Leaving the “sustainability or collapse” narrative behind
Research output: Journal contributions › Scientific review articles › Research
Standard
In: Sustainability Science, Vol. 14, No. 6, 01.11.2019, p. 1717-1728.
Research output: Journal contributions › Scientific review articles › Research
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Leaving the “sustainability or collapse” narrative behind
AU - Strunz, Sebastian
AU - Marselle, Melissa
AU - Schröter, Matthias
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - In this paper, we investigate the cogency of the “sustainability or collapse” narrative, that is, the notion that the current global civilization risks ecological overshoot-induced collapse. Combining different strands of literature, we put forward three arguments: First, for many empirical cases of past societies that purportedly “collapsed”, alternative interpretations, emphasizing resilience, transformation and reorganization are equally if not more plausible. Second, the “sustainability or collapse” narrative tends to be misleading insofar as it suggests that resource input constraints are the main sustainability challenge global civilization faces today. Instead, we argue that a stronger focus on system outputs and pollution is needed. Third, collapse-warnings are psychologically ineffective because they might induce fear and guilt, which leads to apathy not action. In consequence, we suggest that the sustainability agenda relies on positive framings that highlight the benefits from institutional and behavioral changes for human well-being. We illustrate our argument with two examples, water scarcity in Cape Town, South Africa and the German energy transition.
AB - In this paper, we investigate the cogency of the “sustainability or collapse” narrative, that is, the notion that the current global civilization risks ecological overshoot-induced collapse. Combining different strands of literature, we put forward three arguments: First, for many empirical cases of past societies that purportedly “collapsed”, alternative interpretations, emphasizing resilience, transformation and reorganization are equally if not more plausible. Second, the “sustainability or collapse” narrative tends to be misleading insofar as it suggests that resource input constraints are the main sustainability challenge global civilization faces today. Instead, we argue that a stronger focus on system outputs and pollution is needed. Third, collapse-warnings are psychologically ineffective because they might induce fear and guilt, which leads to apathy not action. In consequence, we suggest that the sustainability agenda relies on positive framings that highlight the benefits from institutional and behavioral changes for human well-being. We illustrate our argument with two examples, water scarcity in Cape Town, South Africa and the German energy transition.
KW - Behavior
KW - Collapse
KW - Overshoot
KW - Resilience
KW - Sustainability
KW - Ecosystems Research
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062772033&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11625-019-00673-0
DO - 10.1007/s11625-019-00673-0
M3 - Scientific review articles
AN - SCOPUS:85062772033
VL - 14
SP - 1717
EP - 1728
JO - Sustainability Science
JF - Sustainability Science
SN - 1862-4065
IS - 6
ER -