and gives rise to various fundamental questions such as: What are the needs of future
generations? What are the needs of the present generation and how do they relate to
the needs of future generations? In chronological terms, what is the length of time
implied by the term “future generations?” What is meant by “capacity” to meet
needs?
In fact, concepts and interpretations concerning these questions are varied (Parris
and Kates 2003). Moreover, there are many criticisms of this well-known concept. A
consensus concerning an operable concept of sustainable economic development in
environmental terms has yet to be reached (Bithas and Christofakis 2006; Fischer
et al. 2007; Tanguay et al. 2010). While there are arguments for interpreting the
concept proposed in the Brundtland Report in a forward-looking manner, in that the
essence of sustainable development is to meet the basic needs of human beings while
maintaining life-support systems on Earth (Kates et al. 2001), it has also been
indicated that this concept fails to provide a clear definition of sustainability and
merely describes its characteristics (Bithas and Christofakis 2006). On the other
hand, in an economic framework using a model as an operable concept, sustainability is defined as consumption that does not diminish or availability that does not
decline intertemporally over the long term (Pezzey 1992; Dasgupta 2001; Pezzey
and Toman 2002). In addition to the above, there are definitions and concepts that
may be described as variations of the definition for sustainable development
presented in the Brundtland Report. Sustainable economic development from an
ecological viewpoint is defined as economic activity, human attitude, and population
dynamics for ensuring the maintenance of natural resources, ecosystems, and lifesupport systems while maintaining living standards acceptable to mankind over the
long term (van den Bergh and Nijkamp 1991). Moreover, there are other arguments
that focus on the ecosystem as well as arguments that insist economic activities must
be controlled to prevent instability in mutually linked economic and environmental
systems. Among the latter is an argument that clearly takes up the concept of system
resilience in the context of restorative forces in response to external shocks in
systems (Common and Perrings 1992).
Sustainability is a reciprocal process between society and ecology, which does
not exceed the ecological threshold level (which can be interpreted temporally or
spatially) expected to have a negative impact on either the ecological or social
systems (Berkes and Folke 1998). The sustainability of human and environmental
systems is determined in three major characteristics: resilience against chaos caused
by nature or mankind, aspirations of human society, and temporal and spatial
boundaries and their limitations (Mayer 2008).
While it is understood that these characteristics are already implicitly identified in
the concept of sustainable development or sustainability, there is the argument that
the three elements of environment, economy, and society must be considered
separately to clearly determine sustainability.
These three factors are referred to as “the triple bottom lines” (Elkington 1997).
There is also the proposition that perhaps a hierarchical structure exists among the
three elements (Fischer et al. 2007). Strictly speaking, there are two ways of
distinguishing the triple bottom lines. In general, it is fine to refer to these as the
9 The City Sustainability Index (CSI): How Should the Sustainability of. . .
167
generations? What are the needs of the present generation and how do they relate to
the needs of future generations? In chronological terms, what is the length of time
implied by the term “future generations?” What is meant by “capacity” to meet
needs?
In fact, concepts and interpretations concerning these questions are varied (Parris
and Kates 2003). Moreover, there are many criticisms of this well-known concept. A
consensus concerning an operable concept of sustainable economic development in
environmental terms has yet to be reached (Bithas and Christofakis 2006; Fischer
et al. 2007; Tanguay et al. 2010). While there are arguments for interpreting the
concept proposed in the Brundtland Report in a forward-looking manner, in that the
essence of sustainable development is to meet the basic needs of human beings while
maintaining life-support systems on Earth (Kates et al. 2001), it has also been
indicated that this concept fails to provide a clear definition of sustainability and
merely describes its characteristics (Bithas and Christofakis 2006). On the other
hand, in an economic framework using a model as an operable concept, sustainability is defined as consumption that does not diminish or availability that does not
decline intertemporally over the long term (Pezzey 1992; Dasgupta 2001; Pezzey
and Toman 2002). In addition to the above, there are definitions and concepts that
may be described as variations of the definition for sustainable development
presented in the Brundtland Report. Sustainable economic development from an
ecological viewpoint is defined as economic activity, human attitude, and population
dynamics for ensuring the maintenance of natural resources, ecosystems, and lifesupport systems while maintaining living standards acceptable to mankind over the
long term (van den Bergh and Nijkamp 1991). Moreover, there are other arguments
that focus on the ecosystem as well as arguments that insist economic activities must
be controlled to prevent instability in mutually linked economic and environmental
systems. Among the latter is an argument that clearly takes up the concept of system
resilience in the context of restorative forces in response to external shocks in
systems (Common and Perrings 1992).
Sustainability is a reciprocal process between society and ecology, which does
not exceed the ecological threshold level (which can be interpreted temporally or
spatially) expected to have a negative impact on either the ecological or social
systems (Berkes and Folke 1998). The sustainability of human and environmental
systems is determined in three major characteristics: resilience against chaos caused
by nature or mankind, aspirations of human society, and temporal and spatial
boundaries and their limitations (Mayer 2008).
While it is understood that these characteristics are already implicitly identified in
the concept of sustainable development or sustainability, there is the argument that
the three elements of environment, economy, and society must be considered
separately to clearly determine sustainability.
These three factors are referred to as “the triple bottom lines” (Elkington 1997).
There is also the proposition that perhaps a hierarchical structure exists among the
three elements (Fischer et al. 2007). Strictly speaking, there are two ways of
distinguishing the triple bottom lines. In general, it is fine to refer to these as the
9 The City Sustainability Index (CSI): How Should the Sustainability of. . .
167