This provides one of the differing perspectives requested by a Wikipedia reviewer
Okumaya devam et...
← Previous revision | Revision as of 03:10, 7 May 2024 |
| Line 4: | Line 4: |
| == Net positive sustainability == | == Net positive sustainability == |
| According to PD, the original precepts of [[sustainability]] (nature preservation and equity among current/future generations)<ref name=":4">These principles are common to most early definitions of sustainability and were endorsed at a national level as early as 1969 in the preamble to the [[National Environmental Policy Act]] (NEPA) in the United States. Among the first international documents to define sustainability was the IUCN/UNEP/WWF (1980) ''World Conservation Strategy'', re-published in 1991 as ''Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living'', The World Conservation Union, United Nations Environment Program and World Wide Fund for Nature, Earthscan, London, UK. Here it meant improving life quality within the earth’s ecological carrying capacity. See also COAG (1992) The National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (NSESD), Council of Australian Governments, Canberra, Australia. For historical context, see Commoner, B. (1971) ''The Closing Circle: Nature, Man And Technology'', Knopf, New York and Porritt, J. (1985) ''Seeing Green: The Politics of Ecology Explained'', Blackwell Publishers, UK.</ref> require increasing future options.<ref name=":5">Social options do not mean more consumer products but rather substantive and positive life choices which requires increasing the ecological base and public estate.</ref> This, in turn, requires that development increase the social and natural life support systems.<ref name=":6">The idea that sustainability requires maintaining or increasing future option was discussed in Birkeland, J. (1993) ''Planning for a Sustainable Society: Institutional Reform and Social Transformation'', University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania. See also Norton, B.G. (2005) ''Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management'', University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois for a comprehensive discussion on this point.</ref> [[Green design]] always aimed for [[ecological restoration]], [[Community development|social regeneration]] and economic revitalization.<ref name=":7">For a typology of green building design, see Birkeland, J. (2013) ‘Business Opportunities through Positive Development’, in ''A New Dynamic: Effective Business in a Circular Economy'', in K. Webster, J. Bleriot, and C. Johnston (Eds), Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing, Isle of Wight, UK, pp. 87-110.</ref> However, these essentially only ‘add value’ relative to ''current'' sites, buildings or practices.<ref name=":8">For a discussion of contemporary sustainable building design approaches, see Hes, D. and du Plessus, D. (2015) ''Designing for Hope: Pathways to Regenerative Sustainability'', Taylor & Francis, New York. USA.</ref> Buildings are considered 'sustainable' if they are better than before. They do not yet aim to increase nature, environmental security or justice in absolute (global) terms.<ref name=":14" /> Positive development is defined as structures that increase universal life quality and future options by expanding the ‘ecological base’ ([[Ecosystem|ecosystems]], [[Carrying capacity|ecological carrying capacity]], [[biodiversity]]) and the ‘public estate’ (universal access to means of survival/well-being and [[social capital]]).<ref name=":9">Birkeland, J. (2007) ‘GEN 4: ‘Positive Development’, ''BEDP (Built Environment Design Professions) Environmental Design Guide of the Australian Institute of Architects'', ACT, Australia. http://www.environmentdesignguide.com.au/ Assessed June 2008.</ref> Sustainable design does not yet aim to increase overall natural and social life support systems and generally limits its focus to the health and environmental quality within the project's system boundaries. | According to PD, the original precepts of [[sustainability]] (nature preservation and equity among current/future generations)<ref name=":4">These principles are common to most early definitions of sustainability and were endorsed at a national level as early as 1969 in the preamble to the [[National Environmental Policy Act]] (NEPA) in the United States. Among the first international documents to define sustainability was the IUCN/UNEP/WWF (1980) ''World Conservation Strategy'', re-published in 1991 as ''Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living'', The World Conservation Union, United Nations Environment Program and World Wide Fund for Nature, Earthscan, London, UK. Here it meant improving life quality within the earth’s ecological carrying capacity. See also COAG (1992) The National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development (NSESD), Council of Australian Governments, Canberra, Australia. For historical context, see Commoner, B. (1971) ''The Closing Circle: Nature, Man And Technology'', Knopf, New York and Porritt, J. (1985) ''Seeing Green: The Politics of Ecology Explained'', Blackwell Publishers, UK.</ref> require increasing future options.<ref name=":5">Social options do not mean more consumer products but rather substantive and positive life choices which requires increasing the ecological base and public estate.</ref> This, in turn, requires that development increase the social and natural life support systems.<ref name=":6">The idea that sustainability requires maintaining or increasing future option was discussed in Birkeland, J. (1993) ''Planning for a Sustainable Society: Institutional Reform and Social Transformation'', University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania. See also Norton, B.G. (2005) ''Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management'', University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois for a comprehensive discussion on this point.</ref> [[Green design]] always aimed for [[ecological restoration]], [[Community development|social regeneration]] and economic revitalization.<ref name=":7">For a typology of green building design, see Birkeland, J. (2013) ‘Business Opportunities through Positive Development’, in ''A New Dynamic: Effective Business in a Circular Economy'', in K. Webster, J. Bleriot, and C. Johnston (Eds), Ellen MacArthur Foundation Publishing, Isle of Wight, UK, pp. 87-110.</ref> However, these essentially only ‘add value’ relative to ''current'' sites, buildings or practices.<ref name=":8">For a discussion of contemporary sustainable building design approaches, see Hes, D. and du Plessus, D. (2015) ''Designing for Hope: Pathways to Regenerative Sustainability'', Taylor & Francis, New York. USA.</ref> Green buildings are generally assessed as 'sustainable' if they improve upon best practices. They do not yet aim to increase nature, environmental security or justice in absolute (global) terms.<ref name=":14" /> Positive Development, in contrast, is defined as structures that increase universal life quality and future options by expanding the ‘ecological base’ ([[Ecosystem|ecosystems]], [[Carrying capacity|ecological carrying capacity]], [[biodiversity]]) and the ‘public estate’ (universal access to means of survival/well-being and [[social capital]]).<ref name=":9">Birkeland, J. (2007) ‘GEN 4: ‘Positive Development’, ''BEDP (Built Environment Design Professions) Environmental Design Guide of the Australian Institute of Architects'', ACT, Australia. http://www.environmentdesignguide.com.au/ Assessed June 2008.</ref> Sustainable design does not yet aim to increase overall natural and social life support systems and generally limits its focus to the health and environmental quality within the project's system boundaries. The mainstream perspective is probably because it is assumed that this is not possible. To address this, a PD [http://netpositivedesign.org website] provides examples of how the built environment can address 30 crucial sustainability issues. |
| == Terminology == | == Terminology == |
Okumaya devam et...