, on one for many years, while the more professional hand, a reaction to the previous understanding of companies have focused on buildings on a sustainable buildings as something different and ex- larger scale. Interest in living in a healthy traordinary and, on the other hand, a reaction to the environment, as well as living energy effi- rather inactive policy and slow development of sus- ciently and environmentally soundly, has tainable buildings that had previously existed in meanwhile grown markedly in recent years, Denmark and for this reason there is an increasing Along with the market orientation, the new wave need for an effort in relation to the ongoing of sustainable buildings, in contrast to previous types, professional development of industrialized includes explicit sustainability goals, primarily on building in the field of single-family hous- energy performance. For instance, by using the Ger- ing. The building must offer healthy, en- man passive house standard2 the energy performance ergy-efficient, and environmentally friendly housing which is attractive to ordinary 2 Danes architecturally as well as financially The German passive house standard is a building concept to ensure low energy consumption for heating (15 kWh/m2) and a (The Green House, 2005). comfortable indoor climate. The concept is not protected, but a certification scheme, the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP), has been developed to guarantee that only buildings fulfilling these criteria get the certificate.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

97

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

of the building design must pass the “Passive House sell sustainable houses to “ordinary” Danes. Planners Planning Package” (PHPP) under supervision of a suggest that residents can be characterized as “aver- certified evaluator. This procedure might include age citizens” in socioeconomic terms and this is sup- several calculations during the design process with ported by a survey from Stenløse Syd that showed no subsequent redesign to match the criteria. In a similar income difference between the new occupants and way, the introduction of two different “low energy residents of the municipality as a whole. Also, the classes” for buildings in the Danish building regula- new inhabitants did not appear to opt for residences tions and the development of a tool (Be06) to calcu- on the basis of the sustainability performance of their late the energy performance of the building made it new homes. In Køge, a residential survey demon- possible for municipalities to define explicit goals for strated that environmental qualities ranked third in a building performance and to check satisfactory list of reasons for moving to the area. In other new achievement of these standards throughout the design sustainable housing developments many residents process.3 were not aware that they lived in a “sustainable building.” The projects also demonstrated that local New Actor Roles and Types of Collaboration governments can play a large and active role in facil- Another characteristic of the projects is that a itating the provision of sustainable buildings and this number of actors have assumed new roles, especially effort has inspired other municipalities in the country the municipalities that have increasingly been leading to take similar steps. These initiatives are the first to the development process. Traditionally, local govern- implement the German passive house standard in ments in Denmark have acted in a relatively passive Denmark and therefore have contributed to a learning role as regulatory authorities, issuing building per- process among the actors in the building industry mits and developing plans. In the new projects, these who have apparently implemented some of their ex- entities have been more active in defining sustain- perience in their product lines. Several of the build- ability criteria, buying land, setting up the collabora- ings have received awards for their architecture or tive framework, and so forth and often strongly influ- collaborative frameworks, as well as a great deal of enced by Agenda 21 strategies and green nongov- public and professional attention more generally. ernmental organizations (NGOs). Private building Despite these achievements, our research shows firms are involved to a much larger extent, not only a number of problematic issues related to the “new as contractors, but also as designers and developers. wave of sustainable buildings.” We can divide these For example, Isover, a private insulation producer, issues into two parts. took the initiative to build Comfort Houses that con- First, concern exists about the new role of mu- sists of ten individual homes based on the German nicipal governments in initiating and framing these passive house concept and set up a collaborative projects. This unease came to the surface in Stenløse framework organized around “integrative design.” and Køge due to a desire to formulate sustainability The project entailed considerable knowledge sharing goals for the buildings in the area, to encourage “tra- among the design teams of the different houses. In ditional” building firms to construct houses that several cases, integrated design was used as a form of matched the criteria, and to build the buildings in collaboration between architects and engineers and as accordance with market conditions (i.e., with no sub- a way to integrate environmental measures and sidies), and to market the buildings to “ordinary” standards to achieve an attractive home design. Danes. One of the problems encountered entailed the assessment of how ambitious sustainability goals Experience from the New Wave of Sustainable could be defined if one still wanted market actors to Buildings take interest in the project. If the goals were too am- bitious there might have been insufficient uptake by The new wave of sustainable building projects in investors to be able to construct the buildings and by Denmark has achieved several goals. These initia- owners to purchase them. Therefore, municipal plan- tives have shown that it is possible to build attractive ners need to have a good sense of the market, the buildings according to well-defined environmental attractiveness of the project, and the extra costs to standards, to involve traditional building firms, and to implement the sustainability measures to be able to proceed. This process deviated from earlier efforts to develop sustainable settlements that involved highly 3 The two voluntary low energy classes (low energy class 1 and low energy class 2) were introduced in the Danish Building Regu- engaged owners (grassroots ecocommunities) and/or lations in 2006. Designing with energy class 1 will result in 50% ample public subsidies (subsidized urban projects) lower energy loss for heating compared to a house built in accord- that gave such developments “niche” status and pro- ance with traditional building regulations and energy class 2 will tection from market conditions. result in a reduction of 25% compared to a traditional house. The heating loss is calculated using the Be06 tool.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

98

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

Another challenge was that the municipalities or local technical infrastructure in terms of energy spent considerable time and resources transferring supply and water management. knowledge to construction companies about, for in- In sum, the structures of the new sustainable stance, how to design and build low energy buildings buildings and settlements are to a large extent based and how to translate design standards into actual per- on well-known planning types, primarily the subur- formance outcomes. Also, the role of the municipal ban detached house, where social sustainability has government relative to the building owners could be not generally been a concern. Initiatives to foster so- fraught with ambiguity. If something went wrong in cial sustainability, such as combining land-use func- relation to the low energy concept, owners expected tions, mixing tenure types, establishing communal that the municipality would help to resolve the prob- meeting places, facilitating place making, encourag- lem since the local government imposed the measures ing local ownership, and creating opportunities for for the buildings in the first place. However, the mu- collective management of facilities, have generally nicipalities have no formal obligations to these been overlooked (Polese & Stren, 2000; Carmona et buildings and responsibility for correction resides al. 2010). Also, prospective residents have only occa- with the construction companies. sionally been involved in the design of the buildings Similar views emerged in interviews with resi- and the formulation of sustainability measures. dents about obligations for maintaining sustainability performance over time. For instance, some residents Facilitating Users asked why the municipality did not react when other Helping users to manage the novel technologies residents built a garage with pressure-treated wood in the new wave of sustainable buildings is another prohibited by the sustainability guidelines. This am- issue that has not been satisfactorily addressed, alt- biguous status of the municipality has the potential to hough experience from low energy buildings and create disappointment among homeowners in the area passive houses reveals a number of challenges and possibly discourage them from maintaining their (Rohracher & Ornetzeder, 2002). In their operations own commitments to the project’s overarching prin- phase, the effective utilization of low energy houses ciples. depends on specific sets of user practices. The build- The second set of potential problems concerned ings have very dense systems for providing mechani- the absence of a social dimension in the sustainability cal ventilation, heat supply from heat pumps, heat concept being applied to high-performance homes in regeneration (from the warm ventilation air), and Denmark. This deficiency included the involvement passive solar heating. Furthermore, they sometimes of users in the design and planning phases, as well as rely on active solar energy from solar cells or solar supporting users in the operation phase. We elaborate collectors. Appropriate use of this type of house re- on these issues in the following sections. quires residents to adopt new habits and practices to keep energy use low and indoor climate optimal. Narrowing the Sustainability Concept Some of these challenges relate to shading the The sustainability concepts that have been ap- house. For instance, during the daytime sunlight plied to the new wave of sustainable buildings have should be limited as the house will otherwise become been rather narrow compared to how such ideas have very warm. Other potential problems relate to under- in the past been used in Denmark through the en- standing how to operate the ventilation and heating gagement of grassroots’ ecocommunities during the system—the doors should not be kept open too long 1980s and urban projects during the 1990s. Where because it takes a longer time to heat the house once these approaches previously paid notable attention to the temperature has dropped as compared to “tradi- social sustainability, as well as adopted a holistic tional” heating devices. Also, doors and windows environmental approach, the new sustainable build- should not be opened to ventilate the house as the ings have mainly addressed energy performance in mechanical ventilation (which includes the heat- individual buildings and have only devoted passing regeneration system) manages this aspect of home attention to material-sourcing requirements (for in- comfort. Adjusting to the new technology may well stance by not using polyvinyl chloride or pressure- present obstacles for residents who have purchased treated wood) and rainwater percolation. In addition, their houses for reasons unrelated to energy perfor- no effort has been made to address waste sorting, mance. These challenges likely influence energy con- local waste management, or, more generally, local sumption. self-provisioning. Neither has structural sustain- A survey of actual energy consumption in nine ability, including the separation of functions—home, houses in the Koge project revealed that actual use work, leisure, public and private services—been ad- was on average 31% higher than calculated by BE06 dressed. Moreover, little consideration has been during the preconstruction phase, mainly due to given to transportation, localization, shared facilities, higher than anticipated heat utilization. Average heat

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

99

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

Table 2 Different roles in sustainable building concepts.

Sustainable Building Organization Developer Builder Operator User Ecovillages Residents Residents Residents Residents Social housing Social housing Social housing Social housing Tenants companies companies companies Detached housing Municipalities Building Owner Owner companies

use among the nine houses was 55 kilowatt-hours per greater concurrence across roles. For example, in square meter (kWh/m2) per year (about half the Danish ecovillages, prospective residents have typi- amount of a “traditional” single-family house). How- cally framed the concept of the village, acting as their ever, the buildings consume 13% more energy com- own developers (and to some extent as designers and pared to Danish low energy class 2,4 primarily due to constructors) and simultaneously as owners, opera- higher energy use for heating (Kristensen & Jensen, tors, and users. In social housing, the organization 2011). often takes the initiative, defines the goals, and oper- The high energy consumption seems to derive ates the buildings. The housing company itself de- from a combination of residents’ comfort practices cides the objectives for the buildings, operates them, and a lack of information on maintenance, manage- and is able to collect experience for future projects. ment, indoor climate, and heating and ventilation The principle differences between the various types systems (Kristensen & Jensen, 2011). Generally, the of sustainable buildings are illustrated in Table 2. transfer of knowledge from designers to users has In owner-occupied detached houses, there is been confined to guidance manuals for residents, but generally no facilitation, no formal “expert” to ask, in practice this means of dissemination has had lim- and no operator to check if the building is being used ited effect, or even no effect in several cases. Be- appropriately and whether the technological system is tween 35% and 71% of the respondents in Køge dis- calibrated correctly. In comparison, social housing closed that they had not received this information, departments in Denmark have technical and admin- although providing it is mandatory according to the istrative personnel who are often in close contact Swan label (Kristensen & Jensen, 2011).5 This find- with the residents to inform and help them to max- ing suggests uncertainty about the transfer of imize individual operational systems and the build- knowledge to users and how they are being integrated ings as a whole. For example, the social housing as- into the projects. sociation Ringgaarden, the owner and operator of the Moreover, some residents questioned how the sustainable buildings in Lystrup, is engaged in a con- environmental requirements for the neighborhood are tinuous dialogue with its tenants and tries to instruct managed in the operations phase. They are aware that them about the use of the buildings and the monitor- one sustainability objective entails constructing ing of energy performance. This engagement includes houses without pressure-treated wood, but when they facilitation of knowledge transfer between residents, see their neighbors building garages with such mate- for instance from a woman who has lived half her life rials they ask how the sustainability targets are en- in Morocco (and knows how to use the blinds to forced, and by whom? This kind of variance raises avoid overheating the building during the day) to doubts regarding who should be responsible for en- occupants who are less aware of the need to provide suring that developments live up to their sustain- shading. ability objectives and what organizational models and This type of information and learning is possible sanctions might prevent deviations. because management is part of the social housing The division of roles among different actors institution, along with other shared facilities such as (e.g., developer, designer, contractor, owner, opera- administration, maintenance, common houses, and tor, and user) in the new sustainable buildings departs playgrounds. Such facilitation is not available in the from the organization of other sustainable building detached homes where the owner acts as his own concepts (see Table 2). In the context of ecovillages, facility manager. In this respect, when examining the or sustainability projects in social housing, there is connection between social and environmental sus- tainability it is useful to compare the new wave of sustainable buildings with some features from the 4 This includes energy for heating and electricity. To qualify for Danish low energy class 2 a house measuring 100 square meters ecovillages, especially as a contrasting example. would use a maximum of 66 kWh/m2 per year. 5 The Swan Label is a common Scandinavian ecolabel.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

100

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

Configuration of Ecovillages: Social and Environmental Sustainability

Most Danish ecovillages emerged in the 1980s and 1990s. Among the most well known are Dys- sekilde (Hundested), Hjortshøj (Århus), Munksøgård (Roskilde), and Friland (Djursland). Most ecovillages are members of the National Assembly for Eco- Communities (Landsforeningen for Økosamfund, or LØS). About 30 ecocommunities and a number of associated organizations and enterprises are part of LØS and they vary from smaller settlements situated around former farms (5–20 dwelling units), to larger ecovillages (10–400 dwellings), to communities formed around spiritual centers (10–40 units) (LØS, Figure 1 Hjortshøj eco-village with individual houses 2003). In general, the communities seek to achieve a (right and left), with a shared community house in the middle (October 2010). high degree of self-sufficiency regarding energy and water management, food provisioning, and so forth and emphasize the creation of local jobs and facilities ties are in a process of continuous development. For as ways to create community (Gram-Hanssen & example, in Hjortshøj at the time of this research Jensen, 2005). The goal of self-sufficiency creates a construction of new housing was underway, as well strong relationship between environmental and social as smaller projects including a new shared commu- issues and this feature represents an important ele- nity house for meetings, dinners, hobbies, and com- ment in the overall configuration. mon discussion (see Figure 1). Such circumstances mean that the village is “messier” than other areas, Organization and Participation but residents regard this characteristic as a sign of life A large number of facilities and functions are and communal evolution. In contrast, in the nearby primarily managed by the residents and this creates Lystrup area, where three groups of sustainable numerous opportunities for practical tasks. For ex- buildings have been established, the variation is more ample, in Munksøgård several activity groups pro- limited and there is no neighborhood plan or func- vide practical and social services, including waste tional integration (see Figure 2). collection and management, visitor care, café opera- tion, greenhouse gas-reduction visioning, social ar- Social Mix rangements, green accounting, general information, Despite their alternative approach, Danish information technology, pet care, landscaping, play- ecovillages have had few problems attracting new ground maintenance, environmentally sensitive residents and the population today includes individu- farming, garden management, road repair and clear- als seeking environmental sustainability and people ing, wastewater collection, toilet operation, and interested in socially relevant features. For instance, heating (Munksøgård Bestyrelse, 2010). In addition, according to the residents of Munksøgård, the com- a number of private associations and initiatives work munity has become very popular among people on various issues, for instance promoting the produc- looking for social qualities (work groups, shared re- tion and consumption of organic meat. The high de- sponsibilities, and social arrangements) and social gree of communal self-sufficiency also includes mix (different types of home ownership, various many work obligations for the residents and working ages). groups are organized around the “green economy” In contrast, the quest for self-sufficiency in terms and the provision of mutual assistance. Considerable of facility maintenance, building operations, and built-in flexibility creates useful opportunities to en- other practical tasks means that the communities are gage in the community, to establish local ownership careful about acceptance of residents. The self- among residents, and to create social networks. reliance approach therefore includes a risk of exclu- sion for people who are not regarded as able to oper- Physical Design ate within the frames of “self-sufficiency.” However, In terms of the built environment, Danish contrary examples also exist. For instance, in ecovillages are often based on “organic” design with Hjortshøj the community has fought to acquire an large variation in their architectural styles that in- institution for mentally disabled residents and this is clude winding streets, meeting places, shared facili- now being built. The objective is that the new resi- ties, and varied vegetation. Many of these communi- dents will be able to take on smaller jobs such as

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

101

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

of the residents who want or need salaried jobs and therefore considerable car-based commuting takes place because most ecovillages are not located in proximate distance to public transport. However, the local enterprises are valued due to the contribution they make to enhance the social experience. In summary, the understanding of sustainability being put into practice in the ecovillages entails a close relationship between the environmental and social dimensions. This feature, in combination with the various social qualities that are part of the overall design, adds a sense of community, an attribute diffi- cult to find in the new wave of Danish sustainable

buildings.

Transformation Perspectives

Transition theory emphasizes the need to recon- figure the social and organizational contexts as a pre- condition for technological change. Efforts to bring technologies such as sustainable buildings from niche-scale to regime-scale can be regarded as “‘real world experiments.” When working on systems change involving complex technologies, the best way to learn about them is to build them and test them in everyday life (Gross & Hoffmann-Riem, 2005). The new generation of sustainable buildings in Denmark that are based on market principles constitute such an Figure 2 New sustainable buildings (Lærkehaven) in activity. Our cases have shown that a precondition for Lystrup with light construction passive standard houses (top) and heavy construction low energy buildings these initiatives is that central actors, presently or (bottom) (October, 2010). formerly involved in niche activities (such as Local Agenda 21 initiatives and grassroots-oriented sus- cleaning, caretaking, and general maintenance. Social tainable buildings), have paved the way for these diversity is to some extent ensured by including so- experiments. Ironically, the actors in Køge and cial housing in the development. Many Danish Stenløse who have this background are the ones ecovillages, such as Hjortshøj, Dyssekilde, and fiercely promoting an EMT mindset in the “storyline” Munksøgård, are divided into housing groups, with that has developed around these new sustainable different types of homes, residents, ownership struc- buildings and emphasizing the shortcomings in how tures, and environmental features. the ecocommunities approach sustainable build- ings—they are regarded as too alternative, unappeal- Functional Mix ing to ordinary Danes, and destined to remain “niche Several ecovillages in Denmark have sought to products.” Nevertheless, the cases illustrate the dy- create local workplaces and this effort has been, at namic among niches, “real-life” sustainable building least to some extent, successful. The workplaces are experiments, and regime and landscape changes in mainly provided by smaller enterprises related to terms of new building codes and other types of public community activities. In Hjortshøj, for instance, a regulation. self-employed gardener supplies organic vegetables From an EMT perspective, we might treat the to a local shop. In addition, a display building located new wave of sustainable buildings as examples of in the middle of the development contains rooms for increasing experimentation and collaboration be- exhibits and educational courses and houses a local tween public and private partners, generating new company and the international secretariat for roles for actors, creating different uses of regulation, INFORSE, an international network for renewable and so forth. On a practical level, the cases also show energy. In Dyssekilde, the community has developed that these sustainable buildings face some energy- a local income source by organizing tours for visitors. savings challenges related to their use and the ab- These activities are far from sufficient to employ all sence of a structure to support and inform users about their technological aspects. As mentioned earlier, the

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

102

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

shortcomings stem from an overall need to include crete suggestions from actors in the sustainable social sustainability in the building concept and to buildings sector include systems for better building develop more ambitious targets with respect to envi- monitoring and ways for residents to gain infor- ronmental sustainability. mation about their house—such as Internet based Danish ecovillages can be seen as experiments to solutions—that could be implemented without explore the relationship between social and ecologi- changing the basic concept of mainstreamed sustain- cal sustainability. It can be argued that grassroots able buildings. initiatives and niche developments generate ample On a larger scale, municipalities could facilitate opportunities for innovation that are valuable for such learning processes by inviting and grouping market dissemination, but they also pose several bar- settlements to enable mutual learning. For example, riers and challenges. As Seyfang & Smith (2007) Roskilde municipality has developed the area of argue: “Niches find themselves at the weak end of Trekroner which is a cluster where different types of complex and extended power relations under global- ecosettlements can establish themselves. Established ising capitalism, and dominant individualist and con- developments such as Munksøgård are already lo- sumerist lifestyles aspirations run counter to commu- cated in the district and are able to share facilities nity collectivism.” Although grassroots innovations with similar settlements and help with practical might include development of niche technologies and problems. practices such as wind-energy production or car- Although social sustainability is a concept with sharing clubs, we contend that the lesson from the many diverse interpretations (Vallance et al. 2011), ecocommunities is that a direct transfer does not nec- there are pragmatic ways to make it operational and essarily exist (neither is a transformation of individ- accountable, for instance by following best-practice ual technologies relevant). Rather, an understanding checklists and applying measures on social sustain- of sustainable buildings is best viewed as comprising ability (for instance regarding social mix, meeting a combination of self-sufficiency, ecological and places, and shared facilities) (Polese & Stren, 2000; economic sustainability, social activities, social mix, Carmona et al. 2010). Emerging standards on sus- shared facilities, and functional diversity that in com- tainable buildings and neighborhoods might be an- bination constitute a “configuration that works” (Rip other way to incorporate social sustainability & Kemp, 1998). measures.6 Although recent research suggests that There is no doubt that Danish municipalities can these evaluation systems do not take all features into get inspiration from ecocommunities and other sus- account when evaluating sustainable communities tainable buildings (for instance by visits and infor- (Mapes & Wolch, 2011) and have difficulties quanti- mation exchanges), but there is a need to find ways to fying the softer benefits (Retzlaff, 2010), they might institutionalize knowledge transfer and competence be a way to highlight qualities of social sustainability building. Local management of buildings should have in such settlements. a greater focus on social sustainability, in terms of Because the new wave of sustainable buildings, social and functional diversity and shared facilities, as well as the sustainability standards, are signs of in combination with design and place making that adoption and diffusion of sustainable technologies support these functions. Users live in the buildings as and concepts (Rip & Kemp, 1998), we can ask homes, not as technical artifacts. Domestication the- whether we still need inputs, innovations, and con- ory, as it pertains to technological adaptation, demon- cepts from bottom-up initiatives and niche develop- strates that the way technologies are integrated into ments. From this perspective, initiatives from within specific contexts such as “a home” often include dif- the sector (for instance developing a sustainability ferent practices and meanings than those imagined by label for buildings), in combination with administra- the architects and engineers who initially planned tive and regulatory reforms, seem the most likely them (Lie & Sørensen, 1996). This situation calls for path for the continuous mainstreaming of sustainable better understanding of users as residents and con- buildings. Our research suggests that in light of the sumers at the same time, improvement in the inter- very limited inclusion of social sustainability play between designers and users, as well as efforts measures in these sustainable buildings, we still to include users in decision-making processes on de- could learn a lot from the niche products and bottom- sign and technical solutions (Rohracher & up approaches on sustainable building. Not only Ornetzeder, 2002; Hoffman, 2007). could this make the new sustainable buildings more Strategies to improve competence regarding how attractive, but larger inclusion of social structure to use the buildings could include knowledge transfer whereby existing expert users would act as mentors 6 Two prominent examples are Leadership in Energy and Environ- for new residents and teach them how to use the mental Design (LEED) in the United States and the Building Re- search Establishment Environmental Assessment Method buildings and technologies in an optimal way. Con- (BREEAM) in the UK.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

103

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings could also help improve the interaction between Gram-Hanssen, K. & Jensen, J. 2005. Green buildings in Denmark: buildings and users to reduce energy consumption. from radical ecology to consumer oriented market ap- proaches? In S. Guy & S. Moore (Eds.), Sustainable Archi- tectures: Cultures and Natures in Europe and North Amer- Conclusion ica. pp.165–183. New York: Spon Press. Gross, M. & Hoffmann-Riem, H. 2005. Ecological restoration as a real-world experiment: designing robust implementation We can interpret recent efforts to mainstream strategies in an urban environment. Public Understanding of sustainable buildings as generally consistent with Science 14(3):269–284. EMT, particularly in terms of a robust market ap- Hajer, M. 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Eco- proach and a rejection of the antimodernist attitude logical Modernization and the Policy Process. New York: Clarendon Press. that has been generally evident in sustainable build- Hoffman, E. 2007. Consumer integration in sustainable product ings in Denmark and elsewhere. From a transition development. Business Strategy and the Environment 16(5): theory perspective, mainstreaming sustainable build- 322–338. ings is a strategy within the existing regime, a prom- Jensen, J. & Gram-Hanssen, K. 2007. Ecological modernisation of sustainable building: a Danish perspective. Building Re- ising way to implement such innovations, but one search and Information 36(2):146–158. that so far faces a number of shortcomings and chal- Kristensen, L. & Jensen, O. 2011. Erfaringsopfølgning På Laven- lenges. ergibyggeri Klasse 1 og 2: Med “Fremtidens Parcelhuse” The observations from practice indicate that so- Som Eksempel [Experiences from Low Energy Buildings Class 1 and 2: Using the “Detached House of the Future” as cial sustainability initiatives—physical, spatial, or- an Example]. Køge: Fremtidens Parcelhuse. ganizational—have not been satisfactorily imple- http://www.fp.fremtidensparcelhuse.dk/download/Samlet_rap mented and issues such as engagement with resi- port.pdf (in Danish). dents, information about building use, and creation of Landsforeningen for Økosamfund (LØS). 2003. Økosamfund i Danmark: Hvordan Drømmer Bliver til Virkelighed [Eco- “ownership” regarding sustainability measures for the Communities in Denmark: How Dreams Come True]. Galten: settlements are unresolved and unaddressed. We ar- Landsforeningen for Økosamfund. http://losnet.dk/_ny/ gue that this situation has negative consequences for LOSNETny/LOSNETpdf/2003_OkosamfundiDanmark.pdf the energy performance of these buildings and for the (in Danish). Lie, M. & K. Sørensen (Eds.). 1996. Making Technology Our sustainability of larger settlements. We therefore Own: Domesticating Technology into Everyday Life. Oslo: suggest that the next generation of sustainable build- Scandinavian University Press. ings should adopt a broader perspective in terms of Lovell, H., Bulkeley, H., & Owens, S. 2009. Converging agendas? environmental sustainability and include more robust Energy and climate change politics in the UK. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 27(1):90–109. initiatives on social sustainability, including the Mapes, J. & Wolch, J. 2011. “Living green:” the promise and physical and organizational layout of settlements. pitfall of new sustainable communities. Journal of Urban Design 16(1):105–126. Mol, A. & Sonnenfeld, D. 2000. Ecological modernisation around Acknowledgement the world: an introduction. Environmental Politics 9(1):3–14. The authors would like to thank the Aase og Einar Dan- Mol, A. & Spaargaren, G. 2000. Ecological modernisation theory in debate: a review. Environmental Politics 9(1):17–49. ielsens Fond (Aase and Einar Danielsen’s Fund) and Real- Moss, T., S. Marvin, & S. Guy (Eds.). 2001. Urban Infrastructure Dania for supporting the study reported in this article. We in Transition: Networks, Buildings, Plans. London: also would like to express our appreciation to five anony- Earthscan. mous referees for useful comments and suggestions on an Munksøgård Bestyrelse. 2010. Orientering om Munksøgård earlier draft. [Briefing on Munksøgård]. Roskilde: Munksøgård. http://www.munksoegaard.dk/orientering.pdf (in Danish). Polese, M. & R. Stren (Eds.). 2000. The Social Sustainability of Cities: Diversity and the Management of Change. Toronto: References University of Toronto Press. Retzlaff, T. 2010. Developing policies for green buildings: what Boström, M. 2003. Environmental organisations in new forms of can the United States learn from the Netherlands? Sustain- political participation: ecological and the making of volun- ability: Science, Practice & Policy 6(1):28–38. http://sspp. tary rules. Environmental Values 12(2):175–193. proquest.com/archives/vol6iss1/1004-020.retzlaff.html. Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S., Heath, T., & Oc, T. 2010. Public Rip, A. & Kemp, R. 1998. Technological change. In S. Rayner & Places–Urban Spaces: The Dimensions of Urban Design. E. Malone (Eds.), Human Choice and Climate Change: Vol- 2nd ed. New York: Architectural Press. ume 2 (Resources and Technology). pp. 327–399. Columbus, Farmer, G. & Guy, S. 2005. Hybrid environments: the spaces of OH: Battelle Press. . In S. Guy & S. Moore (Eds.), Sustainable Rohracher, H. & Ornetzeder, M. 2002. Green buildings in context: Architectures: Cultures and Natures in Europe and North improving social learning processes between users and pro- America. pp. 15–30. New York: Spon Press. ducers. Built Environment 28(1):73–84. Geels, F. 2002. Technological transition as evolutionary reconfigu- Seyfang, G. & Smith, A. 2007. Grassroots innovations for sustain- ration process: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. able development: towards a new research and policy agenda. Research Policy 31(8–9):1257–1274. Environmental Politics 16(4):584–603. Guy, S. 2006. Designing urban knowledge: competing perspectives Spaargaren, G. 2000. Ecological theory and domestic consump- on energy and buildings. Environment and Planning C: Gov- tion. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 2(4): ernment and Policy 24(5):645–659. 323–335.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

104

Jensen et al.: Sustainability in Danish Buildings

Spaargaren, G. & Mol, A. 2008. Greening global consumption: van den Burg, S. 2006. Governance Through Information: Envi- redefining politics and authority. Global Environmental ronmental Monitoring from a Citizen Consumer Perspective. Change 18(3):350–359. Doctoral Dissertation. Wageningen Institute for Environment Shove, E. 2003. Comfort, Cleanliness, and Convenience: The and Climate Research, Wageningen University, Wageningen, Social Organization of Normality. New York: Berg. The Netherlands. The Green House. 2005. Projektbeskrivelse for Fremtidens Par- van Tatenhove, J. & Leroy, P. 2003. Environment and participation celhuse [Project Description for Future Detached Houses]. in a context of political modernisation. Environmental Values Køge: Fremtidens Parcelhuse (in Danish). 12(2):155–174. Vallance, S., Perkins, H., & Dixon, J. 2011. What is social sustain- ability? A clarification of concepts. Geoforum 42(3):342– 348.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

105

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

ARTICLE

Contention, participation, and mobilization in environmental assessment follow-up: the Itabira experience

John Devlin1 & Denise Isabel Tubino2 1 School of Environmental Design and Rural Development, University of Guelph, Landscape Architecture Building, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1 Canada (email: [email protected]) 2 Independent Consultant, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (email: [email protected])

This article analyzes the public participation and follow-up stages of the environmental assessment process to secure an operating license for an iron-ore mine in Itabira, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Vale, a major Brazilian mining company, eventually received authorization to begin operations in 2000, but only after making significant concessions to public demands on a variety of environmental and social conditions. In the years following the approval, Vale met several conditions regarding environmental cleanup, parks and infrastructure, water protection, and commitment to the local community. However, over time some of these activities were interrupted or aborted, while a number of conditions were never met. This article suggests that these weaknesses in follow-up were a consequence of the demobilization and retreat of the state and a parallel demobilization of civil society after 2000. The case demonstrates that state and public attentiveness can be episodic and suggests that high-profile agreements do not assure sustainable outcomes. Institutionalized participatory monitoring and management units appear necessary for continued environmental man- agement that pursues long-term sustainability.

KEYWORDS: environmental management, follow-up studies, political change, public awareness, mining, interest groups

Introduction nomic pillars (Littig & Griessler, 2005; Gibson, 2006). Environmental assessment (EA) was introduced Populists push for increased democratization of in the United States during the 1960s in response to EA through more inclusive and deliberative pro- environmental concerns and a desire for both rational cesses (Deitz, 1987; Bartlett, 2005; Doelle & and publicly involved environmental decision making Sinclair, 2006; Isaksson et al. 2009), but, as Sinclair (Weston, 2004). Advocates initially hoped that the & Doelle (2003) suggest, assumptions about the po- combination of technocratic and populist elements in tential for participation may be unrealistic. EA un- EA would reduce political conflict over environ- folds within socially unequal systems and tends to mental issues, allowing environmentalism to become reflect that inequality. In general, projects that are a dimension of public administration rather than a subject to EA are promoted by groups for whom de- continuous area of political contention (Caldwell, velopmental or profit-earning goals are paramount 1998). With the emergence of a sustainability dis- and are opposed by groups concerned with potential course in the 1980s, EA came to be identified as an negative environmental and social impacts. Powerful important tool for achieving environmental, eco- actors who value economic development over envi- nomic, and social sustainability. However, EA’s ronmental preservation dominate the decision- technocratic and populist orientations have continued making process (Yap, 1990; Beattie, 1995; White, to generate tensions (Wood, 2003; Weston, 2004; 1996; Gismondi, 1997; Diduck et al. 2007; Morrison-Saunders & Fischer, 2006). Bäckstrand et al. 2010). Under socially unequal con- Technocrats decry the politicization of EA pro- ditions, EA is open to political manipulation (Dietz & cesses and criticize the public for subscribing to a Stern, 2008) and participation in EA may often be not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) mentality, while oth- little more than “theater” (Hokkanen, 2001). How- ers express dissatisfaction with the limitations placed ever, sometimes EA processes do lead to abandon- on public participation (see, e.g., Petts, 1999). At the ment of project proposals (Devlin & Yap, 2008) and same time, the social pillar of sustainability with its proponents do change their plans in response to pub- focus on equity, social justice, and democracy ap- lic concerns (Rutherford & Campbell, 2004). Why do pears less theoretically developed and integrated into these unusual events occur? Do they represent a decision making than the environmental and eco- strengthening of the social pillar of sustainability?

 2012 Devlin & Tubino Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1 106

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

To pursue these questions, we adopt a conten- and that public participation can contribute to these tious politics approach. Analysts of political conten- processes (Baker, 2004; Morrison-Saunders & Arts, tion suggest that weaker social actors can gain lever- 2004; Marshall et al. 2005). However, numerous age in decision making only under conditions that difficulties are also recognized in bringing effective create unusual political opportunities (McAdam et al. EA follow-up into practice (Nadeem & Hameed, 2001). These openings may be generated by new 2010). We wanted to know if the Itabira agreement legislation, changes in the characteristics of the po- had been successfully implemented. If so, what fac- litical regime, elections, initiatives of international tors would have contributed to the result and what actors, or other events that shift the political terrain role might public participation have played. (Meyer & Minkoff, 2004). Political opportunities can The next section outlines the events leading up to bring new groups to power, increase institutional Vale’s environmental licensing in 2000. The third provisions for participation, encourage new alliances section describes the key public meeting in 1998 that that did not previously seem possible, and make occurred at the height of the public mobilization. This available external resources to groups that lack inter- is followed by a description of Vale’s compliance nal ones (Tarrow, 1994; McAdam, 1996; Tilly, 1999; with licensing between 2000 and 2008. We then sur- Meyer, 2004; Boudet & Ortolano, 2010). vey the factors explaining the levels of compliance The conditions that create political opportunities achieved and conclude with some lessons for EA are historically contingent. Mobilizations can be planners and environmentalists. contained or collapsed, and advances can be reversed We carried out a process of initial document (Piven & Cloward, 1979; Tarrow, 1994). While collection and review during the summer of 2008 in studies of contentious politics tend to focus on the archives of the environmental authority for the macro-level processes, such as large-scale social state of Minas Gerais, Fundação Estadual de Meio movements, revolutions, or waves of labor militancy, Ambiente (FEAM) and in the Prefeitura de Itabira the approach can also be applied to micro-level pro- (PMI). We examined the EA documentation, minutes cesses. For instance, Taylor (2007) argues that the of meetings, memoranda of understanding, and letters emergence of “new governance” has created oppor- among the main stakeholders (Vale, FEAM, and the tunities for previously disadvantaged groups to influ- PMI). The following year, we conducted 22 semi- ence decision making. We approach public participa- structured interviews in the state capital Belo Hori- tion in EA as contentious, historically contextualized zonte, in Itabira, and in Rio de Janeiro where Vale processes (Sharp & Connelly, 2002; Connelly & has its headquarters. Interviewees included three rep- Richardson, 2004), and seek to uncover their micro- resentatives from the state environmental authority scale dynamics to explain how public participation (FEAM); three local government representatives influences EA decisions and outcomes in specific from Itabira (PMI), three representatives from the cases (Flyvbjerg, 2002; 2004). headquarters of Vale in Rio de Janeiro, two repre- This article offers a case study of what we ini- sentatives from Vale operations in Itabira, and eleven tially identified as a successful, and thus atypical, representatives from Itabira’s civil society including public participation process in Brazil. We selected the Municipal Environmental Defense Council the case because a very powerful Brazilian mining (CODEMA). The interviews were audiorecorded and company, Vale, agreed to a long list of environmental transcribed. and social conditions to obtain an operating license. The agreement was the result of an EA that stimu- The Itabira Process lated public mobilization and a two-year negotiation between the company, state agencies, and community Itabira is one of 853 municipalities in the Bra- representatives. The resulting environmental man- zilian state of Minas Gerais, located approximately agement plan incorporated many public concerns. We 100 kilometers (km) northeast of the state capital, were interested in understanding how this agreement Belo Horizonte. The total area of the Municipality of was reached. How important was public participa- Itabira is approximately 1,257 square km and is part tion? Was the Itabira agreement an advance in social of the Doce River watershed (IBGE, 2009). Itabira is sustainability or an unusual and ephemeral political situated in the geological area known as the “Iron opportunity? Quadrangle,” characterized by large quantities of We were interested in determining whether the iron-ore deposits (Souza e Silva, 2004; IBGE, 2009), agreement was implemented successfully. The liter- for which the Companhia Vale do Rio Doce (Vale) ature on EA follow-up suggests that after an envi- was formed in Itabira in 1942 to extract, commer- ronmental management plan has been approved, the cialize, and distribute. Vale remained a national state- implementation period should incorporate monitor- owned company from 1942 until 1996. The munici- ing, evaluation, management, and communication,

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

107

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

Box 1 Acronyms for the main organizations involved in case study.

CODEMA: Conselho Municipal de Defesa do Meio Ambiente [Municipal Council for Environmental Defence of Itabira]. COPAM: Conselho de Política Ambiental de Minas Gerais [Environmental Law Council of Minas Gerais]. FEAM: Fundação Estadual de Meio Ambiente [Environmental Protection State Foundation of Minas Gerais] (The Minas Gerais environmental agency). PEMSO: Programa de Mobilização Social de Itabira [Social Mobilization Program of Itabira]. PMI: Prefeitura Municipal de Itabira [Municipal Government of Itabira]. SMA/PMI: Secretaria Municipal de Meio Ambiente da Prefeitura Municipal de Itabira [Environmental Secretariat of the Municipal Government of Itabira) (The main environmental representative of the local government). SUPRAM leste: Eastern Regional Environmental Superintendence of Minas Gerais.

pality’s capital (also named Itabira) has a population state agency FEAM explained that the initial pressure of just over 100,000 people (Souza e Silva, 2004).1 for a public meeting came from FEAM and PMI, but Public concerns about the environment have a the community soon took up the demand stimulated long history in Itabira, where the first “National by the privatization concerns (for a list of acronyms Meeting on Mining Cities” took place in 1984, of the main organizations involved in this case study, bringing together several municipalities of Minas see Box 1). In the build-up to the public meeting, Gerais to discuss environmental issues. The meeting PMI played an important role by allocating financial called for civil society, government, and mining support and personnel to prepare the community to companies to seek environmental solutions through a voice its concerns. partnership approach. The Municipal Environmental Defense Council (CODEMA) was created in 1985 The Public Meeting following that meeting, and strengthened the envi- ronmental capacity of Itabira’s civil society, includ- The public meeting took place on February 12, ing churches, teachers, and neighborhood associa- 1998 and ran from 7:30 pm until 1:00 am. Over 800 tions (Souza e Silva, 2004; Guimarães de Souza, people attended and, according to a spokesperson 2007). In the early 1990s, there were several commu- from Vale, they were very angry but polite and in- nity protests over environmental issues such as air formed. Civil society representatives came from bar- quality. One slogan disseminated on tee-shirts and rio associations, as well as business, professional, and hats in the early 1990s announced “That’s not fair church groups.3 Vale; I want to Breathe!” (Guimarães de Souza, Sixty-two participants spoke during the meeting: 2007). seven Vale representatives; 22 civil society repre- In 1994, the state government of Minas Gerais sentatives; 21 individuals unaffiliated with a specific instructed Vale to obtain an environmental license, as group or agency; four COPAM members, seven lo- mandated for all mines to operate under the Norma- cally elected officials, Itabira’s Mayor Jackson, and tive Deliberation State Environmental Law Council one Vale rebuttal representative who was later put in (COPAM) which came into effect in 1990. In 1995, charge of negotiations with the community (COPAM, Vale filed for a Corrective Environmental License 1998). At the meeting, 96 charges were set forth, (Licença de Operação Corretiva or LOC) as required under the law. Also in 1995, Brazil’s President Fernando Henrique Cardoso announced that Vale ties that caused or could potentially cause environmental harm. would be privatized, a decision that turned the re- This was followed by the passage of CONAMA Resolution nº 09/87 one year later, which legislated public participation in the quest for an environmental license into a political form of public meetings. CONAMA is the Conselho Nacional de opportunity for environmental advocates. Meio Ambiente, a Federal branch of environmental protection Staff of the local government reported that the (Fowler & Dias de Aguiar, 1993). 3 EA submitted to obtain the LOC contained inaccura- Some of the major civil society participants were: CODEMA; cies and this led to demand for a public meeting, an ASSEAG (Apiculture Nucleus; Engineers, Geologists, Agricultur- 2 alists, and Architects Association); 52nd subsection of the Brazil- unusual event at the time. A representative of the ian Lawyers Association; Medical Association of Itabira; Repre- sentative of the Association of Mining Municipalities of Minas 1 Gerais (AMIG); Itabira Rotary Club; ACITA (Commercia, Indus- Brazilian municipalities can be large regions having capital cit- trial, Services and Agricultural Association of Itabira); Vila ies. Paciencia Community Association; Bela Vista Neighborhood 2 Brazilian environmental legislation established in January 1986 Association, Sao Cristovao Neighborhood Association, Alto Pe- through CONAMA Resolution nº 01/86 addressed the need for reira Neighborhood Association, Campestre Neighborhood Asso- environmental assessment and environmental licensing for activi- ciation; and Diocese Itabira (COPAM, 1998).

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

108

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

eleven suggestions advanced, seventeen demands The Follow-up: What was Actually Achieved? presented, and eight requests for clarification made (COPAM, 1998). The main environmental issues In the years following the licensing approval in raised included concerns about environmental man- 2000, several conditions were met. For example, agement, air quality, ground and surface water man- Vale supported an environmental education program agement, management of tailings, waste rock, haz- for the community, fenced off urban railroad tracks ardous materials, land reclamation (of decommis- for public safety, and built neighborhood plazas and sioned open-pit sites such as Cauê Mine), and flora sports fields. The company introduced internal waste- and fauna. Concern was also expressed for patri- management systems and solid-waste and oil con- mony, the intrinsic value of the scenery and biota, as tainment at train terminals. Some public works and well as about mine encroachment on the city and site-remediation projects were also completed. Vale resettlement issues, noise pollution due to 24-hour engaged in activities that improved air quality, en- mining operations, industrial trucks, blasting, public hanced environmental waste-management systems, health and safety, and economic development in light and upgraded land-reclamation sites. In addition, the of the mine closure anticipated in 2025 (COPAM, Parque do Intelecto (Intellectual Park), an urban envi- 1996a; 1996b). The Vale spokesperson recalled that ronmental education and wheelchair-accessible recre- she had to agree with the issues raised and informed ational area, was completed. the community that Vale would be open to negotia- However, in time some of these activities were tion. interrupted or aborted. For example, Vale ceased to After the public meeting, negotiations began in- sponsor activities for community environmental edu- volving FEAM, Vale, SMA/PMI, and CODEMA to cation. In addition, the Programa de Mobilização establish conditions that would be part of the envi- Social de Itabira (PEMSO—Social Mobilization Pro- ronmental license. FEAM created technical subcom- gram) lasted three years, but was not replaced with mittees centered on the main concerns, such as water another social investment program. The neighbor- resources, air pollution, and soils. CODEMA and hood plazas and sports fields were destroyed and not SMA/PMI met with FEAM and Vale representatives replaced and the substitution of exotics with endemic on a continuous basis. CODEMA served as the species in land reclamation remains incomplete. bridge with the community, keeping community Moreover, several conditions relating to the Itabira members informed about the negotiations and com- landfill were never met, including protection of water municating concerns to FEAM. Vale spokespersons sources and water quality and compensation for bio- and SMA/PMI and CODEMA representatives all diversity losses and deforestation. The Itabiruçu En- indicated that the continuous meetings with FEAM vironmental Education Park was converted into a personnel were crucial to come to a consensus. sterile dumping site, interrupting community-training After two years of meetings, it was announced activities. The general public no longer received that Vale, FEAM, SMA/PMI, and CODEMA had promised daily bulletins on air quality. Finally, Vale agreed upon 52 conditions to the environmental li- considered all conditions that required a “study,” cense (LOC). The LOC was finally granted to Vale “conceptual project,” or “plan” to have been com- on June 21, 2000. The conditions created a wide pleted upon submission of the associated document range of commitments to the community and the even if there has been little or no action to fulfill the municipality arising from the concerns expressed in plan. the public meeting. They included environmental cleanup, creation of parks and infrastructure, com- Why Have the Results been Mixed? munity environmental education and protection of Itabira’s water supply (see Appendix for the complete It is true, but trivial, to suggest that the reason LOC). Vale, with the help of CODEMA, held several not all 52 conditions were met was because Vale did neighborhood meetings to share the results of the not follow through on its commitments, that state negotiations with the community. A majority of agencies did not effectively enforce the agreed re- community respondents felt that the 52 conditions quirements, or that civil society did not mobilize to were a reflection of their concerns shaped by their pressure for complete compliance. All have fallen participation at the public meeting and with the help short, but how might we explain this breakdown? of CODEMA representatives during the 1998 to 2000 From Vale’s perspective, minimizing the costs of negotiations. compliance was almost certainly a motivation. Slowing down the delivery process, seeking to rede- fine some commitments, and simply ignoring others would represent a “bottom line” approach. At the same time, the company sought and obtained ISO

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

109

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

14000 certification in 2000.4 To remain certified, a served, “Their image was worn out...we started to company must develop an internal environmental- feel job insecurity, salaries started to fall, and they management plan and show evidence of regular im- removed the health plan.” In 1979, at the height of provement in environmental practices (Qadir & direct employment, Vale had provided work for over Gorman, 2008). So Vale had reasons to meet some, 5,000 people. Between 1990 and 2002, there was a but not necessarily all, conditions. But why did local 55% reduction (Souza e Silva, 2004). All the com- government and state agencies not sustain their focus munity respondents suggested that privatization was when they had been so instrumental in the original expected to lead to job loss. Protests took place, with negotiation of conditions, and why did public atten- posters reading: “My father [worked for Vale] for 30 tion falter? years but what about me?” (Souza e Silva, 2004). First, the key event affecting the local govern- There was also fear that the company might eventu- ment was the municipal election in 2000. The envi- ally shut down its operations completely in light of ronmentally oriented mayor was defeated and several the anticipated exhaustion of mineral deposits by community members suggested that under the new 2025. mayor, João Izael Querino Coelho, the local govern- People felt they had “nothing else to lose” and all ment actively elevated the interests of Vale over of the internalized complaints finally surfaced and those of the community. Most significantly, the PMI were expressed at the 1998 public meeting. While the administration under the new mayor reduced the size immediate mobilization leading up to the meeting of CODEMA in 2001 and discontinued the positions was around the environmental issues raised by the of two civil society representatives. In 2003, a decree licensing application, the broader impetus came from was passed by the municipality that entitled the Sec- concerns about the economic implications of privati- retary of the Environment of the PMI/SMA to be zation. However, after 2000, concern about layoffs automatically elected as president of CODEMA declined. Mineral exhaustion was reassessed and (Guimarães de Souza, 2007). One interviewee re- Vale announced that it would expand mining opera- ferred to this as the “dismantling of CODEMA.” tions and would also start to extract iron from lower The state of Minas Gerais reduced its attention to grade ores and from mine tailings. So the level of Itabira once the LOC was granted, FEAM’s attention public concern and worry about future employment shifted to other issues, the special technical commit- abated. tees focused on air, water, and soil were dissolved, The second reason for the faltering of public at- and staff was reallocated to work on other environ- tention occurred after the LOC was granted, when mental license applications. FEAM also was admin- civil society groups stopped engaging with Vale as a istratively decentralized and the regional office re- collective group. The ex-president of the council of sponsible for Itabira (SUPRAM leste) was moved neighborhood associations noted, “[A]fter the LOC from Belo Horizonte to the city of Governador was granted the interassociation started to meet less Valadares, which was even further away. Under these and less frequently; the member associations began to new circumstances, it became more difficult for focus on neighborhood issues. We lost our cohesive- FEAM staff to follow-up on the LOC process in Ita- ness.” In part, this was because Vale introduced new bira. Hence, the efficacy of the local and state gov- communication channels for contact with individual ernmental actors was significantly reduced after the neighborhoods, such as Vale Community (Vale Co- LOC was granted. munidade), which ran from 2003 to 2006 and was From the community’s perspective, the mobili- followed in 2007 by the Reference Group (Grupo de zation from 1996 to 1998 was, as one retired Vale Referencia) program. Vale negotiators would go to employee stated, “a unique coincidence.” The com- the neighborhoods once a month or the community pany’s privatization caused concern and anxiety at leaders of the neighborhood association would go to the community level; one respondent explained that it Vale offices to discuss issues. Several respondents allowed “an already ticked off community to express explained that community concerns are no longer itself.” People were worried about layoffs, as Vale discussed in terms of the LOC. For example, when started to offer “early retirement” and began out- house walls were cracking in the neighborhood of sourcing several services. Vale’s image within the Vila Paciencia due to ongoing blasts, the affected community began to decline. As one resident ob- community members contacted Vale to repair the cracks but did not address other community obliga- 4 ISO 14000 is a privately managed international program that tions under the LOC. That Vale had conditions certifies that a company has in place and is maintaining an envi- placed on its license to operate had largely been for- ronmental management program. The certification is reviewed gotten. annually. Many firms in a value chain may require ISO 14000 Third, weaknesses in compliance with the 52 certification from their suppliers. Thus, ISO 14000 is often a re- conditions were due to the fact that the community quirement to enter markets in North America and Europe.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

110

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

put its faith in the hands of the local government and litical system. The local and state governments were expected it to ensure compliance. As the local gov- concerned about the future of Vale, which had been ernment lost its willingness and capacity to enforce nationally owned. This action resulted in an alliance the LOC, no one else emerged to remobilize the between the local and state governments and the community around environmental issues. community to put pressure on Vale’s new manage- Finally, noncompliance was partial and only be- ment. This alliance was maintained during the second came apparent incrementally. After 2000, Vale and phase of the negotiation period up to 2000. During the community underwent a honeymoon period this period, the public was demobilized as commu- marked by corporate social responsibility, during nity representatives engaged in the negotiation pro- which public works such as sports fields and plazas, cess. The third phase began with the 2000 agreement as well as the Praia Canal, were completed. A free on the LOC and the 52 conditions. The municipal concert to inaugurate the canal, in addition to several election in 2000 shifted the relations between Vale highly visible Vale-sponsored events such as school and the municipal government, as the progressive competitions, proved popular within the community. mayor was not re-elected. Vale took a conciliatory However, as time passed, programs contracted and position, began to implement some of the agree- public works, such as the plazas and sports fields, ment’s conditions, and made clear that the mine were not maintained. The relationship of such pro- would continue to operate. The new mayor moved grams to the LOC faded from public memory. The toward the company and the strength of the alliance change in government and the decline in cohesive with the community began to fade. Key leaders in community pressure gave Vale scope to decide which FEAM left the organization. Barrio associations conditions to meet and to what degree. In addition, turned their attention back to neighborhood concerns. for some conditions the exact nature of compliance What the future holds for issues of environmen- was unclear. For instance, a respondent indicated that tal sustainability in Itabira is far from clear. With the Condition 12, which refers to Itabira’s water supply, global economic crisis and over 1,000 layoffs from continues to be “negotiated” due to the lack of clarity Vale in 2009, the community’s economic foundation over who is responsible for finding alternate water is once again in doubt. Perhaps this will spur a new sources. Hence, in effect, no agreement has been wave of public mobilization and renewed concerns reached on this condition at all. about Vale’s effect on Itabira’s environment. How- Overarching all of these factors is the city’s con- ever, the confluence of conditions leading to envi- tinuing dependence on mining operations for jobs and ronmental mobilization in the 1990s may not appear local economic development. According to Souza e again. Silva (2004) and several respondents, the municipal- ity is attempting to diversify its economy through Conclusion partnerships initiated by the Commercial, Industrial, and Agribusiness Association of Itabira (ACITA), but What lessons does the Itabira case offer to envi- the economy cannot easily disassociate itself from ronmental planners, environmentalists, and sustain- Vale’s presence. Indeed, Vale indirectly supports ability theorists? The case suggests that local com- such services as hotels, banks, taxis, shops, and res- munities may be mobilized when jobs and livelihoods taurants. Furthermore, Vale remains central to the appear threatened, and during such a mobilization, psyche of Itabiran society. Several respondents ex- environmental issues may also gain leverage. Hence, plained that without Vale, Itabira would be a poor threats to economic and social sustainability can fa- and isolated municipality. In 2004, Vale’s LOC for cilitate environmental sustainability. Yet, such a Itabira was renewed behind closed doors in negotia- foundation for environmental mobilization is weak tions between SUPRAM leste and Vale without local because it hinges on economic rather than environ- participation. Several community respondents indi- mental concerns. It can be easily reversed. The case cated that they had not even known that Vale’s LOC also demonstrates the potential for corporations to had been renewed prior to the interviews in 2009. use community outreach to outflank regulatory over- Viewing the entire period between 1995 and sight. Through corporate social responsibility pro- 2008, three distinct phases can be identified. Condi- grams, such as neighborhood meetings, companies tions worked in favor of public mobilization during can reach around governments to engage directly the late 1990s. The profile of the environment arising with communities and deflect attention away from from the United Nations Conference on Environment past environmental agreements by introducing new and Development in Rio in 1992, the election of a programs. progressive mayor, and most importantly, the an- Thus, environmentalists must be cautious about nouncement in 1995 of the planned privatization of apparent victories. Having public concerns recog- Vale increased the level of popular access to the po- nized and embedded in an environmental manage-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

111

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

ment plan is necessary but not sufficient for envi- theorists seeking to explain sustainability outcomes, ronmental sustainability. The management plan must the political opportunity approach encourages the be implemented. It is important to recognize that analyst to identify transformational moments, which planning and implementation are two distinct phases may open and close as a contentious environmental within a longer process. During negotiations over a episode unfolds. Sustainability outcomes are contin- management plan, some public concerns may be bar- gent and unpredictable but can be explained histori- gained away to obtain others, so that the sustain- cally with attention to political processes. This ap- ability potential is already compromised. There is proach may not add to the normative debate over the then a second protracted and informal “negotiation” meaning of environmental, economic, and social over implementation, with even more sustainability sustainability. However, it does remind us that what conditions left unmet due to foot dragging, interpre- happens in the real world is far more influenced by tation of conditions, and substantial disagreement immediate interests than by visions of what a sustain- over what is considered compliance. What was won able future could become. The focus on politics in- during the initial negotiations may be lost during vites particular attention to the social conditions un- implementation. der which sustainability is pursued and the uneven Sustainability requires ongoing oversight to distribution of power among the contending interests. guarantee compliance. If a local, state, or national For theorists of social sustainability, the Itabira case governmental authority takes this responsibility seri- suggests that the social pillar of sustainability is often ously, then compliance can be achieved based on missing in practice as well as in theory. state-company interactions in the standard regulatory Although EA tends to focus on technical and sci- mode. However, if government authorities waiver in entific aspects reflecting its original roots as a ra- their oversight for any reason, such as limited fund- tional planning tool, the inclusion of public partici- ing for monitoring staff or an election resulting in a pation has been a step toward the democratization of shift, oversight may falter. Still, public mobilization environmental planning. Institutionalizing continuous is also not a reliable alternative on its own, but is participation in the follow-up period would further episodic. A third possibility is legal enforcement expand social sustainability through persistent com- through lawsuits, but for this to be effective, man- munity oversight. Nevertheless, the creation of such agement plans must be legally binding and commu- multi-stakeholder units will have to be required as a nity organizations must have the resources to under- condition of project approval. Monitoring units must take risky and expensive litigation. Each of these be created while project approval is in doubt and avenues for enforcement might work in some cases project proponents are vulnerable to the possibility and fail in others. that their application will be turned down. Once a An alternative is for compliance to be enforced project is approved, the political moment passes. by an institutionalized mechanism that encourages Without participatory monitoring, the potential of EA sustainability by requiring state agencies and civil to support environmental sustainability will be com- society to work together. Many institutional arrange- promised. EA processes will continue to deliver out- ments can facilitate such engagement (Stewart, comes that fall short of the conditions anticipated in 2007). The institution most likely to succeed will be a environmental management plans in spite of the high participatory monitoring and management unit re- levels of contention, participation, and mobilization sponsible for overseeing the implementation of the that may have stimulated their creation. management plan. Such units would include public representatives with a direct link back to civil society organizations. This offers the greatest likelihood that Acknowledgement new civil society mobilizations can be initiated when The research and fieldwork upon which this article is based compliance begins to waiver for any reason. Such was partially supported by a Standard Research Grant from units would encourage continuous negotiation be- the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, which is gratefully acknowledged. tween the stakeholders while the threat of remobili- zation would be sufficient to lubricate the negotiation process (O’Faircheallaigh, 2010). Such follow-up References monitoring and management units would create a bridge from participatory environmental planning to Bäckstrand, K., Khan, J., Kronsell, A., & Lövbrand, E. 2010. The participatory environmental management. promise of new modes of environmental governance. In K. Bäckstrand, J. Khan, & A. Kronsell (Eds.), Environmental For sustainability theorists, the Itabira case Politics and Deliberative Democracy: Examining the Prom- demonstrates the efficacy of the political opportunity ise of New Modes of Governance. pp. 3–27. Northampton, approach. Integration of environmental, economic, MA: Edward Elgar. and social goals inevitably gives rise to conflict. For

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

112

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

Baker, J. 2004. A practical framework for EIA follow-up. In A. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Manage- Morrison-Saunders & J. Arts (Eds.), Assessing Impact: ment 8(3):259–280. Handbook of EIA and SEA Follow-Up. pp. 42–62. London: Gismondi, M. 1997. Sociology and environmental impact assess- Earthscan. ment. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens de Bartlett, R. 2005. Ecological reason in administration: environ- Sociologie 22(4):457–479. mental impact assessment and green politics. In R. Paehlke & Guimarães de Souza, M. 2007. Da Paciência à Resistência: Con- D. Torgerson (Eds.), Managing Leviathan: Environmental flitos entre Atores Sociais, Espaço Urbano, e Espaço de Min- Politics and the Administrative State, 2nd ed. pp. 47–58. Pe- eração [Patience of the Resistance: Conflicts between Social terborough, ON: Broadview Press. Actors, Urban Space, and Space Mining]. São Paulo: Beattie, R. 1995. Everything you already know about EIA (but Aderaldo & Rothschild. don’t often admit). Environmental Impact Assessment Review Hokkanen, P. 2001. EIA and decision making in search of each 15(2):109–114. other: the final disposal of nuclear waste in Finland. In T. Boudet, H. & Ortolano, L. 2010. A tale of two sitings: contentious Hilding-Rydevik (Ed.), EIA, Large Development Projects politics in liquefied natural gas facility siting in California. and Decision-Making in the Nordic Countries. pp. 95–151. Journal of Planning Education and Research 30(1):5–21. Stockholm: Nordregio. Caldwell, L. 1998. Implementing policy through procedure: impact Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). 2009. Minas assessment and the National Environmental Policy Act Gerais–Itabira. http://www.ibge.gov.br/municesportes/tabelas (NEPA). In A. Porter & J. Fittipaldi (Eds.), Environmental .php?codmun=3170&uf=31&descricao=Itabira. June 30, Methods Review: Retooling Impact Assessment for the New 2009 (in Portuguese). Century. pp. 8–14. Fargo, ND: International Association for Isaksson, K., Richardson, T., & Olsson, K. 2009. From consulta- Impact Assessment. tion to deliberation? Tracing deliberative norms in EIA Connelly, S. & Richardson, T. 2004. Exclusion: the necessary frameworks in Swedish roads planning. Environmental Im- difference between ideal and practical consensus. Journal of pact Assessment Review 29(5):295–304. Environmental Planning and Management 47(1):3–17. Littig, B. & Griessler, E. 2005. Social sustainability: a catchword Conselho Estadual de Política Ambiental (COPAM). 1996a. Refer- between political pragmatism and social theory. International ente à Licença de Operação Corretiva da Empresa Compan- Journal of Sustainable Development 8(1):65–79. hia Vale do Rio Doce Processo. [Reference to the Corrective Marshall, R., Arts, J., & Morrison-Saunders, A. 2005. International Operating License Process for the Company Vale of Rio principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assess- Doce ]. COPAM/N° 119/86/03/1996. FEAM. LO-Licenca de ment and Project Appraisal 23(3):175–181. Operacao. DNPM: 820.326/1971. DIMIM Pasta: 1–3;5. Belo McAdam, D. 1996. Political opportunities: conceptual origins, Horizonte, Brazil: State Environmental Foundation (in Portu- current problems, future directions. In D. McAdam, J. guese). McCarthy, & M. Zald (Eds.), Comparative Perspectives on Conselho Estadual de Política Ambiental (COPAM). 1996b. Ref- Social Movements. pp. 23–40. New York: Cambridge Uni- erente à Licença de Operação Corretiva da Empresa Com- versity Press. panhia Vale do Rio Doce Processo. [Reference to the Cor- McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. 2001. Dynamics of Conten- rective Operating License Process for the Company Vale of tion. New York: Cambridge University Press. Rio Doce ]. COPAM/N° 119/86/03/1996. Serviço Publico do Meyer, D. 2004. Protest and political opportunities. Annual Review Estado de Minas Gerais. CVRD/Mina Cauê-Cia Vale do Rio of Sociology 30:125–145. Doce. Itabira, MG. Minerio de Ferro/Extração e Beneficia- Meyer, D. & Minkoff, D. 2004. Conceptualizing political oppor- mento (00.11.00) Pasta velha: 3. Belo Horizonte, Brazil: tunity. Social Forces 82(4):1457–1492. State Environmental Foundation (in Portuguese). Morrison-Saunders, A. & Arts, J. 2004. Introduction to EIA Devlin, J. & Yap, N. 2008. Contentious politics in environmental follow-up. In A. Morrison-Saunders & J. Arts (Eds.), As- assessment: blocked projects and winning coalitions. Impact sessing Impact: Handbook of EIA and SEA Follow-Up. pp. Assessment and Project Appraisal 26(1):17–27. 1–21. London: Earthscan. Dietz, T. 1987. Theory and method in social impact analysis. Soci- Morrison-Saunders, A. & Fischer, T. 2006. What is wrong with ological Inquiry 57(12):54–69. EIA and SEA anyway? A sceptic’s perspective on sustain- Dietz, T. & Stern, P. 2008. Public Participation in Environmental ability assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Assessment and Decision Making. Washington, DC: National Policy and Management 8(12):19–39. Academies Press. Nadeem, O. & Hameed, R. 2010. Exploring the potential and con- Diduck, A., Sinclair, J., Pratap, D., & Hostetler, G. 2007. Achiev- straints to implementing the international best practice prin- ing meaningful public participation in the environmental as- ciples of EIA follow-up: the case of Pakistan. Journal of sessment of hydro development: case studies from Chamoli American Science 6(12):108–121. District, Uttarakhand, India. Impact Assessment and Project O’Faircheallaigh, C. 2010. Public participation and environmental Appraisal 25(3):219–231. impact assessment: purposes, implications, and lessons for Doelle, M. & Sinclair, A. 2006. Time for a new approach to public public policy making. Environmental Impact Assessment Re- participation in EA: promoting cooperation and consensus for view 30(1):19–27. sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review Petts, J. 1999. Public participation and environmental impact as- 26(2):185–205. sessment. In J. Petts (Ed.), Handbook of Environmental Im- Flyvbjerg, B. 2002. Bringing power to planning research: one pact Assessment. pp. 145–77. Malden, MA: Blackwell Sci- researcher’s praxis story. Journal of Planning Education and ence. Research 21(4):353–366. Piven, F. & Cloward, R. 1979. Poor People’s Movements: Why Flyvbjerg, B. 2004. Phronetic planning research: theoretical and They Succeed, How They Fail. New York: Vintage Books. methodological reflections. Planning Theory & Practice 5 Qadir, S. & Gorman, H. 2008. The use of ISO 14001 in India: (3):283–306. more than a certificate on the wall? Environmental Practice Fowler, H. & Dias de Aguiar, A. 1993. Environmental impact 10(2):53–65. assessment in Brazil. Environmental Impact Assessment Re- Rutherford, S. & Campbell, K. 2004. Time Well Spent? A Survey of view 13(3):169–176. Public Participation in Federal Environmental Assessment Gibson, R. 2006. Beyond the pillars: sustainability assessment as a Panels. Vancouver: West Coast Environmental Law Associ- framework for effective integration of social, economic and ation. ecological considerations in significant decision-making.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

113

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

Sharp, L. & Connelly, S. 2002. Theorising participation: pulling Taylor, M. 2007. Community participation in the real world: op- down the ladder. In Y. Rydin & A. Thornley (Eds.), Planning portunities and pitfalls in new governance spaces. Urban in the UK: Agenda for the New Millennium. pp. 33–63. Lon- Studies 44(2):297–317. don: Ashgate. Tilly, C. 1999. Conclusion: from interactions to outcomes in social Sinclair, A. & Doelle, M. 2003. Using law as a tool to ensure movements. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), meaningful public participation in environmental assessment. How Social Movements Matter. pp. 253–270. Minneapolis: Journal of Environmental Law and Practice 12(1):27–54. University of Minnesota Press. Souza e Silva, M. 2004. A Terceira Itabir: Os Espaços Politico, Weston, J. 2004. EIA in a risk society. Journal of Environmental Economico, Socioespacial e a Questão Ambiental [The Third Planning and Management 47(2):313–325. Itabir: The Political Landscape, Economic, Sociospatial and White, S. 1996. Depoliticising development: the uses and abuses of Environmental Issues]. São Paulo: Editora Hucitec (in Portu- participation. Development in Practice 6(1):6–15. guese). Wood, C. 2003. Environmental Impact Assessment: A Compara- Stewart, K. 2007. Write the rules and win: understanding citizen tive Review, 2nd ed. New York: Pearson Education. participation game dynamics. Public Administration Review Yap, N. 1990. Round the peg and square the hole: populists, tech- 67(6):1067–1076. nocrats and environmental assessment in Third World coun- Tarrow, S. 1994. Power in Movement: Collective Action, Social tries. Impact Assessment Bulletin 8(1–2):69–83. Movements and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Appendix: The 52 Conditions of the LOC (Corrective Operation License) (COPAM, 1996a)

1. Prepare a conclusive report on Itabira’s landfill and a feasibility study for solid-waste management. Due: six months after issuance of the LOC. 2. Implement oil- and grease-management systems throughout the Vale Mining Complex in Itabira. Due: six months. 3. Provide a solid waste treatment plant (ETE) for the Vale Mining Complex in Itabira. Due: six months. 4. Develop an executive project for solid-waste containment of oils and greases at the train terminals that leave Mina Cauê (Mine) and Conceição Mine. Due: six months. 5. Operate the solid waste treatment plant and the oil and grease systems to contain effluents as dictated by COPAM. Conduct monthly monitoring of the oil and grease systems and submit a report every four months. Due: monthly. 6. Develop an executive project for rehabilitation of Corrego Conceição (Conceição Stream) if it is deemed technically unviable. Provide other compensatory measures with reference to the Guidance Plan of Water Resources of Itabira. Due: three months. 7. Stabilize, rehabilitate, and fill in the sterile pile of the Cauê Mine. Due: 31 December 2001. 8. Develop an executive project for rehabilitation of the Piçarrao Mine. Due: three months. 9. Develop a contingency plan for emergency situations and a mitigation plan for catastrophic events, such as toxic waste spills, breakage of dams, and compromise of dykes. Due: preliminary dangers report due December 2000 and all contingency plans due by July 2001. 10. Prepare an annual photographic report of the Vale Mining Complex of Itabira. Due: first report due by 1 December 2000. 11. Formalize a licensing system to control Itabira’s falling water table. Due: studies are due in three months and the formalization of the licensing system is due in twelve months. 12. Implement all short-term proposals to remediate Itabira’s water-sourcing problems after presentation of all options. a. Optimize and enlarge the Tres Fontes water source and study the viability of extracting water from Areao. Due: six months. b. Improve the water-treatment plant of Pará and monitor the water that comes from the Companhia Vale do Rio Dolce (CVRD). Due: 24 months. c. Improve the surface-water system that relies on gravity from Pai Joao. Due: six months. d. Improve water filtering and chemical-treatment equipment. Due: 24 months. e. Use technical cooperation of CVRD and PMI partnership to find new and viable water sources. Due: 28 February 2001. f. Launch a massive campaign to increase awareness about water consumption and to decrease water wastage in Itabira. Due: 24 months. The medium-term and long-term actions on water in Itabira must be presented to FEAM by 28 February 2001 and an accord signed with PMI by 30 July 2000. 13. Maintain the Rio Peixe water level at a minimum of 100 liters per second in May to October during the whole period of validity of the LOC. Due: from 31 May 2000 onwards. 14. Install a water-flow system for Rio Peixe with approval of FEAM. Due: 6 months. 15. Develop a budget for water containment according to legislation. Due: 6 months. 16. Develop an inventory of point source air emissions in Vale operational areas as well as non-point sources (automobiles). Due: 1 month. 17. Prepare a report on meteorological data for the Municipality of Itabira using the suspended particle study. Due: 1 month. 18. Prepare a qualitative report on the chemical composition of suspended particles in Itabira air. Due: 1 month. 19. Undertake a study of suspended particles in the air through adequate mathematical modeling techniques and identify their sources. Due: 3 months. 20. Purchase and install equipment and software creating an Itabira air quality-monitoring network in several locations in accordance with the suspended particles study. Due: 12 months. 21. Install two data-collection stations (computer connected to the data acquisition-monitoring units). The data must go to the air quality-monitoring department of FEAM and to the same type of unit at PMI. Due: 12 months. 22. Maintain and operate all equipment for air-quality monitoring. Due: once the stations are installed.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

114

Devlin & Tubino: Environmental Assessment Follow-Up

Appendix: (cont.)

23. Propose a management plan to monitor an air-quality network that entails cooperation with PMI and FEAM to identify other sources of air pollution. Due: twelve months. 24. Prepare evaluation reports every six months based on air quality-management actions. Due: 8 months. 25. Sample air quality every six days from November to April and every three days from May to October and send the results to FEAM and CODEMA/PMI by weekly fax. Due: upon approval of the LOC. 26. Develop and present to FEAM and PMI a maintenance program for the operation of the automatic air-quality stations. Due: 3 months after installation of the automatic monitoring stations. 27. Present a radio-station plan to FEAM. Due: 6 months after installing the automatic air quality-monitoring stations. 28. Develop a contingency plan with PMI and FEAM for air-quality crises in Itabira. Due: six months after beginning operation of the automatic monitoring stations. 29. Develop retrospective and prospective epidemiological reports for the Municipality of Itabira to evaluate the impacts of air pollution on the local population. Due: six months. 30. Conduct a complimentary study of the flora and fauna of Itabira that includes an inventory and monitoring report of fauna. Highlight the most sensitive ecological areas of the Municipality (i.e., fauna refuge, nesting sites, rare species, threatened species, and endemic species). Due: immediately after submission of the Itabira Municipal Guidance Plan on Green Areas. 31. Prepare an analytical report of aquatic fauna focused on seasonal species. Due: three months—to be submitted to FEAM for monitoring of the species. 32. Present a report on the biotypes of plants in the Municipality and in proximity to the mines. Due: twelve months. 33. Develop a management plan for Pinus and Eucalyptus use and revegetation of the sterile piles with endemic, noninvasive species. Due: twelve months. 34. Develop a Green Areas Plan for Itabira with a chronology for physical and financial development and execution of the actions set forth in the Plan. Due: twelve months. 35. Develop a chronology for the establishment of the Itabira Green Belt after consensus has been reached with PMI and CODEMA in the areas of mines, railroad tracks and the city with respect to the final submission of the Conservation Units Final Report. Due: March 2002. 36. Develop a chronology for the construction of sports fields and parks. Due: seven sports fields and parks in 2000 and 2001 and the rest of the sports fields and parks due in 2002. The neighborhoods to receive a sports field or park are Bela Vista, Vila Amelia, Agua Santa, Fenix, Praia, Bela Camp, Vila Paciencia, Juca Batista, Nova Vista, Gabiroba, and Madre Maria de Jesus. Due: one month after the conceptual project is cleared by PMI. 37. Develop new alternatives for the environmental compensation units (conservation units) to include 2,500 hectares including “legal reserves” to be reforested by native species in conjunction with the Itabira Green Areas Plan and with consideration given to the 1,482 hectares that Vale plans to deforest through 2009. The proposal must have CODEMA approval. All proposals must include flora research and be integrated to the Guidance Plan of Water Resources of Itabira. Due: February 2001. 38. Present the proposed areas of a “legal reserve” (natural preservation unit) to FEAM. Due: six months. 39. Develop a chronology and follow through with the actions to rebuild Fazenda do Pontal. Due: 1 month. 40. Fencing off of all residential areas near train tracks. Due: one month. 41. Build pedestrian overpasses on all urban and residential train tracks in the neighborhoods of Vila Amelia, Bairro Praia, Bairro Sao Cristovão, and Laboriaux. Due: 6 months. 42. Reduce the number of train maneuvers at stops within the city in Vila Amelia, Bairro Sao Cristovão so as to limit interruptions of local traffic. Due: Permanently after concession of the LOC. 43. Inform CODEMA in advance when chemical products will be used to clean mining operations along the train tracks. Due: Permanently. 44. Conduct a feasibility study for the relocation of the train terminal for passengers going to Espiritu Santo. Due: two months. 45. Conduct an impact study of the expropriation of homes in the neighborhoods of Vila São Jose, Santana, Bela Vista and Camarinha. This study should include a program of mitigation and/or compensatory measures and identify affected families in an executive summary as discussed by the Dwelling Association of Itabira. Due: eight months. 46. Develop a Population Resettlement Plan as discussed by the community and the public administration as a preventative measure in light of future risk and obligatory expropriation of homes in the Itabira community with reference to the Urban Plan of Itabira. Due: no date set. 47. Prepare a report on tree buffers between the mining complex and the MG 129 highway that establishes a buffer of no less than one meter. Due: three months. 48. Prepare a report upon completion of repairs to homes that have infrastructure cracks due to the construction of the underpass of Caminho Novo. Due: three months. 49. Guarantee ongoing technical, political, and financial support to PEMSO and PEA of Itabiruçu. Due: July 2000 onwards. 50. Install the Social Communication Program (Multimedia Kiosk) and conduct periodic visits to the Itabiruçu Park. Due: three months. 51. Prepare a report that establishes partnership actions with the Industrial and Agribusiness Association of Itabira (ACITA). Due: three months. 52. Advise PMI on the Municipal Directive Plan of Itabira outlining obligatory studies for the development of the Plan to guarantee diversification of the Itabira local economy. Due: 31 December 2001 (for the Municipal Directive Plan of Itabira) and July 2001 onwards for the obligatory studies.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

115

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy http://sspp.proquest.com

BOOK REVIEW PERSPECTIVES

Understanding the Environment and Social Policy by Tony Fitzpatrick (Editor)

Policy Press, 2011, 384pp, ISBN: 1847423795

Karin Bradley the tired policies of mainstream society, and hence Department of Water and Environmental Studies, Linköping attempt to rethink current models and measurements University, Linköping SE-581 83 Sweden (email: of development and growth. In this respect, the au- [email protected]) thors bring up deep-rooted problems of Western civi- Understanding the Environment and Social Pol- lization, such as the linear notion of progress and icy deals with the intersection of environmental pol- Cartesian philosophy, as they simultaneously engage icy and social policy. Though often treated as two with current everyday politics and geopolitical real- different fields with different sets of literature, in ity. practice, they are deeply intertwined. The book is pri- What was lacking, however, was a more nuanced marily written from the perspective of how environ- discussion about politics and the political—a more mental challenges alter the field of social policy, but penetrating discussion about liberal democracy, cur- it also considers to some extent how environmental rent forms of political arrangements, and their capa- policy can be more attentive to the dimensions of bility (or lack thereof) to deal with environmental social sustainability. The volume develops a thorough concerns. In Chapter Four, Philip Catney & Timothy ecosocial perspective of ethics, policy, and planning. Doyle briefly mention such theorists as Robyn Its explicit aim is to help advance the emerging field Eckersley (2004) who argues that environmental re- of ecosocial policy making. The volume is part of a sponsibility and a “truly green state cannot be series of books oriented to students on the overall achieved within the frameworks of liberal democ- theme of “understanding welfare.” Despite a some- racy,” and that “new forms of democracy” need to be what unappealing title, this book is an important developed. However, this chapter does not explore work, not only for students, but also for politicians these new forms. This is a key question if one wants and practitioners. to advance ecosocial perspectives. How might current The book is an edited volume consisting of systems of democracy and governance be altered to chapters on environmental challenges and policy, better encompass environmental concerns, collective social challenges and policy, environmental ethics, identities, care for the commons, as well as distant environmental justice, health, urban planning, green environments and distant people? It would have been jobs, citizenship, and international development. fruitful to expand this discussion and engage with Tony Fitzpatrick, the editor of the book and author of current debates around the post-political condition three of its chapters, sets the overall tone. It is (Swyngedouw, 2007), that argues for going beyond primarily his contributions—using illustrative exam- contemporary consensus-seeking governance models ples and writing in a transparent, humorous and and explores meanings of “the political,” agonism, sometimes unexpected way—that engage the reader. and radical pluralist democracy (both within and be- Fitzpatrick is clear about the book’s political po- yond the state) (see Mouffe, 2005). sitioning, a stance that is often absent from course Catney & Doyle believe in state governance; literature that maintains an assumption of neutrality. however, they admit that until now no state can be He situates the work in the center-left and the mid- said to have effectively handled environmental con- green shades of politics. At the same time, the contri- cerns (i.e., there are no “green states”). They note the butors are careful to avoid being interpreted as tradition of environmental thinking that is skeptical alarmists or “unrealistic” ecologists. Rather they seek of the state and instead promote local governing. to position themselves as sound academics—well However, rather swiftly this strand of thought is dis- informed about global, social and environmental missed for being unable to cope with global ecologi- challenges and the necessities for action. The ana- cal problems. But what if Catney & Doyle had posed lyses, questions, and perspectives raised in the book the question differently: What are examples of socie- move beyond the well-known consensus politics and ties that have managed to govern their common re- sources in sustainable ways and have not contributed

 2012 Copyright held by author Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

116

Book Review Perspectives: Fitzpatrick, Understanding the Environment and Social Policy

to global ecological problems? This is the question of imagining and framing appealing ideas of the fu- put forth by Elinor Ostrom (1990). The answer is, ac- ture, not only for the already convinced, but for all. If cording to Ostrom’s extensive case studies, small we cannot portray and believe in a more desirable units of self-organized forms of governing, some- future, how can we think that people will vote and times nested in multiple layers. work toward it? The contributors to this volume are most likely This volume is vastly important and deserves to aware of this work, but do not mention it. Today we be read widely by students of social and environ- have global socioecological problems and states with mental policy (for whom it offers excellent insight), which we need to work, but nevertheless it is impor- and also by practitioners, politicians, and the general tant to consider if and how we can accommodate public. To make it attractive for the latter groups, a local and trans-local self-governance with state and shorter and less scholarly version of the book would transnational governance. It is also worth highlight- need to be produced. ing that the contemporary “commons movement” is engaged in self-organized forms of governing natural resources, production, agriculture, and energy pro- References duction, as well as the digital commons (see Hardt & Negri, 2009; Walljasper, 2010). These types of Berglund, M., Jakobsson, K., & Aleklett, K. Sveriges klimatutsläpp är större än regeringen säger [Sweden's levels movements, oriented toward self-organization and of green house gas emissions are higher than the government nonprofit-driven development, are likely to grow says]. Dagens Nyheter September 14 (in Swedish). stronger in the wake of economic crises, and perhaps Eckersley, R. 2004. The Green State: Rethinking Democracy and most particularly in the crumbling welfare states of Sovereignty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hardt, M. & Negri, A. 2009. Commonwealth. Cambridge, MA: southern Europe and the UK. Belknap Press. Perhaps it is in directions such as these that we Mouffe, C. 2005. On the Political. New York: Routledge. can look for new seeds of ecosocial governance. The Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of In- so-called best practices in the book are often drawn stitutions for Collective Action. New York: Cambridge Uni- versity Press. from the Scandinavian countries. Indeed, when it Swyngedouw, E. 2007. Impossible “sustainability” and the postpo- comes to environmental regulation and occupational litical condition. In R. Krueger & D. Gibbs (Eds.), The Sus- health policies, these nations have been progressive. tainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economy in However, they also have among the largest per capita the United States and Europe. pp. 13–40. New York: Guil- ford Press. ecological footprints and growing levels of con- Walljasper, J. 2010. All That We Share: A Field Guide to the sumption. In official statistics, Sweden reports that it Commons. New York: The New Press. reduced its greenhouse-gas emissions by 10% be- tween 1993 and 2005 and manages to rank highly on the Environmental Performance Index (see Chapter About the Author Three). However, recent research points out that the Karin Bradley is Assistant Professor of urban and regional country’s record is not nearly as good if one includes studies at KTH Royal Institute of Technology and Post- the embodied emissions of imported products doctoral Researcher in the Department of Water and Envi- ronmental Studies at Linköping University. Her research (Berglund et al. 2011). According to these latter cal- concerns sociocultural perspectives on sustainable devel- culations, the country has actually increased its emis- opment, environmental justice, and alternative futures. Her sions by 20% during this period. In this respect, the doctoral dissertation was entitled Just Environments: Po- Scandinavian countries cannot realistically be seen as liticising Sustainable Urban Development and her work has pioneering ecosocial development that takes into ac- appeared in Local Environment and International Planning count the well-being of global environments and Studies, as well as in several popular books and journals. populations. Other development paths are surely needed. However, the book not only portrays the Scandinavian welfare states as “the way” forward, it Henrike Rau also discusses alternative futures (e.g., downshifting, School of Political Science and Sociology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland (email: local exchange and trading systems, feminist forms [email protected]) of societal organization, and environmental citizen- ship). On these subjects, the contributors walk a fine Understanding the Environment and Social Pol- line between being optimistic—believing in a combi- icy critically examines current connections between nation of institutional solutions and grassroots initia- environmental and social policy and presents propos- tives—and being forthright about the difficulties of als for the future development of an ecosocial agenda current situations and development paths. that can address pressing sustainability problems. In The concluding chapter of the book is, in my this edited collection, Tony Fitzpatrick has assembled view, the strongest. Fitzpatrick shows the importance high-quality contributions from international scholars

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

117

Book Review Perspectives: Fitzpatrick, Understanding the Environment and Social Policy

with expertise in social policy, environmental policy, covers proposals that range from modest reforms and and sustainability. The first part of the book provides incremental changes in institutional setup to technol- an extensive overview of major theoretical debates ogical fixes and sweeping changes in the political around the ethics and politics of welfare and envi- system. Bottom-up and participatory initiatives such ronmental protection. It also identifies current ten- as local time banks, complementary currencies, and sions and gaps between these two policy areas, and community-centered economic development also explores opportunities for “greening” the welfare receive attention. state. The second part of the volume focuses on key The volume further points to tensions between policy arenas, such as transportation, planning, different social sectors that may or may not be irrec- health, employment, and international development oncilable. For example, the often adversarial relation- that represent important intersections between envi- ship that exists among environmentalists, government ronmental and social concerns. Case studies and syn- actors, and citizens in many countries can be at- opses of relevant policy research illustrate more gen- tributed to divergent views on how radical a change eral points made in each chapter. is needed to address the environmental crisis. As The main question that connects the different Fitzpatrick outlines in his introduction, “most envi- chapters is: How to respond to the ecological crisis in ronmentalists call for a rethink much deeper than equitable ways that protect society’s most vulnerable governments and electorates seem currently willing members? The book presents a wide variety of argu- to go.” Similarly, several chapters reveal that contact ments from greater integration of environmental and and collaboration between social policy actors and social policy to addressing pressing problems such as environmentalists has been the exception, at least poverty, pollution, and climate change. Fitzpatrick until recently, partly because of divergent positions argues that “we need to turn environmentalism and with regard to the (un)desirability of unlimited eco- social policy from distant acquaintances into firm nomic growth. However, the rise of environmental friends and it seems we need to do so with some ur- justice movements worldwide indicates emerging gency.” Research presented throughout the volume alliances between antipoverty and green campaign shows that “green” fiscal measures, such as fuel taxes groups that have hitherto remained separate. and pricing mechanisms linked to domestic resource The book also identifies major barriers to an eco- consumption, can disproportionately affect low- social transition. These obstacles include the hegem- income households. This highlights the need for envi- ony of a productivist, growth-oriented ethos, the ronmental and social policy makers to address im- overemphasis on paid employment as a source of portant ethical questions and to face uncomfortable material security and identity, and the very limited tradeoffs between tackling poverty and exclusion, on opportunities for meaningful public participation in the one hand, and preventing further environmental political decision making. It also shows that pro- degradation, on the other. nouncements calling for a complete reassessment of The need to challenge the fragmentation and the environmental and social effects of economic compartmentalization of policy making, which often growth (as well as related “limits to growth” argu- results in environmental and social problems being ments) remain on the margins of public debate, es- dealt with separately, represents a second key theme pecially during recessionary times. There is ample of this collection. This separation of goals has also evidence throughout the volume that economic re- characterized the nongovernmental sector. According covery and job creation will continue to be given to Fitzpatrick, “advocates of social justice and envi- priority over both ecological and social justice goals ronmental sustainability have all too often spoken for the foreseeable future. For example, recent drastic past one another and so blunted their influence on cuts in public spending in many developed countries policy makers.” Transportation-related examples have intensified the competition for scarce public re- used by Glenda Verrinder (Chapter Eight), Stephen sources, which equally affect both environmental and Wheeler (Chapter Nine), and Michael Cahill (Chapter social policy initiatives. This situation is a major ob- Ten) vividly illustrate the serious consequences for stacle to the transition to a “green” welfare state. society and the environment that arise from this lack A theme that some contributors touch on (which of integrated or comprehensive thinking. Importantly, a second edition of this book could develop further) these and other contributors to the book see as a key is the role of time in environmental and social policy. priority the establishment of an ecosocial policy “Greening” social policy clearly requires fundamen- agenda that addresses welfare and environmental tal time-related changes in the design, implementa- issues in a holistic way. tion, and evaluation of policy measures. Here, Does the current ecological crisis require a more Fitzpatrick observes that “social policy has to think radical transformation of current economic, political, more about the longer term. At present, governments and social structures and systems? The collection are at best concerned with the short to medium term.”

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

118

Book Review Perspectives: Fitzpatrick, Understanding the Environment and Social Policy

Much contemporary policy making adopts a view of mental policy for over two decades. It implies that time that leaves little or no room (and no time) for environmental concerns, social justice, and economic meaningful public participation and deliberation. development must be harmonized. In practice, how- More importantly, research presented in this volume ever, there are several contradictions and conflicts to reveals that short-term thinking remains a major deal with in the endeavor to achieve sustainable de- stumbling block to sustainability. There is a need to velopment. Likewise, as Fitzpatrick points out, the challenge the dominance of electoral cycles as major discourse of ecological modernization has “set the timeframes for policy making and implementation. agenda for discussions of public sector goods and Many debates presented in the book show clearly that services,” implying an emphasis on technological the “greening” of the welfare state requires a long- innovation and market-based policies to manage en- term approach to policy, although this is not always vironmental degradation. This discussion has ne- made explicit. glected social policy and the core idea of sustainable This book is an important and timely collection development. Understanding the Environment and that makes a very significant contribution to the sus- Social Policy provides a contribution to remedy this tainability debate in the social sciences. Importantly, indifference. it sets the agenda for future research in environmental The book convincingly demonstrates how envi- and social policy. Complex subjects are presented in ronmental policy and social policy are intertwined a clear and accessible way, with a good balance be- and elucidates various synergies and tradeoffs be- tween more theoretical material and relevant exam- tween the two. The editor and contributors present ples. The use of images, charts, and other visual aids different perspectives on environmental concerns, makes for a very engaging teaching text suitable for environmental ethics, and environmental justice; in- both undergraduate and graduate programs. The glos- troduce current debates on globalization and the role sary is another useful tool that many readers will of the state and governance; and discuss issues such appreciate. Importantly, the concise format will ap- as health, transportation, planning and care that peal to policy makers, practitioners, and advocates in evince how environmental policy and social policy community development, social policy, welfare pro- intersect in various ways. This overview of different vision, and environmental policy. A second edition perspectives and empirical areas provides a broad and could perhaps be extended to include a chapter on accessible introduction to some of the key issues in a methodological challenges in the socioenvironmental multifaceted policy field. One of the book’s strengths assessment of policy, and on recent trends in social is that it deals with a number of complex debates and scientific sustainability research toward inter- and policy areas in a clear and comprehensible way. transdisciplinarity, qualitative and quantitative sce- Understanding the Environment and Social Pol- nario building, and backcasting. icy aims to introduce a broad variety of issues and debates of relevance at the intersection of environ- mental and social policies. The intention is to high- About the Author light possibilities for sustainability without ignoring Henrike Rau is Lecturer in the School of Political Science the clash of interests and structural obstacles that of- and Sociology at the National University of Ireland, Gal- ten stand in its way. This commendable enterprise way. She has a background in sociology and psychology points to one of the questions social scientists have to and her current research focuses on sociocultural and po- litical aspects of consumption, especially with regard to deal with in environmental research. How shall we as (un)sustainable transport patterns. Dr. Rau currently leads a researchers approach the many difficulties and obsta- work program in ConsEnSus, a four-year research project cles that are inescapable in this area without giving on consumption, environment, and sustainability funded by ourselves up either to discouragement or to naïve the Environmental Protection Agency, Ireland utopian thought? (http://www.consensus.ie). The book avoids oversimplification of complex issues and the idea of easily gained so-called “win- win” solutions that appeal to many politicians. These Ylva Uggla points are particularly emphasized in the contribution Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, Örebro University, by Philip Catney & Timothy Doyle. At the same Örebro, SE-701 82 Sweden (email: [email protected]) time, Fitzpatrick’s concern and message is clear: en- The book Understanding the Environment and vironmental degradation and climate change must be Social Policy, edited by Tony Fitzpatrick, provides an addressed, and to do so he advocates “a politics based inclusive discussion of the interdependence between around the principle of sustainability.” The message environmental and social policies. Sustainable devel- is that actually we do not have a choice. To leave opment has been the dominant discourse of environ- something more than a guidebook for how to avoid catastrophe, we have to change direction. In this re-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

119

Book Review Perspectives: Fitzpatrick, Understanding the Environment and Social Policy

gard there is a tension in the volume. On one hand, the first chapter of the book entitled “The Environ- the soundness of diverging opinions and free debate mental Challenge” outlines the causes and conse- is acknowledged, resulting in the idea that sustaina- quences of climate change and discusses various mit- bility cannot be anything but a portal or “an entrance igation measures. This presentation is primarily based into a series of debates.” A free society needs to fos- on a linear model of science for policy, where scien- ter open discussion and we have to tolerate disagree- tists provide knowledge and politicians make deci- ment. On the other hand, the book stresses the need sions. In discussing environmental issues, not least for a new trajectory and calls for harmonization of the issue of climate change, science is also an im- the variety of voices in contemporary ecosocial pol- portant actor in policy making. As other scholars icy deliberations. have pointed out, climate policy and regulation are With reference to the chapter by John Hannigan, inseparable from atmospheric science (van der Sluijs Fitzpatrick argues that social scientists’ use of a so- et al. 1998; Miller & Edwards, 2001; Weart, 2011). cial constructionist perspective acts as a “veil to bind In this fusion of science and policy, the Intergovern- our eyes.” It is not difficult to agree with the intent of mental Panel on Climate Change functions as a cen- this observation. However, I challenge the view of ter of authority that must uphold its credibility in the social construction on which it is based. For example, eyes of both the scientific and political communities. Hannigan states that “according to the constructionist The book does not give much attention to this more perspective, social understanding, knowledge and complex role of science in environmental policy. perception of both nature and environmental risk is Given the breadth of debates and perspective pre- inherently subjective.” However, the concept of so- sented, it would have been reasonable to discuss in cial construction is based on the idea that human un- further detail the role of science and the interdepend- derstanding, knowledge, and perception always arise ence between science and policy. in social contexts. Thereby, the idea of “inherently In sum, this book is worthwhile for readers subjective” understandings and perceptions is mis- looking to better understand the intersection of envi- leading. This is, however, not the same as saying that ronmental and social policies. Understanding the environmental problems do not exist or that we can- Environment and Social Policy presents a broad va- not know anything about them. Instead, the social riety of relevant issues in a clear and thought- constructionist perspective can help us analyze the provoking way, and thereby stimulates further useful variety of ideas and opinions that we find in the sus- discussion. tainability debate. It could shed light on and help us to come to terms with some of the difficulties and obstacles that we face in discussing sustainable de- References velopment. While Understanding the Environment and So- Miller, C. & P. Edwards (Eds.). 2001. Changing the Atmosphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. cial Policy provides a comprehensive introduction to van der Sluijs, J., van Eijendhoven, J., Shackley, S., & Wynne, B. relevant debates (one of its explicit purposes) overall, 1998. Anchoring devices in science for policy: the case of the reader is left without tools to assess how and why consensus around climate sensitivity. Social Studies of Sci- various actors come to adopt different conclusions ence 28(2):291–323. Weart, S. 2011. The development of the concept of dangerous and standpoints. For example, how can we under- anthropogenic climate change. In J. Dryzek, R. Norgaard, & stand that there are different primary explanations for D. Schlosberg (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Climate the “environmental disturbance” and different envi- Change and Society. pp. 77–81. New York: Oxford Univer- ronmental ethics? And how can we decide which di- sity Press. rection is preferable? As mentioned above, the chap-

ter by Hannigan discusses social constructions and About the Author policy processes and presents the concepts of dis-

course, frame and framing, and story lines. This theo- Ylva Uggla is Associate Professor of Sociology at the retical perspective is described, but its potential to Centre for Urban and Regional Studies (CUReS) at Örebro contribute to understanding certain policy debates University. Her research encompasses multilevel govern- and controversies is never put to work in other parts ance, environmental politics and regulation, and urban of the book. Further elaboration of this and other planning. Recent projects concern climate change adapta- theoretical concepts would have enabled readers to tion in local politics and planning and the negotiation of draw some general conclusions that pulled together urban nature in planning processes and city marketing. prior contributions in the book. Fitzgerald and his contributors stress the need to take environmental issues seriously, not least the challenges posed by global warming. For instance,

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

120

Book Review Perspectives: Fitzpatrick, Understanding the Environment and Social Policy

Rejoinder from the author hundreds of millions are being squeezed (and their Tony Fitzpatrick patience is being tested), and where the old problems School of Sociology & Social Policy, Nottingham University, of global poverty remain, both remarkable opportu- University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK (email: nities and troubling dangers surround us. Of course, [email protected]) neoliberal globalization is multifaceted. It did not win First, I am deeply grateful to Karin Bradley, its victories to the same extent, in the same way, and Henrike Rau, and Ylva Uggla for the time they took in every place. Local cultures, institutions, and prac- to read and comment upon Understanding the Envi- tices matter. Nor, then, will it be resisted to the same ronment and Social Policy. I am appreciative of their extent in the same way, and in every place. If we are view that I and the contributors have helped to de- to develop a post-neoliberal settlement, then different velop a much needed debate. battles must be fought in different corners of the The debate has been ongoing for several dec- globe. Yet, across diverse national borders and cul- ades now, especially in the field of development tural horizons, there is also a common recognition studies. The task of thinking through the likely im- among those straining for the birth of the new. If we pact of climate change for social policies, and the are to roll back the boundaries of the free market— implications of social policy and existing welfare with its ethic of short-term self interest and profit— systems for environmental policy more generally, is a then some degree of concerted action is required. daunting one. Thankfully, various economists, phil- My own country, the UK, is one in which op- osophers, social scientists, and, of course, politicians posing forces, and opposing movements, are crystal- and activists have been nibbling around the edges lizing. On one hand, many believe that three decades since the 1970s. For the most part, however, and in of neoliberal globalization have brought us to the most countries (the UK included), that body of work edge of ruin. These are not just the “usual suspects.” has failed to break into the hallowed halls through They are many who welcomed the housing and con- which policy makers and commentators pace. Some sumer booms of hypercapitalism, but who now rec- of the debate has been focused on social policy di- ognize they were enjoying a few leftover scraps from rectly and some of it has been more tangential; some a party which, closed to all but the super-rich and the of it has been highly technical, though much has been political class, was going on elsewhere. Even some deeply prescriptive and even utopian. This has added on the Right have added their voices to this disaf- to the sense, shared by many of us who teach and fected chorus. Nonetheless, orthodox, there-is-no- research this subject, that “social policy” is a slippery alternative thinking still holds sway and forces that term. Beyond the core concerns of “social admin- exist in a permanent 1980s time warp have been istration,” social policy issues frequently occupy a massing. “Yes,” we are told, “global capitalism has ghostly, liminal space, hovering around a diverse shipwrecked but that is bound to happen occasion- series of disciplines and morphing into a variety of ally. Socialism is still dead. So even if free markets forms. have failed, the solution can only be more free mar- My objective when designing the book was kets.” The UK welfare state is now under assault to a therefore an ambitious one. On top of the fact that the degree never attempted even by Margaret Thatcher. “Understanding Welfare” series is primarily designed This is where the comments offered by Bradley, for students and others new to social policy, I wanted Rau, and Uggla are most relevant and potent so far as to portray the extent to which these issues are some- Understanding the Environment and Social Policy is how simultaneously old and well-established, yet also concerned. The book does not deal sufficiently with new and cutting-edge, for policy makers but also for the nature of political action and social change. Let many lecturers, researchers, and practitioners. I also me offer some background, first of all. As every edi- wanted to capture the “core” administrative issues tor throughout history will tell you, even with the traditional to social policy, and which speak to its best will in the world, people do not always deliver. practical, problem-solving concerns, while opening Academics are usually very nice people who say them up and highlighting the extent to which the “yes” far too often, but, as deadlines, commitments, ground has been shifting, demanding new agendas and real life pile up, this sometimes turns into a long, and revived, idealistic energies. If these ambitions lingering “sorry.” The book was originally going to were at least partly fulfilled, then it is due to the ef- have two additional chapters, one of which would forts of the book’s contributors and let me thank have dealt with political and social movements. them—not for the first time! Never mind; we are where we are. So where do we go from here? Other than getting Karin Bradley confronts this issue of the political out of bed every day and starting again, frankly I do head on, highlighting the extent to which our very not know. In a world where repeated financial crises idea of politics—let alone specific political institu- have become almost normal, where the incomes of tions—may need revising. I could not agree more.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

121

Book Review Perspectives: Fitzpatrick, Understanding the Environment and Social Policy

That said, the chapter by Philip Catney & Tim Doyle Hannigan’s chapter captures the essentials very well. does provide part of the solution. Although Elinor No one new to such debates could doubt his central Ostrom is obviously not guilty of this—and we had point that understanding, knowledge, and perception planned to discuss her and the “commons movement” always arise in social contexts. Uggla also observes in one of the two missing chapters—some within the that the book should have offered more of a con- green movement have been guilty of wishful thinking sistent review of the importance of social context— when it comes to collective action problems. You can consistent not necessarily in terms of the conclusions be highly critical of particular states and govern- reached but of the tools and concepts deployed. ments, you can even demand that “the state” bugger Perhaps. It might indeed have been possible to off, but this requires even more attention than before design an overarching theoretical framework, for to possible collective action solutions. A local meet- instance, between “thin” and “thick” versions of so- ing will enable us to irrigate a field, but what is ap- cial constructionism and ask all contributors to speak propriate on a global and regional scale? Philip and to it. Indeed, such a contrast is implicit within my Tim wanted to offer a corrective to those who would comment in the book’s introduction: wish such questions away and to suggest that alter- native ways of thinking and organizing are most ad- [S]ocial scientists are fond of using the term vanced in the global South. “social construct” to underline the extent to In terms of my own chapter, “The Challenge for which “facts” are, to whatever extent, as- Social Policy,” I am also aware that the best per- semblages of social categories, discourses, forming countries, on the various environmental interpretative frames, paradigms and under- league tables that have been devised, still fall far standings…Yet nor should we use a con- short of where we would wish them, and everyone structionist veil to bind our eyes. else, to be. I hint as much (on page 72), and if I did not make enough of this point it is because my desire As Uggla seems to acknowledge, this was not to be upbeat got the better of me. This hardly ever meant to suggest that, because there are antirealist happens and so when it does I run with the impulse! forms of social constructionism (to which I object), Henrike Rau draws attention to the role of time all forms of social constructionism are thereby con- and its political significance within the policy- demned. This point is, however, separate from the making process. Again, I could not agree more and question of whether all of the chapters should have have written on this theme elsewhere (e.g., utilized a similar conceptual apparatus. Fitzpatrick, 2004a; 2004b; and see the chapter by This may be where we just have to disagree. Adrian Little in Fitzpatrick & Cahill, 2002). At the There is plenty of work within the sociology of the moment, when UK politicians think about time it is environment that speaks to the issue that Uggla very much along the lines of “we are living longer raises, and offers a “tighter” overview of such de- therefore we are going to have to work longer,” and bates. But when designing the book—given the limi- the state retirement age is ratcheted up as a result. nal nature of social policy and the near silence of Many new university students will not retire until the what I have sometimes called an “ecosocial welfare” 2060s (if they are lucky!). Unfortunately, few politi- agenda—it seemed more important to establish that cians pay much attention to the “we” who are living there is a conversation rather than to get people to longer or to the “we” who will be forced, directly or sign up to it using the same set of tools or theoretical indirectly, to work longer years. This is in large part framework. Yes, social policy researchers should because they wish to avoid a mature conversation question the means by which something is or is not about the many possible ways in which “life” and recognized as a social problem, both within the “work” can relate to one another. policy-making process and elsewhere, as well as the Finally, Ylva Uggla identifies a tension between links between science and policy. Nonetheless, the intellectual openness that the book embraces and within the social policy community, specific concepts its demand for a “new trajectory.” There is indeed such as discourse, repertoires, narratives, framing, some strain here but I hope it is a creative one. It is and storylines will mean much more to some than to the difference between a group of people who all others, especially since underpinning them are some want to travel to a similar destination, but who disa- heavy questions about causation, epistemological and gree largely about the mode and rapidity of travel, ontological relativism, the relationships between the and another group who disagree fundamentally about cultural and the material—well, the list goes on. For where we should be going and why. The book’s ten- some, social policy is a kind of applied sociology— sion aspires to the first kind rather than the second. the term “sociology of policy” has become prominent Furthermore, on the issue Uggla raises regarding recently—but others come at it from other directions, social constructs, it seems to me that John with alternative vocabularies.

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

122

Book Review Perspectives: Fitzpatrick, Understanding the Environment and Social Policy

In short, the book is indeed conceptually and ther progress must come from those with a similar methodologically “looser” than Uggla might have impulse. The commentators have each suggested ad- wished. Yet, it is also trying to kick-start a conversa- ditions for a second edition and, should this ever tion accented around social policy issues. Hopefully, happen, I will try to accommodate those ideas and in time, that conversation will devolve into particular remember to thank them accordingly. dialogues: sociology, political science, philosophy, social work, economics, law, and so forth. Out of these dialogues some grand synthesis may then References emerge, but I would not want to prescribe at this stage what inflection it must possess. Fitzpatrick, T. 2004a. Time, social justice and UK social policies. Economy and Society 33(3):335–358. Social policy scholars and researchers face a per- Fitzpatrick, T. 2004b. Time and social policy. Time and Society ennial dilemma. If they try wandering the corridors of 13(2–3):197–219. power, begging the privilege of occasionally being Fitzpatrick, T. & M. Cahill (Eds.). 2002. Environment and Wel- able to whisper the conclusions of their research into fare. New York: Palgrave. the ears of policy makers, then they risk recreating

the world as it is. Business-as-usual politics threatens About the Author to crush imaginative and idealistic passions, which we need more urgently than ever. But, if we drift too Tony Fitzpatrick is Reader at the University of Nottingham, far away from the world “as it is,” preferring to wan- UK. He is coeditor of the journal Policy & Politics and was der the visionary landscapes of a better society, then principal editor of the three-volume International Encyclo- we may render ourselves impotent in another way. paedia of Social Policy (Routledge, 2006). In addition to Throughout my work, I have tried to defend a Understanding the Environment and Social Policy (Policy radical pragmatism—akin to the more commonly Press, 2011), his other recent books include Voyage to Uto- used term “real utopias”—knowing that this risks pias (Policy Press, 2010) and the second edition of Welfare upsetting radical purists on one side and hard-headed Theory (Palgrave, 2011). pragmatists on the other. Understanding the Envi- ronment and Social Policy was designed with the same objective in mind and I am grateful to Bradley, Rau, and Uggla for approaching it in this spirit. Fur-

Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy | http://sspp.proquest.com Winter 2012 | Volume 8 | Issue 1

123