Three pillar model (sustainability)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Various models of sustainability (three-pillar model and priority model)

The three-pillar model of sustainable development (often also the “three-pillar principle of sustainable development” or “three-pillar concept of sustainable development”) is based on the idea that sustainable development can only be achieved through simultaneous and equal implementation environmental, economic and social goals can be achieved. Only in this way can the ecological, economic and social performance of a society be ensured and improved. The three aspects are mutually dependent.

definition

Following the Brundtland report of the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, the German Bundestag's Enquete Commission "Protection of Man and the Environment" describes sustainability as the concept of a sustainable development of the economic, ecological and social dimensions of human existence. These three areas (“areas”, the Brundtland report does not use the metaphor of the pillar) of sustainability interact with one another and require balanced coordination in the long term.

These three dimensions of sustainability essentially mean:

  • Ecological sustainability : It is based most strongly on the original idea of ​​not overexploiting nature. Ecologically sustainable would be a way of life that only demands the natural foundations of life to the extent that they regenerate.
  • Economic sustainability : A society should not live beyond its means economically, as this would inevitably lead to losses for future generations. In general, an economy is considered sustainable if it can be operated permanently.
  • Social sustainability : A state or a society should be organized in such a way that social tensions are kept within limits and conflicts do not escalate, but can be resolved in a peaceful and civil manner.

Creation of the three-pillar model

The exact origin of the three-pillar model cannot be precisely identified. The Oldenburg professor Bernd Heins claims the authorship of the model from 1994. On the other hand, a comparable understanding of sustainability is proven in 1994 in the international debate; the above-mentioned study commission of the German Bundestag describes a comparable integrative understanding of sustainability for the report of the Brundtland commission.

The three-pillar model or the magic triangle of sustainability was introduced by the Association of the Chemical Industry (VCI) into the discussion of the above-mentioned study commission. As early as 1996 this demanded that “economic, ecological and social aspects should be given equal priority. So we don't see sustainable development as a one-sided ecological concept, but as a holistic future concept. Because each of these three areas contributes to making long-term and sustainable development possible. "

The VCI specified its model in the 1997 study, Building Blocks for a Sustainable Germany. This study was the counter-study of the famous study Sustainable Germany. A contribution to a globally sustainable development of the Wuppertal Institute and was based on a concept of weak sustainable development.

The three-pillar model then found wide public acceptance through the final report of the Enquete Commission “Protection of people and the environment”, which was already cited above in 1998. It was attractive to the Commission because it enabled a picture of sustainable development based on the criterion of feasibility.

The Advisory Council for Environmental Issues (SRU) stated in its 2008 report that the three-pillar concept has gained international acceptance and that the former “restrictive understanding of environmental policy” has given way to an integrated and synergistic understanding.

Use and effect

From 1998 onwards, the three-pillar model of sustainable development was widely used. Internationally, the emphasis was placed more on the development problem, for example in the final declaration of the World Summit in Johannesburg in 2002 :

“ Thirty years ago, in Stockholm, we agreed on the urgent need to respond to the problem of environmental deterioration. Ten years ago, at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro, we agreed that the protection of the environment, and social and economic development are fundamental to sustainable development, based on the Rio Principles. To achieve such development, we adopted the global program, Agenda 21, and the Rio Declaration, to which we reaffirm our commitment. The Rio Summit was a significant milestone that set a new agenda for sustainable development. "

- Johannesburg Declaration 2002

The three pillars of sustainable development are often expanded to include a fourth - that of the political implementation level. In German politics, the educational perspective is particularly emphasized. A Bundestag motion from all parties underlines the priority of education in this context.

The three-pillar model was “style-forming” for the discourse on sustainable development. It required the ecological, economic and social actors to accept each other's interests. As a result, the focus of the sustainability discourse was directed “on the institutional innovations linked to the sustainability debate, on the importance of consensus-oriented, dialog-based participatory processes for the specification and implementation of the model of sustainable development.” Thus, its development also contributed to an “appreciation of environmental issues” it determines their equality in relation to economic and social issues.

Criticism of the three-pillar model

Operational feasibility

The three-pillar model is controversial in the professional world. Above all, critics complain that it is difficult to operationalize and that hardly any practical consequences can be derived from it. The study commission of the German Bundestag has not determined whether the model of sustainable development will continue to primarily serve the preservation of natural capital or whether these long-term goals are always linked to actually feasible short-term goals in order to preserve the current development model.

The Advisory Council for Environmental Issues (SRU) denied the orientation function of the three-pillar model in its 2002 report because it degenerated into a three-column wish list in which every actor could enter his or her concerns. However, this leads to a “hypercomplexity that overwhelms the political system based on the division of labor”.

Unclear weighting in the objective: strong and weak sustainability

From the point of view of many critics, the model describes economic, ecological and social sustainability as being on an equal footing; in fact, on the other hand, the goal of ecological sustainability must have priority, since the protection of natural living conditions is the basic requirement for economic and social stability.

The scientific discussion about sustainability distinguishes between “weak” and “strong” sustainability . “Weak sustainability” describes the idea that ecological, economic and social resources can be balanced against each other. In the context of weak sustainability, for example, it would be acceptable for natural resources and thus natural capital to be exhausted if the appropriate amounts of human or physical capital were created for this purpose . Economy and ecology are of equal importance here.

Strong sustainability means that natural capital is only very limited or cannot be replaced by human or physical capital. This approach corresponds z. B. the environmental space concept, the well-known ecological footprint or the “guard rail model”. According to him, the ecological parameters that ensure stable living conditions on earth in the long term form a development corridor that must be observed. Only within this corridor is there scope for the implementation of economic and social goals.

From the point of view of critics, the three-pillar model of weak sustainable development speaks for itself. The Council of Economic Experts criticizes the fact that the three-pillar model calls for the mutual integration of economic, ecological and social issues. It thus contradicts the so-called cross-sectional principle of environmental policy , which was also anchored in the Amsterdam Treaty and which initially called for the integration of environmental concerns into all policy areas.

In 2002, the SRU therefore recommended abandoning the three-pillar model and instead using the "more manageable" principle of integrating environmental concerns. This takes into account the fact that in environmental protection there is the greatest pent-up demand compared to the implementation of economic and social goals and with regard to the long-term stabilization of the ecological basis there are the greatest deficits.

The SRU also criticized the fact that the isolated application of the concept of sustainability to the sub-areas of ecology, economy and social issues aroused the idea that ecological, economic and social sustainability could be achieved independently of one another and thus undermine the integrative function of the sustainability idea (cf. SRU 1994, Item 19).

Missing global dimension

As part of a study by the Karlsruhe Research Center , the study commission's concept was supplemented:

“In contrast to the operationalization approach of the Enquete Commission, which was limited to Germany from the start, the HGF project initially tries to formulate minimum requirements for sustainable development that are independent of the national context. Since these minimum conditions should be globalizable, they must consistently take into account both objectives of the model, i.e. both the preservation and development perspectives "

Basic criticism of the sustainability discourse

In general, sustainability is about aligning human action more closely not only with intergenerational justice, but also with global justice. In view of this orientation, whether it is really appropriate to speak of “three pillars” (and whether essential parts of the “economic” and “social” side have nothing to do with sustainability) is not the only point of contention. The current debate is also accused of ignoring the background question of why future generations and people in other parts of the world should receive more attention.

Persistent base

Despite the frequent criticism of the three-pillar model, no other model has so far been able to establish itself. In almost all definitions of sustainable development, the three pillars as well as inter- and intra-generational justice are the greatest common denominator. Many important implementations are also aimed at the three pillars, for example the world community with point I.2 of the Johannesburg implementation plan ( World Summit for Sustainable Development ) or the European Community in Art. 1 of the EC Treaty ( Treaty establishing the European Community ). It can therefore be stated that the three pillars still represent an important starting point for many sustainability discussions, as they are pragmatic and find great consensus as a magical set of goals for sustainable development. According to the Johannesburg Conference ( World Summit for Sustainable Development ), the goals should always be pillars that are independent but mutually support one another (“interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars”).

Further development

Integrated sustainability approach

The three-pillar model was further developed by the Karlsruhe Research Center as part of a large study. Central here is the expansion of the institutional dimension, the operationalization, cross-dimensional sustainability goals such as "safeguarding human existence", "preserving societal productive potential" and "preserving development and action opportunities", as well as the integration of intra- and intergenerational aspects of Justice:

“The starting point is not the limited perspective of the individual dimensions, but - in an integrating perspective - three general, cross-dimensional sustainability goals are projected onto the dimensions and conveyed with the 'intrinsic logic' of the individual dimensions - embodied in various discourses. The result are operationalizations of the general goals with regard to sustainability-relevant constitutive elements of the individual dimensions in the form of "rules". The general sustainability goals in detail are “securing human existence”, “maintaining societal productive potential” and “preserving opportunities for development and action”. They represent both fundamental normative principles of justice of sustainability in the preservation or development dimension as well as their most general analytical-functional premises. Intra- and intergenerational aspects of justice are seen in this context as equal and from an anthropocentric perspective ”.

Integrating representation

The integrating sustainability triangle allows the three dimensions of ecology, economy and social affairs to be continuously merged.

If the three-pillar model is retained, however, it must be adapted to the requirements of an integrated representation. Here, the adoption of a triangular diagram that is widely used in technical and scientific areas is recommended . The diagram, also known as Gibbs triangle, depicts a mixture of three components (x + y + z = 100%). In this sense, we must bid farewell to the idea of ​​three isolated pillars. Instead, the pillars are to be understood as dimensions to which sustainability aspects can be continuously assigned. For example, eco-efficiency as an economic-ecological concept affects two dimensions equally (50% economy + 50% ecology), while biodiversity is primarily to be viewed as an ecologically dominated topic (approx. 100% ecology). The central field stands for a position with three explanatory contributions, about the same size. All possible combinations can be represented in the integrating sustainability triangle.

This integrating method of presentation enables a much more differentiated analysis, more targeted integration of other concepts (e.g. eco-efficiency) and at the same time a synoptic compilation. Compared to earlier approaches for a magic sustainability triangle, the integrating sustainability triangle uses the inner surface and emphasizes the interaction of the three sustainability dimensions. It is for many other uses such as u. a. Sustainability assessment, collection of indicators or content structuring (e.g. www.agenda21.rlp.de) are suitable.

literature

  • German Bundestag: Concept of sustainability. From mission statement to implementation. German Bundestag, Public Relations Department. Bonn 1998. ISBN 3-930341-42-5
  • Felix Ekardt: The principle of sustainability. Intergenerational justice and global justice. Munich 2005. ISBN 978-3406527982
  • Felix Ekardt, Cornelia Richter: Social Sustainability? In Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik und Umweltrecht , year 2006, p. 545 ff.

See also

Web links

swell

  1. ↑ Scientific Services of the German Bundestag: Sustainability , The Current Concept 06/2004, April 6, 2004 (PDF file; 101 kB)
  2. ↑ a b Final report of the study commission "Protection of people and the environment - goals and framework conditions for sustainable, future- oriented development" German Bundestag: Printed matter 13/11200 of June 26, 1998, p. 218 (PDF file; 9.97 MB )
  3. ↑ a b c Jörg Tremmel: Sustainability as a political and analytical category. The German discourse on sustainable development as reflected in the interests of the actors. , Munich ; Ökom, Ges. für Ökologische Kommunikation, 2003, ISBN 3-936581-14-2
  4. ^ VCI (Association of the Chemical Industry eV): Responsible action. Data on safety, health, environmental protection. A German contribution to the global Responsible Care program of the chemical industry. Frankfurt / Main, 1996, quoted from: Karl-Werner Brand & Georg Jochum: The German Discourse on Sustainable Development. Final report of a DFG project on the topic of Sustainable Development / Sustainable Development - On the social construction of global action concepts in environmental discourse. Munich project group for social research, MPS-Text 1/2000.
  5. ^ IFOK (Institute for Organizational Communication): Building blocks for a sustainable Germany. Discourse project on behalf of VCI and IG Chemie-Papier-Keramik, Wiesbaden 1997
  6. ^ A b c d Karl-Werner Brand & Georg Jochum: The German Discourse on Sustainable Development. Final report of a DFG project on the topic of Sustainable Development / Sustainable Development - On the social construction of global action concepts in environmental discourse. Munich project group for social research, MPS-Text 1/2000.
  7. ^ SRU (Advisory Council for Environmental Issues): Environmental Report 2008 - Environmental Protection in the Sign of Climate Change. Berlin 2008, p. 56 ( Memento of the original from April 2, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF file; 7.94 MB)  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.umweltrat.de
  8. ^ Stockmann, Reinhard (1996): The effectiveness of development aid. An evaluation of the sustainability of programs and projects in vocational training. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, pp. 74-75
  9. ↑ Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Ed.): Report of the Federal Government on Education for Sustainable Development. January 2002.
  10. ↑ Bundestag: Action plan for the UN World Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (PDF file; 303 kB)
  11. ^ A b c d Advisory Council for Environmental Issues: Environmental Report 2002. For a new pioneering role , Stuttgart: Metzler-Poeschel, 2002. ISBN 3-8246-0666-6 . (Bundestag printed matter 14/8792)
  12. ^ Michael Kraack, Heinrich Pehle, Petra Zimmermann-Steinhart: Environmental integration in the European Union. The environmental profile of the EU in a comparison of policy fields. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2001 (Integration of Europe and order of the world economy, Vol. 23) ISBN 3-7890-7623-6
  13. ↑ a b c J. Jörissen, J. Kopfmüller, V. Brandl, M. Paetau: An integrative concept of sustainable development Karlsruhe: Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, 1999 (Technology and Environment, Scientific Reports FZKA 6393) (PDF file; 911 kB)
  14. ^ Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development , United Nations
  15. ^ WSSD: Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, (Chapter I, Art. 1), New York 2002
  16. ↑ Alexandro Kleine: Operationalization of a sustainability strategy - integrating ecology, economy and social issues; Wiesbaden: Gabler 2009.