More Like this

1. Weak Sustainability at Regional Scale

   https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125403  

   Randall, Alan; Jones, Mackenzie; Irwin, Elena G (June 2025, Sustainability)

   Weak sustainability (WS) requires that the inclusive wealth (IW) of a place (e.g., the world, a nation, or a sub-national region) be non-decreasing over a long time. The WS framework provides a more complete account of the sustainability of a place than do sustainability indicators or conventional economic measures, such as gross domestic product. However, while many decisions that affect sustainability are made at regional and local levels, the abstract theory of WS was developed without explicit recognition of the porosity of geographic boundaries and the interdependencies of regions. In this paper, we make three contributions: a carefully reasoned defense of IW per capita as the WS criterion, an improved understanding of the relationship between mobility, labor productivity, and regional economic growth, and an empirical application to US counties that demonstrates the feasibility of empirical regional WS assessment by summarizing Jones’ research. This analysis, extending the framework developed by Arrow and co-authors, accounts for more region-specific factors related to population, most notably the labor productivity component of health capital, and assesses IW per capita for all 50 states and 3108 counties in the US from 2010 to 2017. These improved methods revealed substantially more states and counties that were not WS relative to results using the Arrow et al. framework. The not-WS counties exhibited a distinct rural bias, as regional scientists have suspected but, nevertheless, the majority of rural counties were WS. Our work demonstrated that regional WS assessment is feasible, produces results that are consistent with prior expectations based on reasoning and empirical research, and has the potential to provide fresh insights into longstanding questions of regional development. 

   more » « less
2. On Intergenerational Commitment, Weak Sustainability, and Safety

   https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135381  

   Randall, Alan (July 2020, Sustainability)

   This article examines sustainability from a policy perspective rooted in environmental economics and environmental ethics. Endorsing the Brundtland Commission stance that each generation should have undiminished opportunity to meet its own needs, I emphasize the foundational status of the intergenerational commitment. The standard concepts of weak and strong sustainability, WS and SS, are sketched and critiqued simply and intuitively, along with the more recent concept of WS-plus. A recently proposed model of a society dependent on a renewable but vulnerable resource (Barfuss et al. 2018) is introduced as an expositional tool, as its authors intended, and used as a platform for thought experiments exploring the role of risk management tools in reducing the need for safety. Key conclusions include: (i) Safety, in this case, the elimination of risk in uncertain production systems, comes at an opportunity cost that is often non-trivial. (ii) Welfare shocks can be cushioned by savings and diversification, which are enhanced by scale. Scale increases with geographic area, diversity of production, organizational complexity, and openness to trade and human migration. (iii) Increasing scale enables enhancement of sustainable welfare via local and regional specialization, and the need for safety and its attendant opportunity costs is reduced. (iv) When generational welfare is stochastic, the intergenerational commitment should not be abandoned but may need to be adapted to uncertainty, e.g., by expecting less from hard-luck generations and correspondingly more from more fortunate ones. (v) Intergenerational commitments must be resolved in the context of intragenerational obligations to each other in the here and now, and compensation of those asked to make sacrifices for sustainability has both ethical and pragmatic virtue. (vi) Finally, the normative domains of sustainability and safety can be distinguished—sustainability always, but safety only when facing daunting threats. 

   more » « less
3. University handprint framework: quantifying the positive impacts of university-led sustainability action research

   https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-10-2024-0755  

   Burek, Jasmina; Smith, Alana Teresa; Winans, Kiara; Sonnert, Sophia; Granda_Marulanda, Nelson; Norris, Gregory (August 2025, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education)

   PurposeThis study aims to introduce the University Handprint Framework – a novel method for quantifying the external positive impacts (“handprints”) of sustainability actions undertaken by higher education institutions. It aims to fill a critical gap in current sustainability tracking systems by enabling universities to measure their contributions to societal and environmental outcomes beyond campus boundaries. Design/methodology/approachThe study presents a case study of a project-based sustainability course that partnered students with external organizations to implement climate-related solutions. The study calculated the university’s potential handprint associated with the course and informed the development of the University Handprint Framework. Data challenges, such as availability, tracking, attribution and double counting of emissions, were addressed in the method’s development to ensure methodological rigor. FindingsThis study results revealed that the course enabled partner organizations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 7.04E + 05 kg CO2-eq, which demonstrated a quantifiable, university-enabled carbon handprint beyond campus boundaries. Practical implicationsThe framework offers universities a practical tool to highlight their broader societal contributions and can inform policy, reporting and investment in sustainability education and research. Given universities’ pivotal role in research dissemination, sustainability education and climate change mitigation, showcasing these positive impacts is essential. Originality/valueThis is the first known framework tailored to higher education that enables structured quantification of both potential (ex ante) and realized (ex-post) handprints. It complements existing tools and adds a new dimension to sustainability planning and impact tracking in academia. 

   more » « less
4. Countering the prominence effect: How U.S. national security lawyers can fulfill non-prominent humanitarian objectives

   Delaney, D. G. (January 2019, Journal of national security law & policy)

   Decision researchers describe a “prominence effect” that leads decision makers to choose an option with more defensible attributes when quantitative assessment of those options is difficult. Prominence is hypothesized as a factor in US policy decisions not to use military force to prevent or stop humanitarian crises. Prominence is also regarded as a behavioral failure affecting both the general public and public officials that can be mitigated to improve welfare outcomes in transnational security decisions. This article—by David G. Delaney and Paul Slovic—considers those hypotheses as they relate to attorneys advising the US president and other senior public officials addressing transnational security issues. It proposes a combination of institutional, organizational, and individual steps to mitigate prominence and related behavioral failures. 

   more » « less
5. Resource Scarcity and Sustainability—The Shapes Have Shifted but the Stakes Keep Rising

   https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105751  

   Randall, Alan (May 2021, Sustainability)

   null (Ed.)

   The objective is to provide an interpretive reading of the literature in resource scarcity and sustainability theory from the nineteenth century to the present time, focusing on shifts that have occurred in problem definition, conceptual framing, research tools applied, findings, and their implications. My reading shows, as one would expect, that the discourse has become more technical and the analysis more sophisticated; special cases have been incorporated into the mainstream of theory; and, where relevant, dynamic formulations have largely supplanted static analysis. However, that is barely scratching the surface. Here, I focus on more fundamental shifts. Exhaustible and renewable resource analyses were incorporated into the mainstream theory of financial and capital markets. Parallels between the resources and environmental spheres were discovered: market failure concepts, fundamental to environmental policy, found applications in the resources sector (e.g., fisheries), and renewable resource management concepts and approaches (e.g., waste assimilation capacity) were adopted in environmental policy. To motivate sustainability theory and assessment, there has been a foundational problem shift from restraining human greed to dealing with risk viewed as chance of harm, and a newfound willingness to look beyond stochastic risk to uncertainty, ambiguity, and gross ignorance. Newtonian dynamics, which seeks a stable equilibrium following a shock, gave way to a new dynamics of complexity that valued resilience in the face of shocks, warned of potential for regime shifts, and focused on the possibility of systemic collapse and recovery, perhaps incomplete. New concepts of sustainability (a safe minimum standard of conservation, the precautionary principle, and planetary boundaries) emerged, along with hybrid approaches such as WS-plus which treats weak sustainability (WS) as the default but may impose strong sustainability restrictions on a few essential but threatened resources. The strong sustainability objective has evolved from maintaining baseline flows of resource services to safety defined as minimizing the chance of irreversible collapse. New tools for management and policy (sustainability indicators and downscaled planetary boundaries) have proliferated, and still struggle to keep up with the emerging understanding of complex systems. 

   more » « less