Sustainable development: An institutional approach

Opschoor, Hans; Straaten, J. van der

doi:10.1016/0921-8009(93)90004-p

Cited by 78 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the short-term benefit of smooth regulatory implementation veils a failure to address issues of long-term sustenance. According to Opschoor and van der Straaten (1993), Dutch labour and capital interests have been able to build up such a strong position in the state machinery that they can 'solve' their struggle by using up the powerless production factor, i.e. natural resources.…”

Section: The Netherlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is rather that the corporatist structure of the institutions within which decisions on environmental policy are made prevents important conflicts of interest over sustainable development from entering the political conflict resolution agenda. Paradoxically, policymakers expecting superior economic performance may in the long run see corporatism destroy the ecological base of the economy itself (Opschoor and van der Straaten, 1993;De Jong et al, 1994;Hukkinen, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long‐term environmental policy under corporatist institutions

Hukkinen

1995

Eur. Env.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Case studies in waste management are reviewed to assess how successfully long‐term considerations have been included in the design and implementation of environmental policy in two European countries with corporatist decision‐making institutions, Finland and the Netherlands. Although corporatism, or the institutionalized integration of conflicting interests in social decision‐making, has been linked with good long‐term industrial and economic performance, this study indicates that the corporatist structure of environmental institutions prevents important conflicts of interest from entering the political conflict resolution agenda. The central recommendation of the study is the administrative and procedural separation of conflicting environmental policy interests and the backing of sustainable goals with appropriate institutions. This would promote an open political debate and settlement of long‐term environmental policy issues. The designers of common European environmental policy should be aware of environmental corporatism, because corporatist institutions within the European Union lack the transparency required to settle the multidimensional long‐term issues of a transnational environment.

show abstract

Section: The Netherlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Long‐term environmental policy under corporatist institutions

Hukkinen

1995

Eur. Env.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, improvements in DRR and CCA may not be sustainable over the long run because of their unintended or unanticipated impacts on key sustainability dimensions; (5) Note that the systems model alerts us and enables us to analytically differentiate DRR, CCA, and sustainability development. It is argued here that DRR and CCA should and can be related to the medium term-long-term goals of sustainable development; (6) In general, the factor of sustainability trumps DRR and CCA in terms of impact assessment and design, but there are other considerations as discussed below.…”

Section: Drr and Cca Should Be Subjected To Sustainability Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation—A Sustainable Development Systems Perspective

Burns

Johansson²

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers the concepts of sustainability and sustainable development in relation to disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. We conceptualize sustainability from a social systemic perspective, that is, from a perspective that encompasses the multiple functionalities of a social system and their interrelationships in particular environmental contexts. The systems perspective is applied in our consideration and analysis of disaster risk reduction (DRR), climate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable development (SD). Section "Sustainability and Sustainable Development" introduces briefly sustainability and sustainable development, followed by a brief presentation of the theory of complex social systems (Section "Social System Model"). The theory conceptualizes interdependent subsystems, their multiple functionalities, and the agential and systemic responses to internal and external stressors on a social system. Section "Case Studies of Response to Stressors" considers disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA), emerging in response to one or more systemic stressors. It illustrates these with disaster risk reduction in the cases of food and chemical security regulation in the EU. CCA is illustrated by initiatives and developments on the island of Gotland, Sweden and in the Gothenburg Metropolitan area, which go beyond a limited CCA perspective, taking into account long-term sustainability issues. Section "Sustainable Development as a Societal Development System" discusses the limitations of DRR and CCA, not only their technical limitations but economic, socio-cultural, and political limitations, as informed from a sustainability perspective. It is argued that DRRs are only partial subsystems and must be considered and assessed in the context of a more encompassing systemic perspective. Part of the discussion is focused on the distinction between sustainable and non-sustainable DRRs and CCAs. Section "Concluding Remarks" presents a few concluding remarks about the importance of a systemic perspective in analyzing DRR and CCA as well as other similar subsystems in terms of sustainable development.

show abstract

“…In other words, improvements in DRR and CCA may not be sustainable over the long run because of their unintended or unanticipated impacts on key sustainability dimensions. (5) Note that the systems model alerts us and enables us to analytically differentiate DRR, CCA, and sustainability development. It is argued here that DRR and CCA should and can be related to the medium term-long-term goals of sustainable development.…”

Section: Drr and Cca Should Be Subjected To Sustainability Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation—A Sustainable Development Systems Perspective

Burns¹,

Machado²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers the concepts of sustainability and sustainable development in relation to disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. We conceptualize sustainability from a social systemic perspective, that is, from a perspective that encompasses the multiple functionalities of a social system and their interrelationships in particular environmental contexts. The systems perspective is applied in our consideration and analysis of disaster risk reduction (DRR), climate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable development (SD). Section 1 introduces briefly sustainability and sustainable development, followed by a brief presentation of the theory of complex social systems (Section 2). The theory conceptualizes interdependent subsystems, their multiple functionalities, and the agential and systemic responses to internal and external stressors on a social system. Section 3 considers disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA), emerging in response to one or more systemic stressors. It illustrates these with disaster risk reduction in the cases of food and chemical security regulation in the EU. CCA is illustrated by initiatives and developments on the island of Gotland, Sweden and in the Gothenburg Metropolitan area, which go beyond a limited CCA perspective, taking into account long-term sustainability issues. Section 4 discusses the limitations of DRR and CCA, not only their technical limitations but economic, socio-cultural, and political limitations, as informed from a sustainability perspective. It is argued that DRRs are only partial subsystems and must be considered and assessed in the context of a more encompassing systemic perspective. Part of the discussion is focused on the distinction between sustainable and non-sustainable DRRs and CCAs. Section 5 presents a few concluding remarks about the importance of a systemic perspective in analyzing DRR and CCA as well as other similar subsystems in terms of sustainable development.

show abstract

Sustainable development: An institutional approach

Cited by 78 publications

References 10 publications

Long‐term environmental policy under corporatist institutions

Long‐term environmental policy under corporatist institutions

Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation—A Sustainable Development Systems Perspective

Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation—A Sustainable Development Systems Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About