18
2 Technology, Risk, Precaution, and Sustainability
In the discussions about the requirements for sustainable development, a longterm controversy has been on how various resources (both natural and man-made
capital) can be replaced by one another and whether or not they are substitutable.
Strong sustainability aims to preserve the stock of environmental capital, whereas
weak sustainability assumes that virtually all resources (including natural ones)
can be substituted by other resources (Ang and Van Passel, 2012). Consequently,
a decrease of a specific resource is considered justifiable by the concept of
weak sustainability if functionally equivalent substitution possibilities exist and
the total capital stock does not decrease over time. The respective definitions of
environmental capital and total capital are often disputed. For a critical discussion
of the sustainability concept, see Beckerman (1994), who maintains that strong
sustainability is not feasible because it is too strict, whereas weak sustainability
is nothing else than welfare maximization as it is known in traditional economics.
It is plausible that some resources are substitutable for individual functions (e.g.,
fuels), but not in regard to all functions, some of which are not even known yet.
Pearce, therefore, introduced the concept of critical natural resources (Pearce et al.,
1990), which are defined as resources considered so essential that they should not
be allowed to diminish even though substitutes may be acceptable for other natural
resources.
In the 1990s, the discussion of how sustainable development can be reached
strongly focused on this question of stocks of “capital” and how they may best be
used or preserved. The idea was to find guidelines that would enable societies to permanently preserve the functions of the environment as a source of resources, as the
absorption medium for emissions, and as a basis for livelihood. Accordingly, early
criteria for sustainable development focused on the management of stocks and flows
of different types of resources (Enquete-Kommission, 1993; Interdepartementaler
Ausschuss Rio, 1995; Industrie- und Handelskammer Nürnberg für Mittelfranken,
2002):
• Criterion for the stability of renewable resources: Consumption rate < regeneration rate. Supplies from a renewable resource may be used only at the rate at
which it is created during the same time. The stock of renewable resources may
not decrease.
• Criterion for the stability of nonrenewable resources: Consumption rate <
compensation rate. Supplies from a nonrenewable resource may be used at a rate
at which it can be substituted by equivalent renewable resources. The substitute
must cover all essential functions of the resource.
• Criterion for the burden from emissions: Emission levels < exposure threshold.
The emission load must not exceed the load threshold of the overall system
including long-term and combined effects as well as accumulation and degradation processes.
• Criterion for stability in ecosystems: Rate of change < rate of adaptation.
Changes in the living conditions of major ecosystems should not happen more
quickly than their ability to react to such changes.
2 Technology, Risk, Precaution, and Sustainability
In the discussions about the requirements for sustainable development, a longterm controversy has been on how various resources (both natural and man-made
capital) can be replaced by one another and whether or not they are substitutable.
Strong sustainability aims to preserve the stock of environmental capital, whereas
weak sustainability assumes that virtually all resources (including natural ones)
can be substituted by other resources (Ang and Van Passel, 2012). Consequently,
a decrease of a specific resource is considered justifiable by the concept of
weak sustainability if functionally equivalent substitution possibilities exist and
the total capital stock does not decrease over time. The respective definitions of
environmental capital and total capital are often disputed. For a critical discussion
of the sustainability concept, see Beckerman (1994), who maintains that strong
sustainability is not feasible because it is too strict, whereas weak sustainability
is nothing else than welfare maximization as it is known in traditional economics.
It is plausible that some resources are substitutable for individual functions (e.g.,
fuels), but not in regard to all functions, some of which are not even known yet.
Pearce, therefore, introduced the concept of critical natural resources (Pearce et al.,
1990), which are defined as resources considered so essential that they should not
be allowed to diminish even though substitutes may be acceptable for other natural
resources.
In the 1990s, the discussion of how sustainable development can be reached
strongly focused on this question of stocks of “capital” and how they may best be
used or preserved. The idea was to find guidelines that would enable societies to permanently preserve the functions of the environment as a source of resources, as the
absorption medium for emissions, and as a basis for livelihood. Accordingly, early
criteria for sustainable development focused on the management of stocks and flows
of different types of resources (Enquete-Kommission, 1993; Interdepartementaler
Ausschuss Rio, 1995; Industrie- und Handelskammer Nürnberg für Mittelfranken,
2002):
• Criterion for the stability of renewable resources: Consumption rate < regeneration rate. Supplies from a renewable resource may be used only at the rate at
which it is created during the same time. The stock of renewable resources may
not decrease.
• Criterion for the stability of nonrenewable resources: Consumption rate <
compensation rate. Supplies from a nonrenewable resource may be used at a rate
at which it can be substituted by equivalent renewable resources. The substitute
must cover all essential functions of the resource.
• Criterion for the burden from emissions: Emission levels < exposure threshold.
The emission load must not exceed the load threshold of the overall system
including long-term and combined effects as well as accumulation and degradation processes.
• Criterion for stability in ecosystems: Rate of change < rate of adaptation.
Changes in the living conditions of major ecosystems should not happen more
quickly than their ability to react to such changes.